From the Canadian Energy Centre

Q&A with Gabriel Giguère, senior policy analyst with the Montreal Economic Institute

A new poll from Angus Reid shows significant support from people in Quebec for Canada to build sea-to-sea oil and gas pipelines.

Gabriel Giguère, a senior policy analyst with the Montreal Economic Institute, says it’s support like he has never seen before.

Here’s what he had to say.

Gabriel Giguère. Photo courtesy Montreal Economic Institute

CEC: Where does Quebec get its energy from?

Giguère: Quebec’s electricity comes from local hydroelectric power, while oil and gas primarily come from Canada and the United States. This is a major shift from 2005, when oil was sourced from Algeria, the UK, Norway, Mexico and Venezuela and only a small amount from Canada. Today, it’s almost entirely from Canada and the United States.

CEC: How would an oil pipeline from Alberta benefit the people of Quebec?

Giguère: It’s clear it will help Canadians diversify their trading partners. A pipeline will also create jobs, benefiting Quebec workers.

Quebec is a part of Canada, and unity is essential. The good news is we all seem to agree on that. According to the latest poll from Angus Reid, it’s unanimous. There is broad support for new pipelines to expand our trade relationships.

The United States has been a strong trading partner, but there is ongoing uncertainty that has made diversification essential. We all know that investors don’t like uncertainty. To achieve certainty, we need the right infrastructure to be able to diversify.

In Quebec, twice as many people support a new pipeline than oppose it. I don’t remember having data like that before.

This is a clear and significant shift, especially for the oil and gas sector, which is one of Canada’s most vital economic sectors. This is very good news.

CEC: What has changed that is making Quebecers more supportive of a project like this?

Giguère: I believe the tariff threat was the spark. People are now starting to understand that our trade relationship with the United States isn’t what it once was. It’s as simple as that.

We need to diversify our trading partners. The million-dollar question is: how? I don’t think It’s possible without a pipeline. I believe Quebecers are starting to understand that.

There is the pipeline, but I strongly believe that GNL Quebec [proposed LNG project in the Saguenay Region to transport Alberta natural gas to Europe] could have even stronger public support, as it offers a direct way to diversify our trading partners. This wouldn’t only benefit our European allies but would open doors to other countries also.

CEC: What do you see happening next?

Giguère: It will depend on political leadership in Quebec. When we are talking about pipelines here, the discussion always circles back to Energy East, which was scrapped because there was “no social acceptability.” Nobody can say that today.

It’s not possible to tell me there’s no social acceptability when you have twice as many people who want a pipeline than those who don’t. There is clearly social acceptability.

The real issue is heavy regulation, such as the Impact Assessment Act. To be clear, I’m not saying we should not have any environmental impact assessment, but we need to make sure that the current regulatory framework allows the construction of big energy infrastructure projects.

Political leaders need to recognize that diversifying our trading partners is their responsibility and requires facilitating the projects to make that possible.

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Blackmon

It seems safe to predict that Chris Wright is going to be a consistent newsmaker for the duration of his time as the nation’s secretary of Energy. Wright has never shied away from public controversy related to energy and climate policies, and this past week brought a good example.

During an interview with Bloomberg on Wednesday, Wright talked about the “all of the above” energy source philosophy he shares with President Donald Trump, and emphasized that, when he says “all” energy sources, that is exactly what he means. In a direct 180-degree turn from the war on the nation’s domestic coal industry mounted by both Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama, Wright told Bloomberg’s hosts the time has come to halt the closing of coal-fired power plants in the United States.

“Coal has been essential to the United States’ energy system for over 100 years,” Wright said. “It’s been the largest source of global electricity for nearly 100 years, and it will be for decades to come, so we need to be realistic about that.”

Wright pointed out that the U.S. under both Biden and Obama was on a path to shrink the coal power generation sector, an action he says has “made electricity more expensive and our grid less stable.” The Trump agenda to reindustrialize the American economy and end the shipping of the country’s heavy industries overseas to China and India depends on a growing abundance of reliable, affordable, 24/7 power generation that can only be provided by natural gas, coal, and less affordably, nuclear.

Admitting that a resurgence in the growth of coal power is unlikely, Wright adds “the best we can hope for in the short term is to stop the closure of coal power plants. No one has won by that action.” This could also include allowing regional grid managers to permit the reactivation of mothballed coal plants, but, at least in the near term, is unlikely to see permits issued for new, greenfield coal plants.

Michelle Bloodworth, president and CEO of America’s Power, told me in an email that “Secretary Wright is correct that affordable, reliable, and secure energy should be the goal, and coal can deliver on all of those fronts. Energy demand is skyrocketing, and shutting down coal plants before replacement sources can be brought online would be a disaster for the American power grid and the economy.”

Pointing to Trump’s executive order declaring a national energy emergency, Bloodworth urged EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin to move to rewrite heavy-handed Biden-era regulations that have led to the premature closing of a large number of coal plants, diminishing grid stability in the process. “We look forward to continuing to work with the Trump Administration to ensure coal can continue to support our country’s growing energy needs for years and years to come,” she added.

Michelle Manook, CEO of the global trade group FutureCoal, points out that the U.S. is home to an unrivaled abundance of coal resources, and that advanced technologies are now capable of removing 99% of real pollutants in modern power plants. “The question for US policymakers and the nation’s value chain, with its still 400 years of reserves, is this: Will you lead the modernization and reindustrialization of this critical resource?” she told me.

For Wright, reindustrialization of the U.S. economy is the key driver of the need for more power generation from every source.

“The goal is just affordable, reliable, secure energy from wherever that comes from,” he told Bloomberg, noting that solar (but, interestingly, not wind) will also have a role in power generation into the future.

“We’re not going to go down the road of Germany,” Wright added. “They spent a half a trillion dollars, they more than doubled their price of electricity, they actually shrunk the total amount of electricity the country produces by about 20% – and their industry is fleeing the country. That’s the path the United States was starting to go down, but that’s the wrong path.”

It’s a new day in American power generation. Coal is in, wind is out and reindustrialization is the goal. Climate alarmists will scream disaster, but for millions of others, it’s all a long-awaited breath of fresh air.

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.