The Alberta government has submitted an analysis showing why the proposed Clean Electricity Regulations (CER) will threaten the electricity grid. “These regulations are irresponsible and reckless, setting unrealistic targets and even banking on technologies that don’t exist,” said Alberta Premier Danielle Smith in a Friday press release. “They will result in Albertans shouldering an unbearable cost for an electricity system that will no longer deliver the safety, reliability and affordability upon which our lives depend.”Smith said the Alberta government “will not permit these dangerous and unconstitutional regulations to be imposed upon our province.”Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault released the CER in August in a move that was dreaded in Alberta and Saskatchewan for tough new restrictions on natural gas plants.READ MORE: Guilbeault releases draft electricity regulations, natural gas gets partial passThe regulations, which come into effect in 2035, will allow natural gas plants to operate with the caveat they have to recover 95% of associated carbon emissions.It was a small carrot to Alberta and Saskatchewan, which rely on fossil fuels to power their grids.Based on expert analysis and industry consultations, the Alberta government said it submitted a detailed response outlining the technical problems with the CER. The analysis shows these regulations are unrealistic, ineffective and could compromise grid reliability to an unacceptable degree. Alberta Environment and Protected Areas Minister Rebecca Schulz warned the standards and enforcement the Canadian government is proposing “would put the safe, reliable and openly competitive market of Alberta's electricity system at risk — all for targets that aren’t feasible or realistic.”“We cannot allow the reliability of our electricity to be compromised and risk public safety during the coldest months of the year — when people need the power most,” said Schulz. “We urge Ottawa to abandon these regulations and work with us on a realistic path that aligns with our own emissions-reduction goals.”One of the problems the Alberta government spoke about with the CER in its analysis was the Canadian government lacked the capability to assess its energy-only market, including its large share of co-generation. It added the tools use incomplete proxies to evaluate system reliability, leading them to underestimate the negative impacts.The modelling relies too much on technologies unable to be deployed right now, assuming they will soon be available. As a result, it offers an unreliable, inaccurate portrayal of the costs, impacts on reliability and possible outcomes. It acknowledged the regulations propose unachievable emission standards, with limited flexibility and using a rigid approach that will not work. Even under optimal conditions, the standard is based on unproven design measures that will be challenging for operators to meet. The Canadian government’s standard is higher than the one proposed in the United States in May. It said standards need to be based on actual performance.If the CER goes ahead, it said they are punitive with inflexible compliance options. As written, generators must not emit or could face criminal penalties under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. One of these penalties is incarceration. It said it would add red tape, increase costs and offer little flexibility for industry. The Alberta government called on the Canadian government to respect jurisdictional authority and the enshrined rights and responsibilities of the provinces. The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision on the Impact Assessment Act confirmed the unconstitutionality of its ongoing efforts to interfere with electricity and natural resource sectors of all provinces. A working group between the two governments continues to discuss how to bring their efforts to achieve carbon neutrality in the economy in line with Alberta’s Emissions Reduction and Energy Development Plan. If this alignment is not achieved, Alberta will chart its own path to protect its people and economy by ensuring it has additional reliable, affordable and sustainable electricity brought onto the power grid. Its officials will continue to share technical information and analysis on these regulations with the Canadian government as required to achieve a more practical, realistic approach.Schulz told the Western Standard in an interview the Canadian government is looking at the CER from an ideological approach. “They set these targets that sound good when they’re at their UN meetings overseas and then they come back and tell the provinces ‘OK, you just figure it out,’” she said. “Regardless of the fact that it’s completely unrealistic, widely unaffordable, and will actually provide such risk to our electricity grid that there are very real health and safety concerns for Albertans.” If the CER goes ahead, she confirmed the Alberta government will not be implementing it. Electricity generation is an area of provincial jurisdiction, and the submission covered that.
The Alberta government has submitted an analysis showing why the proposed Clean Electricity Regulations (CER) will threaten the electricity grid. “These regulations are irresponsible and reckless, setting unrealistic targets and even banking on technologies that don’t exist,” said Alberta Premier Danielle Smith in a Friday press release. “They will result in Albertans shouldering an unbearable cost for an electricity system that will no longer deliver the safety, reliability and affordability upon which our lives depend.”Smith said the Alberta government “will not permit these dangerous and unconstitutional regulations to be imposed upon our province.”Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault released the CER in August in a move that was dreaded in Alberta and Saskatchewan for tough new restrictions on natural gas plants.READ MORE: Guilbeault releases draft electricity regulations, natural gas gets partial passThe regulations, which come into effect in 2035, will allow natural gas plants to operate with the caveat they have to recover 95% of associated carbon emissions.It was a small carrot to Alberta and Saskatchewan, which rely on fossil fuels to power their grids.Based on expert analysis and industry consultations, the Alberta government said it submitted a detailed response outlining the technical problems with the CER. The analysis shows these regulations are unrealistic, ineffective and could compromise grid reliability to an unacceptable degree. Alberta Environment and Protected Areas Minister Rebecca Schulz warned the standards and enforcement the Canadian government is proposing “would put the safe, reliable and openly competitive market of Alberta's electricity system at risk — all for targets that aren’t feasible or realistic.”“We cannot allow the reliability of our electricity to be compromised and risk public safety during the coldest months of the year — when people need the power most,” said Schulz. “We urge Ottawa to abandon these regulations and work with us on a realistic path that aligns with our own emissions-reduction goals.”One of the problems the Alberta government spoke about with the CER in its analysis was the Canadian government lacked the capability to assess its energy-only market, including its large share of co-generation. It added the tools use incomplete proxies to evaluate system reliability, leading them to underestimate the negative impacts.The modelling relies too much on technologies unable to be deployed right now, assuming they will soon be available. As a result, it offers an unreliable, inaccurate portrayal of the costs, impacts on reliability and possible outcomes. It acknowledged the regulations propose unachievable emission standards, with limited flexibility and using a rigid approach that will not work. Even under optimal conditions, the standard is based on unproven design measures that will be challenging for operators to meet. The Canadian government’s standard is higher than the one proposed in the United States in May. It said standards need to be based on actual performance.If the CER goes ahead, it said they are punitive with inflexible compliance options. As written, generators must not emit or could face criminal penalties under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. One of these penalties is incarceration. It said it would add red tape, increase costs and offer little flexibility for industry. The Alberta government called on the Canadian government to respect jurisdictional authority and the enshrined rights and responsibilities of the provinces. The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision on the Impact Assessment Act confirmed the unconstitutionality of its ongoing efforts to interfere with electricity and natural resource sectors of all provinces. A working group between the two governments continues to discuss how to bring their efforts to achieve carbon neutrality in the economy in line with Alberta’s Emissions Reduction and Energy Development Plan. If this alignment is not achieved, Alberta will chart its own path to protect its people and economy by ensuring it has additional reliable, affordable and sustainable electricity brought onto the power grid. Its officials will continue to share technical information and analysis on these regulations with the Canadian government as required to achieve a more practical, realistic approach.Schulz told the Western Standard in an interview the Canadian government is looking at the CER from an ideological approach. “They set these targets that sound good when they’re at their UN meetings overseas and then they come back and tell the provinces ‘OK, you just figure it out,’” she said. “Regardless of the fact that it’s completely unrealistic, widely unaffordable, and will actually provide such risk to our electricity grid that there are very real health and safety concerns for Albertans.” If the CER goes ahead, she confirmed the Alberta government will not be implementing it. Electricity generation is an area of provincial jurisdiction, and the submission covered that.
