When we last commented on our intrepid warriors, they were planning to send emissaries to a joint federal/provincial working group to see if climate peace was possible. It may be an understatement to suggest that these talks will lead nowhere..Rather than wait for the feds to make an announcement, Danielle Smith placed a six-month moratorium on the approval of any new wind or solar electricity projects. Very dramatic. And probably overdue given the disastrous effects these projects are having on the consumer price of electricity..The Liberal government responded with criminal sanctions to any corporate or personal disobedience from net-zero electricity by 2035, and also tied any federal subsidies for CO2 abatement (eg Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage in oilsands) to the same provincial adherence to net-zero 2035..“Pound sand” seems like a polite response to such unwise policy levers..There are several reasons why it is really important that the rebel alliance (AB and SK) win this one..First, the goal of a pan-Canadian green electricity grid is absurd..Canada is uniquely blessed with bountiful hydro electric power. ‘We’ are already more than 85% carbon (dioxide) free. But do ‘we’ need to get to 95% or 100%? Really? Who are the ‘we’?.Does anyone actually think this is an important national environmental objective? If so, then please explain why..There has never been a national electricity strategy, or a national electricity mandate. People need electricity as a fundamental and essential commodity. The provincial governments have this responsibility and have been very effective in fulfilling this need..Why are the federal Liberals trying to ‘big foot’ their heavy hands into this provincial business?.Why indeed?.Second, the intent of this policy is simply to punish the West..Other than Nova Scotia, the most affected jurisdictions are Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nunavut. This is a wedge issue that is intended to help consolidate Liberal votes in Quebec and Ontario for the next federal election..True, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia have objected to the policy, but have likely also already brokered a deal with the Liberals to shield them from its effects, and thus keep the Liberals seats in the Maritimes..A succinct expression of this ‘punish the West’ policy can be found in Max Fawcett’s 'Danielle Smith wants a fight on climate policy' Justin Trudeau should give it to her.'.The view can be summarized as Big Bad Bitumen Billionaires (AKA Albertans) are evil and need to be brought to account. This is not some extreme environmentalist wailing in the night. This is mainstream Liberal thinking and is an effective part in maintaining their core voters..Max, this isn’t Justin Trudeau, this is the Liberal brain trust at its finest..And sadly, it will be effective. If elected, Pierre Poilievre will likely follow through with eliminating the carbon (dioxide) tax. But his path through Quebec will require some serious concessions..Poilievre will likely not even campaign on repealing the green electricity silliness. But if he does, then be assured that there will be a substantive ‘quid pro quo’ to Quebec likely in terms of guaranteeing or even increasing equalization benefits..But the most important reason for winning this battle is to start changing the narrative on the solutions to climate change..The mitigation strategy to slow down CO2 emissions is the perfect definition of insanity. You keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Except the concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere keep increasing regardless of the mitigation programs..So far, more than $500 billion has been spent worldwide trying to reduce emissions..More than $150 trillion is what is estimated to be required. Except the alarmists simultaneously claim we are experiencing climate Armageddon now, this summer, today..The battle and the war are already over. We lost, so what do we do now? Spend even more money on mitigation! Brilliant..The narrative on climate solutions has to change from mitigation to adaptation. Adaptation means that where there are serious problems from extreme weather, regardless of the cause, we take steps to reduce those problems or protect the people affected. Forget about spending money on reducing emissions — we cannot reduce them. But we can adapt to the most dangerous effects..During the election, the UCP estimated costs to get Alberta to net-zero electricity by 2035 were $52 billion. Recently, this number has ballooned to $200 to $400 billion, but let's just say $100 billion or so..This will eliminate about 25 million tons of CO2. Estimates of the CO2 released from this year’s Canadian wildfires is in excess of 1 billion tons..This is not a typo. This year’s wildfire season alone contributed more than 40 times the emissions expected to be saved from a $100 billion ‘investment’. Surely that money would be better spent on reducing wildfires or protecting people against the damage that they cause..The Slave Lake fire cost about $750 million. The Ft. MacMurray fire was about $3.5 billion. Interestingly, in this most recent worst wildfire season in Alberta history, neither of these communities were affected. This shows the effectiveness of fire adaptation or forest management measures..$100 billion can also buy a lot of irrigation to counteract the effects of drought. It can buy a lot of flood control measures. It can buy a lot of cloud-seeding to reduce hail storms. It can even buy air-conditioners for anyone who has a serious health risk from high temperatures..If ‘we’ have to spend this money then at least do it on things that are effective..William D. Marriott is a retired economist who specialized in public policy analysis of the oil and gas industry.
