Energy
When Vancouver reverses ban on natural gas appliances, it’s time to talk about energy choices
From EnergyNow.ca
By Stewart Muir of Resource Works
More News and Views From Resource Works Here
The Practicality of Energy Choice in Vancouver
Vancouver’s decision to reverse the ban on natural gas appliances in new homes should serve as the beginning of a necessary conversation about energy system choices
In a city like Vancouver, where the mountains meet the sea and the urban skyline reflects both our history and our aspirations, policy decisions are often a reflection of our values. Yet, sometimes, even the best intentions can lead us down a perilous path. The recent decision by the City of Vancouver to restore freedom of choice for heating water and space in our homes, reversing an earlier ban on natural gas, is a move I support.
Housing affordability was a major deciding factor, but to me this turn of events – one the nation is watching – also marks a step away from a simplistic and potentially regressive approach to climate action, one that could have stymied our efforts to decarbonize in a meaningful way.
Let me be clear: climate change is real, and the need to reduce emissions is urgent. However, the original gas ban, while well-intentioned, was not the answer. Banning natural gas from our homes might have seemed like a bold move, but it ignored the nuances of our energy system and the challenges we face in transitioning to a low-carbon future.
The gas ban was a decision that felt good for those deeply concerned about climate action; a personal stand against fossil fuels. But feelings alone do not build resilient energy systems, nor do they account for the complex interplay of technologies and fuels that will be necessary to achieve our climate goals. Natural gas, particularly when blended with renewable gases like hydrogen, can and should play a role in our energy future. The idea of banning it outright was akin to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Consider this: hydrogen, a zero-emissions fuel, is already the focus of enormous national and international investment. Canada is positioning itself as a leader in hydrogen production and technology, recognizing its potential to decarbonize sectors that are otherwise difficult to electrify. Banning natural gas infrastructure would have made it difficult, if not impossible, to integrate hydrogen into our energy mix when the technology matures.
Similarly, renewable natural gas, produced from organic waste, relies on the very distribution networks that a gas ban would have dismantled. The infrastructure for delivering gas to our homes is not a relic of the past but a vital component of our future energy system, one that could deliver clean, low-carbon fuels to millions of Canadians.
Let’s not forget the practical realities of energy demand. Suppose gas was revoked as an option for homes in Canada; the energy required to replace it would necessitate the entirety of our current solar and wind capacity several times over. This is not hyperbole—it’s a fact. And it doesn’t even account for the intermittency of these renewable sources, which means they cannot be relied upon to meet demand at all times.
In British Columbia, we’re already seeing the strain on our electricity system. We’ve become net importers of electricity, a situation that underscores the limits of our current infrastructure. As demand continues to rise—for electric vehicles, air conditioning, and the energy-hungry applications of artificial intelligence—our grid is buckling under the pressure. Tens of billions of dollars in upgrades are required, and these projects will take years to complete. Meanwhile, our neighboring provinces and states are facing similar challenges, leading to a regional energy crunch.
This diagram of Canada’s energy system provides, under close examination, a sober realization of how things work:
There is a lot to take in here, showing as it does the sources of all the energy in Canadian life (on the left) and how they flow into particular uses (right).
In grey shading on the right, the box labelled “Rejected Energy” represents energy that goes to waste. It is a staggering five times the amount of all types of energy used in our homes. I can understand that this area of high potential is hard to create excitement about. Nonetheless, it is a real source of ongoing progress, represented by ever more efficient ways of using fuels and upgrading equipment, and we aren’t talking about it.
Energy experts understand that banning a single type of energy without considering the broader system is not just imprudent; it’s dangerous. It could lead to shortages, higher costs, and ultimately, a failure to achieve our climate goals. Yet, I also recognize the appeal of actions that seem to offer immediate, tangible results. There’s a strong emotional pull in taking control of what happens in our own homes, in feeling like we’re doing our part.
This is why I’m calling for more energy education and diverse conversations that are constructive, respectful, and grounded in reality. We need to move beyond the tired narrative of “faceless corporations” versus the environment. The truth is, the people in both policy and industry are striving for the same outcome: a world with lower emissions and better outcomes for all.
The City of Vancouver’s decision to reverse the gas ban is a wise one, but it should be just the beginning. I urge the city to initiate a robust process of energy education, one that equips residents with the knowledge they need to make informed decisions about their energy use. And as a resident of this city, I am more than willing to take part in this vital conversation.
Our future depends on it.
Stewart Muir is the Founder and CEO of Resource Works.
Energy Talking Points by Alex Epstein
Alex Epstein
This is the kind of integrity we need from industry—and from Congress.
Dear Chairman Smith and Chairman Crapo:
We, the undersigned American energy producers and investors, write to voice our principled support for full repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act’s (IRA) energy subsidies, including subsidies that would appear to be to our firms’ and industry’s benefit. This is the only moral and practical path forward if we are to truly unleash American energy.
In recent weeks, Congress has been embroiled in battles over which, if any, of the IRA energy subsidies to cut. Lobbyists representing every corner of the energy landscape, including trade groups that many of us are part of, are jockeying to preserve their own piece of the pie, claiming that it is uniquely valuable.
We have oil lobbyists fighting to keep carbon capture and hydrogen subsidies, solar and wind lobbyists fighting to keep solar and wind subsidies, biofuel lobbyists fighting to keep biofuel subsidies, and EV lobbyists fighting to keep EV subsidies.
If this continues, we will likely preserve most if not all of the subsidies, which, deep down, everyone knows are not good for America.
The fundamental truth about subsidies is very simple. For any product, including energy, a subsidy is just a way of taking money from more efficient producers—and from taxpayers—and giving it to less efficient producers. The result is always less efficient production and therefore higher costs or lower quality for Americans.
The most egregious example of subsidies’ destructiveness is the IRA’s solar and wind subsidies, which pay electric utilities to invest much more money in solar and wind than they otherwise would, and thus much less in coal and gas than they otherwise would. Ultimately this means higher electricity prices and certainly less electricity reliability for Americans.
The IRA subsidies’ devastating harm to American energy is more than enough to compel us, as energy producers, to oppose them.
But their harm goes far beyond energy, as they will dramatically increase our debt and ultimately undermine every aspect of our economy.
A central Congressional priority is to curb the national debt during the upcoming budget reconciliation exercise. But according to credible estimates, the IRA will cost over $1 trillion over the next decade and trillions more after that. Worse, the IRA subsidies are expected to misallocate, into uncompetitive business and jobs, $3 trillion of investment by 2032 and $11 trillion by 2050. That’s a disaster for our economy, and for real job opportunities.
Clearly, the right thing to do is to eliminate all these subsidies. When lobbyists say that these subsidies are essential for America, what they’re really saying is that their backers have made investments in projects that have no near term cost-effectiveness and that are totally dependent on indefinite subsidies to sustain themselves.
Most people know the truth, but are afraid to say it due to institutional pressures. Too many Congressmen are afraid of alienating trade groups. Too many trade groups are afraid of alienating their large and vocal members who have made investments hoping for indefinite subsidies. All the while, too few are talking about freedom.
That’s why we invite our colleagues to do the right thing: level with the American people, say that we made a mistake, and that those who built subsidy-dependent businesses took on the kind of risk that we do not want to reward.
Keeping the IRA subsidies—despite all the evidence that they benefit only special interests at the expense of America—risks making our nation ever more like Europe, where industries do not succeed by providing the best value to consumers, but by providing the best favors to politicians. That’s not the America we want to work in.
Sincerely,
Bud Brigham, Founder, Atlas Energy Services and Brigham Exploration
David Albin, Managing Partner, Spectra Holdings
Adam Anderson, CEO, Innovex International
Thurmon Andress, Chairman and CEO, Andress Oil
Don Bennett, Managing Partner, Bennett Ventures LP
Greg Bird, CEO and President, Jetta Operating Company
David de Roode, Partner, Lockton
Andy Eidson, CEO, Alpha Metallurgical Resources
Matt Gallagher, President and CEO, Greenlake Energy
Mike Howard, CEO, Howard Energy
Justin Thompson, CEO, Iron Senergy
Ed Kovalik, CEO, Prairie Operating Company
Thomas E. Knauff, Executive Chairman, EDP
Lance Langford, CEO, Langford Energy Partners
Mickey McKee, CEO, Kodiak Gas Services
Mike O’Shaughnessy, CEO, Lario Oil and Gas Company
D. Martin Phillips, Founder, EnCap Investments LP
Karl Pfluger, midstream executive
David Rees-Jones, President, Chief Energy
Rob Roosa, CEO, Brigham Royalties
Bobby Shackouls, Former CEO, Burlington Resources
Ross Stevens, Founder and CEO, Stone Ridge Holdings Group
Kyle Stallings, CEO, Desert Royalty Company
Justin Thompson, CEO, Iron Senergy
Mike Wallace, Partner, Wallace Family Partnership
Ladd Wilks, CEO, ProFrac
Denzil West, CEO, Admiral Permian Operating
Bill Zartler, Founder and CEO, Solaris Oilfield Infrastructure
Additional signatories (email [email protected] to add yours):
Jimmy Brock, Executive Chairman, Core Natural Resources
Ted Williams, President and CEO, Rockport Energy Solutions LLC
To make sure as many politicians as possible see this letter, help us by sharing on Twitter/X and tagging your Congressmen! Congress is currently undecided about what to do about the IRA subsidies, so now is the moment to make your voice heard.
“Energy Talking Points by Alex Epstein” is my free Substack newsletter designed to give as many people as possible
access to concise, powerful, well-referenced talking points on the latest energy, environmental,
and climate issues from a pro-human, pro-energy perspective.
From the Canadian Energy Centre
Q&A with Mike Verney, executive vice-president, McDaniel & Associates
New analysis commissioned by the Alberta Energy Regulator has increased the province’s natural gas reserves by 440 per cent, bumping Canada into the global top 10.
Alberta’s oil reserves – already fourth in the world – also increased by seven billion barrels.
The report was conducted by Calgary-based consultancy McDaniel & Associates. Executive vice-president Mike Verney explains what it means.
CEC: What are “reserves” and why do they matter?
Verney: Reserves are commercial quantities of oil and gas to be recovered in the future. They are key indicators of future production potential.
For companies, that’s a way of representing the future value of their operations. And for countries, it’s important to showcase the runway they have in terms of the future of their oil and gas.
Some countries that have exploited a lot of their resource in the past have low reserves remaining. Canada is in a position where we still have a lot of meat on the bone in terms of those remaining quantities.
CEC: How long has it been since Alberta’s oil and gas reserves were comprehensively assessed?
Verney: Our understanding is the last fully comprehensive review was over a decade ago.
CEC: Does improvement in technology and innovation increase reserves?
Verney: Technological advancements and innovation play a crucial role in increasing reserves. New technologies such as advanced drilling techniques (e.g., hydraulic fracturing, horizontal drilling), enhanced seismic imaging and improved extraction methods enable companies to discover and access previously inaccessible reserves.
As these reserves get developed, the evolution of technology helps companies develop them better and better every year.
CEC: Why have Alberta’s natural gas reserves increased?
Verney: Most importantly, hydraulic fracturing has unlocked material volume, and that’s one of the principal reasons why the new gas estimate is so much higher than what it was in the past.
The performance of the wells that are being drilled has also gotten better since the last comprehensive study.
The Montney competes with every American tight oil and gas play, so we’re recognizing the future potential of that with the gas reserves that are being assigned.
In addition, operators continue to expand the footprint of the Alberta Deep Basin.
CEC: Why have Alberta’s oil reserves increased?
Verney: We discovered over two billion barrels of oil reserves associated with multilateral wells, which is a new technology. In a multilateral well, you drill one vertical well to get to the zone and then once you hit the zone you drill multiple legs off of that one vertical spot. It has been a very positive game-changer.
Performance in the oil sands since the last comprehensive update has also gone better than expected. We’ve got 22 thermal oil sands projects that are operating, and in general, expectations in terms of recovery are higher than they were a decade ago.
Oil sands production has grown substantially in the past decade, up 70 per cent, from two million to 3.4 million barrels per day. The growth of several projects has increased confidence in the commercial viability of developing additional lands.
CEC: What are the implications of Alberta’s reserves in terms of the province’s position as a world energy supplier?
Verney: We’re seeing LNG take off in the United States, and we’re seeing lots of demand from data centers. Our estimate is that North America will need at least 30 billion cubic feet per day of more gas supply in the next few years, based on everything that’s been announced. That is a very material number, considering the United States’ total natural gas production is a little over 100 billion cubic feet per day.
In terms of oil, since the shale revolution in 2008 there’s been massive growth from North America, and the rest of the world hasn’t grown oil production. We’re now seeing that the tight plays in the U.S. aren’t infinite and are showing signs of plateauing.
Specifically, when we look at the United States’ largest oil play, the Permian, it has essentially been flat at 5.5 million barrels per day since December 2023. Flat production from the Permian is contrary to the previous decade, where we saw tight oil production grow by half a million barrels per day per year.
Oil demand has gone up by about a million barrels a day per year for the past several decades, and at this point we do expect that to continue, at the very least in the near term.
Given the growing demand for oil and the stagnation in supply growth since the shale revolution, it’s expected that Alberta’s oil sands reserves will become increasingly critical. As global oil demand continues to rise, and with limited growth in production from other sources, oil sands reserves will be relied upon more heavily.
Chinese Narco Suspect Caught in Private Meeting with Trudeau, Investigated by DEA, Linked to Panama, Caribbean, Mexico – Police Sources
Doug Ford needs to ditch the net-zero pipedreams
Brookfield’s Deep Ties to Chinese Land, Loans, and Green Deals—And a Real Estate Tycoon With CCP Links—Raise Questions as Carney Takes Over from Trudeau
Flu Vaccine Exposed: The Shocking NIH Discovery They Don’t Want You to Know
-
Brownstone Institute1 day agoThe New Enthusiasm for Slaughter
-
Catherine Herridge1 day agoHow ‘Woke’ Broke The FBI
-
MxM News1 day ago“Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports” Executive Order doesn’t go far enough: Second place finisher
-
Business1 day agoA Look at Canada’s Import Tariffs
-
Energy2 days agoNext federal government should close widening gap between Canadian and U.S. energy policy
-
Carbon Tax1 day agoDon’t be fooled – He’s Still Carbon Tax Carney
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day agoThe National Freakout Over The 4 Nations Drama Still Resonates
-
Addictions1 day agoThe Fentanyl Crisis Is A War, And Canada Is On The Wrong Side