STIRLING: Canada is sleepwalking into personal carbon rationing

As Premier Danielle Smith and Prime Minister Mark Carney shook hands and smiled for the cameras for the submission of Alberta’s proposal for a West Coast Pipeline, a collection of climate change science jigsaw pieces was falling out of place.Part of the Canada-Alberta MOU raised the industrial price of carbon dioxide (CO2) from the price of about $20 per tonne to $95. Minister Dabrusin was thrilled. Premier Smith claimed success in keeping the 2040 target price at $140 per tonne instead of the original $170 per tonne. This difference incensed climate activists as ‘not enough.’Yes, most climate activists in the world, especially those in Europe, want a global floor price of $400 per tonne carbon tax, and rising.Most people are blissfully unaware that though the consumer carbon tax has been set to zero, on the horizon is the personal carbon credit — or perhaps the personal carbon ration.A couple of days ago, the Canada-British Columbia Cooperative Prosperity Agreement came up with this little note: “National Carbon Credit Framework: British Columbia and Canada will work with other provinces and territories to explore options for developing a National Carbon Credit Framework, including the use of credits generated through consumer sustainability choices, such as retrofits and EVs, and nature-based solutions.”Huh? Personal carbon credits? Will the global energy crisis impose ‘energy efficiencies’ upon you via personal carbon rationing? At last week’s IEA conference in Montreal, Minister Dabrusin said, “…cheapest energy is the energy that you don’t produce; energy efficiency is a win-win.”.Based on the national plan for the electricity grid, there will not be enough new power generation in the short term, but demand will grow, especially as the feds install heat pumps all over the place at your expense. So, then the only alternative is to ration people or give them coercive incentives not to use energy.The looming necessity of drastic cuts in personal energy use to reach Net Zero was forecast long before the global energy crisis in the Straits of Hormuz by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA). An analysis by Friends of Science Society Director Ian Cameron revealed that the CCPA paper written by David Hughes in 2024 showed that “…the government’s major priority for net-zero should be reducing energy demand, [as he] states on page 6 of Getting to Net-Zero.”“Reducing energy consumption is the low-hanging fruit, as it eliminates the cost of new energy production and emissions reduction infrastructure. Prioritizing conservation, efficiency, and behavioural change must become a major government policy priority.”Mr. Hughes’ report doesn’t provide any figures for how much to reduce energy consumption (or what the whole net-zero effort will cost), only that the Canada Energy Regulator’s (CER) per capita energy reduction of 33%-41% won’t be enough. As he told The Tyee: “We are going to have to accept contraction, unfortunately. It has been a slice. But the math does not work for continuous growth.” In other words, getting to net-zero means an end to economic growth, let alone the 1.4% per year real GDP increase assumed in EF2023.There you have it, folks..Stock up on candles, matches, and blankets. Despite the fact that the climate catastrophe scenario known as RCP 8.5/SSP5-8.5 has been deemed implausible by the official climate modelling community, even though the central banking sector’s climate damage function based on a flawed paper by Kotz et al. (2024) has been formally retracted, and even though recently, it was revealed that a very influential paper nicknamed “Wedges” that promoted a “wedge-by-wedge” transition from conventional oil and gas to renewables was flawed and unachievable. The paper asserted that “Humanity can solve the carbon and climate problem in the first half of this century simply by scaling up what we already know how to do.” Nope. Wrong.Despite all that, it appears that the climate activist world is ignoring ‘the science’ in favour of putting you in the energy poorhouse and rationing all you do. They will try to frame this as you being a ‘climate hero’ for your self-sacrifice.A climate hero who is without reliable heat and power in Canada in winter is no hero, but rather a useful idiot. No rationale remains for net zero or a personal carbon ration.Lots of people are addicted to climate hysteria — for them, it is the drug that motivates their daily lives. Like any addict, it will be hard to stop them, even though the evidence does not support their ideology.So, it is up to you. Just say no to Net Zero. Say no to a personal carbon ration.

STIRLING: Canada is sleepwalking into personal carbon rationing

Related Stories

GREEN: Smith and Carney agree to build a very public pipeline

Taxpayers federation urges Carney and Smith to repeal carbon taxes, anti-pipeline laws instead of funding pipeline

PINDER: Carney vs. Smith — Alberta's pipeline shootout has reached high noon

MACLEOD: The beginning of the end for Danielle Smith?