Connect with us

Opinion

In 2021 Collicutt Centre, Red Deer’s 4th and last recreational centre will be 20 years old.

Published

3 minute read

2021 will be a pivotal year in Red Deer.
Collicutt Centre will be celebrating it’s 20 anniversary just as the shovels hit the dirt on a new Multi-plex Aquatic Centre.
2001 the Collicutt opened it’s doors for the first time. Red Deer’s population was a hefty 68,308 residents.
1991 Mayor McGhee and council decided it was prudent for Red Deer to have a fourth recreational complex. The population was 58,252 residents and a recreational centre for every 15,000 was the established goal.
2001 Red Deer’s fourth recreational centre opened to a population ratio of a recreational centre for every 17,077 residents. Already behind the target.
There was as recently as last year that the ratio of 1 indoor ice rink per 15,000 was established as determined for recreational complexes. With that in mind we should have built one in 2004 when the population was at 75,923. Giving us 5 recreation centres or 1 for every 15,000 residents as was deemed appropriate. Then again in 2010 when our population was 90,084 we should have built the 6th recreational complex.
If we followed this reasoning we should be planning on opening our 7th recreational complex because our population is 99,832 according to our last municipal census and if we were to grow at 1,2% annually we should hit 105,000 in 2021.
That did not and will not happen. The best we can hope for is a new Aquatic Centre to open in 2022.
The ideal goal is one for every 15,000 residents but if we build a 5th recreational complex with an indoor pool then we would have to settle for 1 for every 21,000 residents.
A fifth recreational complex north of hwy 11a would service the residents, expand tourism and kick start development north of 11a.
The current thinking is the city will tear down the downtown recreation centre and build the aquatic centre there. Leaving us with only 4 or 1 recreational complex for every 26,125 residents.
Instead of 7 we would be left with 4 for another 20 years.
What do we do? Councillor Tanya Handley has declared that she cannot support building the aquatic centre downtown with poor parking but would support building it as Councillor Frank Wong has been advocating, north of 11a near Hazlett Lake to kick start development. Newcomer Councillor Michael Dawe would consider moving the aquatic centre as would another.
That gives us 4 councillors but with 8 councillors and the mayor voting on the issue in a year, we need the commitment of 5 to ensure a new pool and not just a replacement.
I am asking all councillors and the mayor to commit to building a new aquatic centre north of 11a. Why now?
The city is a bureaucracy that tends to move slowly and in precise steps. It is always too early then it’s too late. We need commitment now so the city can make the necessary adjustments when necessary. Please commit.

Follow Author

Business

Carney should rethink ‘carbon capture’ climate cure

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Kenneth P. Green

In case you missed it amid the din of Trump’s trade war, Prime Minister Carney is a big believer in “carbon capture and storage.” And his energy minister, Tim Hodgson, who said it’s “critical to build carbon capture systems for the oilsands,” wants the Smith government and oilsands companies to get behind a proposed project (which hasn’t been unable to raise sufficient private investment) in Cold Lake, Alberta.

The term “carbon capture and storage” (or CCS) essentially refers to technology that separates carbon dioxide (CO2) from emissions and either stores it or uses it for other products. Proponents claim that CCS could replace other more ham-handed climate regulations such as carbon taxes, emission caps, etc. The problem is, like many (or most) proposed climate panaceas, CCS is oversold. While it’s a real technology currently in use around the world (primarily to produce more oil and gas from depleting reservoirs), jurisdictions will likely be unable to affordably scale up CCS enough to capture and store enough greenhouse gas to meaningfully reduce the risks of predicted climate change.

Why? Because while you get energy out of converting methane (natural gas) to CO2 by burning it in a power plant to generate electricity, you have to put quite a lot of energy into the process if you want to capture, compress, transport and store the attendant CO2 emissions. Again, carbon capture can be profitable (on net) for use in producing more oil and gas from depleting reservoirs, and it has a long and respected role in oil and gas production, but it’s unclear that the technology has utility outside of private for-profit use.

And in fact, according to the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), most CCS happening in Canada is less about storing carbon to avert climate change and more about stimulating oil production from existing operations. While there are “seven CCS projects currently operating in Canada, mostly in the oil and gas sector, capturing about 0.5% of national emissions,” CCS in oil and gas production does not address emissions from “downstream uses of those fuels” and will, perversely, lead to more CO2 emissions on net. The IISD also notes that CCS is expensive, costing up to C$200 per tonne for current projects. (For reference, today’s government-set minimum carbon market price to emit a tonne of CO2 emissions is C$95.) IISD concludes CCS is “energy intensive, slow to implement, and unproven at scale, making it a poor strategy for decarbonizing oil and gas production.”

Another article in Scientific American observes that industrial carbon capture projects are “too small to matter” and that “today’s largest carbon capture projects only remove a few seconds’ worth of our yearly greenhouse gas emissions” and that this is “costing thousands of dollars for every ton of CO2 removed.” And as a way to capture massive volumes of CO2 (from industrial emission streams of out the air) and sequestering it to forestall atmospheric warming (climate change), the prospects are not good. Perhaps this is why the article’s author characterizes CCS as a “figleaf” for the fossil fuel industry (and now, apparently, the Carney government) to pretend they are reducing GHG emissions.

Prime Minister Carney should sharpen his thinking on CCS. While real and profitable when used in oil and gas production, it’s unlikely to be useful in combatting climate change. Best to avoid yet another costly climate change “solution” that is overpromised, overpriced and has historically underperformed.

Kenneth P. Green

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Energy

Is Carney ‘All Hat And No Cattle’?

Published on

From the National Citizens Coalition

By National Citizens Coalition President Peter Coleman

Mark Carney promised to lead Canada with bold vision and economic strength. But his latest stall tactics on removing red tape for Canadian oil and gas, his floundering in tariff negotiations despite lofty “elbows up” promises, and his refusal to address shocking interference allegations tied to his public safety minister so far show that he’s all hat and no cattle.

Today, Prime Minister Mark Carney held consultations and conversations with Indigenous groups on Bill C-5, which claims to fast-track “nation-building” energy projects. Yet he announced no major approvals on the horizon, and impressed no urgency or authority upon those in attendance who would seek to claim veto over vital projects.

Canada doesn’t need more endless talk or one bill to pick more losers than winnersWe need action to remove anti-resource laws and regulatory roadblocks that choke our energy sector. Projects like pipelines and LNG facilities are critical for jobs, economic growth, and energy security, but they’re stalled by bureaucratic overreach and outdated policies. Hard-working Canadians deserve affordable energy. Our economy needs rescuing from tariff threat and a decade of Liberal sabotage. And Indigenous communities deserve real economic partnerships, not more delays and cowardly half-measures that often only placate anti-resource interests and insiders, not the real needs of the community.

Streamlined approvals with clear economic benefits will unlock prosperity for all Canadians. Carney’s stall tactics only hold back progress. It’s time to cut the red tape and get out of the way so that real Canadian leaders, and our great Canadian workers, can rebuild Canada after all that’s been broken.

Carney campaigned as the economic genius who could handle U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariff threats. Yet, with Trump’s August 1 deadline for a 35% tariff on Canadian goods approaching, Carney’s negotiations are going nowhere. His vague promises do nothing to protect Canadian jobs, industries, or families facing higher costs. Canadians deserve a leader who delivers results, not one who breaks campaign promises with empty rhetoric.

Meanwhile, he’s been shielding corruption and dodging accountability. Carney, now revealed to have 16 pages of conflicts that were kept from voters during the election, continues to protect Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree, who faces serious allegations of lobbying for those with listed terrorist ties. Instead of demanding transparency, Carney is shielding his minister from scrutiny, doubling down on the Liberal tradition of dodging accountability. Canadians deserve a government that upholds integrity, not one that buries troubling connections to protect political allies. Is Carney just like Justin, who broke immigration and invited rampant foreign interference into government? Because this response is right out of his predecessor’s playbook.

Mark Carney’s leadership has been all talk and no action. Canada needs a government that unleashes our energy potential, lives up to its lofty campaign promises, and roots out corruption; not another Justin Trudeau.

We’re not falling for it. And neither are you. Demand action. Demand results.

Carney’s delays and cover-ups are holding Canada back. Chip in today to support our fight for energy development, economic strength, and accountability in Ottawa! Click here to donate.

Peter Coleman, President, National Citizens Coalition

Continue Reading

Trending

X