Connect with us

Economy

Not energy ‘transition’ but energy ‘addition’. Intermittent wind and sun requires backup power generation

Published

11 months ago

6 minute read

From Resource Works

Until battery technology is an option, there is no real energy transition

Climate campaigners steadily push for clean, renewable energy sources to replace hydrocarbons. However, international consultants Wood Mackenzie view this push as overly simplistic, arguing it does not consider the complexities of energy supply and the uses of oil and gas that extend far beyond power generation.

“Perhaps most striking is the extraordinary contribution that oil and gas have made to energy supply and what a gargantuan task it will be to build a new low-carbon system in its place.”

The latest report from “WoodMac” lists several challenges for a future of low-carbon power.

For one, U.S. demand for electrical power is set to grow at least through the rest of this decade.

“What is exciting about this new growth is that it is a manifestation of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Central to this is the explosive growth of data centres, the beating heart of the infrastructure supporting artificial intelligence (AI), cloud computing, digitalization, and big data. Second is a new wave of cleantech, including the manufacturing of semiconductors, batteries, and renewable energy equipment. Third is the increasing electrification of the economy.”

Offshore wind’s power output has an energy efficiency of 92% compared with oil and gas, which, in use, deliver only 25% of their original energy content. But “what may impress is how long it will take for the cumulative output of wind to exceed that of oil and gas, despite this disparity in energy efficiency.”

Closer to home, questions have been raised in Canada about climate campaigners’ arguments that the costs of solar and wind power operations have steadily decreased and are now comparatively affordable.

The small-c conservative Fraser Institute notes that the G7 countries (including Canada) have pledged to triple renewable energy sources to ensure an “affordable” energy future.

“But while direct costs for wind and solar are dropping, they remain expensive due in part to the backup energy sources required when renewables are not available.

“Wind and solar energy are intermittent, meaning they aren’t consistently available, so we need an alternative power source when there’s no sunlight or wind, given the current limited ability to store energy from solar and wind.

“So we must maintain enough energy capacity in a parallel system, typically powered by natural gas. Constructing and maintaining a secondary energy source results in higher overall energy costs because two energy systems cost more than one. Therefore, when evaluating the costs of renewables, we must consider the costs of backup energy.

“Often, when proponents claim that wind and solar sources are cheaper than fossil fuels, they ignore these costs.”

The TD Bank adds: “Despite the improvement in the cost-competitiveness of renewable and storage technologies, the growth of low-carbon electricity supply is likely to increase electricity costs.

“According to estimates by the Alberta Electric System Operator, the load-adjusted generation costs in 2035 could be 56–66% higher in net-zero-by-2035 scenarios compared to a technology trajectory based on current policies.

“For Ontario, we estimate that replacing expiring gas-generator contracts with a combination of solar, wind, storage, and small modular reactors could increase the average generation cost by around 20% in 2035 compared to what it would be if the gas contracts were renewed and the current procurement plan for new resources proceeds as planned.”

The Fraser Institute also cites a 2021 study by University of Chicago economists showing that between 1990 and 2015, U.S. states that mandated minimum renewable power sources experienced significant electricity price increases after accounting for backup infrastructure and other costs.

“Specifically, in those states, electricity prices increased by an average of 11 per cent, costing consumers an additional $30 billion annually. The study also found that electricity prices grew more expensive over time, and by the twelfth year, electricity prices were 17 per cent higher (on average).”

“Europe is another case in point. Between 2006 and 2019, solar and wind sources went from representing around 5 per cent of Germany’s electricity generation to almost 30 per cent in 2019. During that same period, German households experienced an increase in electricity prices from 19.46 cents to 30.46 cents per kilowatt hour — a rise of more than 56 per cent. This surge in prices occurred before the war in Ukraine, which led to an unprecedented price spike in 2022.”

Meanwhile, in the U.S., a study published in Energy, a peer-reviewed energy and engineering journal, found that — after accounting for backup, energy storage, and associated indirect costs — solar power costs skyrocket from US$36 per megawatt hour (MWh) to as high as US$1,548, and wind generation costs increase from US$40 to up to US$504 per MWh.

We’re firmly in favour of advancing renewable energy sources, and the sooner, the better. But the cost estimates need to be true

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Energy / 2 hours ago

75 per cent of Canadians support the construction of new pipelines to the East Coast and British Columbia

espionage / 4 hours ago

Carney Floor Crossing Raises Counterintelligence Questions aimed at China, Former Senior Mountie Argues

International / 5 hours ago

Ottawa is still dodging the China interference threat

Business

Canada Hits the Brakes on Population

Published on December 18, 2025

By

The Opposition with Dan Knight

Dan Knight's avatar Dan Knight

The population drops for the first time in years, exposing an economy built on temporary residents, tuition cash, and government debt rather than real productivity

Canadians have been told for years that population decline was unthinkable, that it was an economic death spiral, that only mass immigration could save us. That was the line. Now the numbers are in, and suddenly the people who said that are very quiet.

Statistics Canada reports that between July 1 and October 1, 2025, Canada’s population fell by 76,068 people, a decline of 0.2 percent, bringing the total population to 41,575,585. This is not a rounding error. It is not a model projection. It is an official quarterly population loss, outside the COVID period, confirmed by the federal government’s own data

The reason matters. This did not happen because Canadians suddenly stopped having children or because of a natural disaster. It happened because the number of non‑permanent residents dropped by 176,479 people in a single quarter, the largest quarterly decline since comparable records began in 1971. Permit expirations outpaced new permits by more than two to one. Outflows totaled 339,505, while inflows were just 163,026

That is the so‑called growth engine shutting down.

Permanent immigration continued at roughly the same pace as before. Canada admitted 102,867 permanent immigrants in the quarter, consistent with recent levels. Births minus deaths added another 17,600 people. None of that was enough to offset the collapse in temporary residency. Net international migration overall was negative, at minus 93,668

And here’s the part you’re not supposed to say out loud. For the Liberal‑NDP government, this is bad news. Their entire economic story has rested on population‑driven GDP growth, not productivity. Add more people, claim the economy is growing, borrow more money, and run the national credit card a little harder. When population growth reverses, that illusion collapses. GDP per capita does not magically improve. Housing shortages do not disappear. The math just stops working.

The regional numbers make that clear. Ontario’s population fell by 0.4 percent in the quarter. British Columbia fell by 0.3 percent. Every province and territory lost population except Alberta and Nunavut, and even Alberta’s growth was just 0.2 percent, its weakest since the border‑closure period of 2021

Now watch who starts complaining first. Universities are already bracing for it. Study permit holders alone fell by 73,682 people in three months, with Ontario losing 47,511 and British Columbia losing 14,291. These are the provinces with the largest university systems and the highest dependence on international tuition revenue

You’re going to hear administrators and activists say this is a crisis. What they mean is that fewer students are paying international tuition to subsidize bloated campuses and programs that produce no measurable economic value. When the pool of non‑permanent residents shrinks, departments that exist purely because enrollment was artificially inflated start to disappear. That’s not mysterious. That’s arithmetic.

For years, Canadians were told that any slowdown in population growth was dangerous. The truth is more uncomfortable. What’s dangerous is building a national economic model on temporary residents, borrowed money, and headline GDP numbers while productivity stagnates. The latest StatsCan release doesn’t just show a population decline. It shows how fragile the story really was, and how quickly it unravels when the numbers stop being padded.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight

I’m an independent Canadian journalist exposing corruption, delivering unfiltered truths and untold stories.
Join me on Substack for fearless reporting that goes beyond headlines
Continue Reading

Business

White House declares inflation era OVER after shock report

Published on December 18, 2025

By

MXM logo MxM News 

The White House on Thursday declared a decisive turn in the inflation fight, pointing to new data showing core inflation has fallen to its lowest level in nearly five years — a milestone the administration says validates President Donald Trump’s economic reset after inheriting what it calls a historic cost-of-living crisis from the Biden era. In a statement accompanying the report, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said inflation “came in far lower than market expectations,” drawing a sharp contrast with the 9 percent peak under President Joe Biden and arguing the numbers reflect sustained relief for American households. “Core inflation is at a new multi-year low, as prices for groceries, medicine, gas, airfare, car rentals, and hotels keep falling,” Leavitt said, adding that lower prices and rising paychecks are expected to continue into the new year.

According to the White House, core inflation — widely viewed by economists as the most reliable gauge because it strips out volatile food and energy costs — is now down roughly 70 percent from its Biden-era high. Officials noted that if inflation continues at the pace of the last two months, it would be running at an annualized rate of about 1.2 percent, well below the Federal Reserve’s 2 percent target. The report also highlighted broad-based price moderation across consumer staples and services, with declines in groceries, dairy, fruits and vegetables, prescription drugs, clothing, airfares, natural gas, car and truck rentals, and hotel prices. Average gas prices have fallen to multi-year lows, while rent inflation has dropped to its lowest level since October 2021, a shift the administration attributes in part to tougher enforcement against illegal immigration and reduced pressure on housing demand.

Wages, the White House says, are rising alongside easing prices. Private-sector workers are on track to see real wages increase by about $1,300 in President Trump’s first full year back in office, clawing back purchasing power lost during the inflation surge of the previous administration. Gains are strongest among blue-collar workers, with annualized real earnings up roughly $1,800 for construction workers and $1,600 for manufacturing employees. Administration officials also took aim at critics who warned Trump’s tariff policies would reignite inflation, arguing the data shows no demonstrable inflationary impact despite repeated predictions from Wall Street and academic economists.

Even commentators across the media spectrum acknowledged the strength of the report. CNBC’s Steve Liesman called it “a very good number,” while CNN’s Matt Egan said it was “another step in the right direction.” Harvard economist Ken Rogoff described the reading as “a better number than anyone was expecting,” adding, “There’s no other way to spin it.” Bloomberg’s Chris Anstey noted the figure came in two-tenths below the lowest estimate in a survey of 62 economists, calling it “remarkable,” while The Washington Post’s Andrew Ackerman wrote that inflation “cooled unexpectedly,” easing pressure on household budgets.

For the White House, the message was blunt: the inflation era is over. Officials framed Thursday’s report as proof that Trump has followed through on his promise to defeat the cost-of-living crisis he inherited, laying what they called the groundwork for a strong year ahead. As the president told the nation this week, the administration insists the progress is real — and that, in his words, the best is yet to come.

Continue Reading

Trending

X