I Toured “The Best Damn [Natural Gas] Plant In The Fleet.” Two Years Later It Exploded.

Image courtesy of Mark Specht, UCS

Originally published by Union of Concerned Scientists, The Equation.
By, Mark Specht, Senior Energy Analyst

Two years ago, I went on a tour of the Russell City Energy Center, a natural gas power plant in California.

Two months ago, the power plant exploded, raining hunks of metal down on the surrounding neighborhood.

How did this relatively new and technologically advanced gas plant fail so catastrophically? Why is California racing to get this power plant back online? And what does this situation teach us about California’s energy challenges?

First, the tour. Then I’ll get to the explosion and its aftermath.
The tour: “the best damn plant in the fleet”

When I toured the power plant two years ago, I was impressed. For a gas plant, it was truly state-of-the-art. Built in 2013, Russell City Energy Center is a combined cycle power plant with two gas turbines and one steam turbine; the two gas turbines generate electricity by burning gas, while the steam turbine generates electricity with the waste heat from the gas turbines. The process of capturing waste heat to generate additional electricity makes the plant much more efficient, approximately 55–65% overall.

The plant is also equipped with advanced emission control technologies: low NOx burners and a selective catalytic reduction system to reduce air pollution emissions, particularly oxides of nitrogen (NOx). For a plant that burns fossil fuels, this is about as good as current technology can get; however, it’s not even close to being as clean as renewable energy.

(Don’t forget: natural gas power plants are not clean! They produce significant amounts of global warming emissions and still produce air pollution even when advanced emission control technologies are in use.)

This schematic shows how a combined cycle power plant operates. I’ll get to this later, but the part of the Russell City Energy Center that exploded and suffered significant damage was the steam turbine generator and the steam turbine (i.e. the parts around #3 on the diagram). BAAQMD

But there are a lot of combined cycle power plants out there with relatively advanced emission control technologies, so that’s not what made this plant special.

Russell City also has features that make it more flexible and more useful for the grid. For example, certain parts of the plant can be kept warm by what are essentially big electric blankets, and this makes the plant more flexible by allowing it to ramp up to higher levels of electricity generation more quickly. In addition, the power plant recently added black start capabilities, which allows the plant to start back up even when the grid is offline. (Yes, it turns out that gas plants need electricity to generate electricity, so Russell City installed backup batteries to give it the boost it would need to start on its own.)

And that’s not all. Even my wife, who is an academic specialized in water treatment systems, wanted to come along on the tour because the most advanced aspects of this power plant are actually its water systems. The plant uses up to four million gallons of water per day for cooling, but all of that water is treated wastewater, provided by the water treatment plant right next door. Russell City uses a couple additional processes to clean up the treated wastewater before using it in the power plant, then the really impressive part is that they have a zero liquid discharge system. So instead of discharging the water used by the power plant into the sensitive San Francisco Bay ecosystem, they have processes in place that essentially concentrate all the contaminants in the water then boil off the residual water until all that remains is solid waste (which is then sent to a landfill).

At the end of the tour, I stopped to take a picture of the sign at the entrance to the plant that read, “Welcome to the Best Damn Plant in the Fleet!” I also remember one of my colleagues telling me, “If we need some gas plants for a little while still, they should all be like this: the best of the best.” And while I think it’s definitely more complicated than that, I do think there’s a little bit of truth there.

But wait. This state-of-the-art gas plant, aka “the best damn plant in the fleet,” exploded two months ago … pardon my acronym, but WTF?

The explosion: cause unknown

Just before midnight on May 27, 2021, something went horribly wrong when part of the Russell City Energy Center exploded. Thankfully, no one was hurt by the explosion (or the ensuing fire) even though the explosion catapulted large hunks of metal hundreds of feet. Through sheer luck, the shrapnel didn’t hit any people or significantly disrupt the operation of critical water infrastructure right next door. However, there were some close calls: one hunk of metal pierced the roof of an unoccupied trailer at a navigation center for Hayward’s homeless residents and melted the carpet.

What caused the explosion? Multiple investigations are still underway, but initial statements from Calpine (the company that owns the power plant) pointed towards “a mechanical event inside the steam turbine generator compartment.” If that sounds like a vague and generally unhelpful explanation to you, then we’re on the same page!

But it does give us one important piece of information: the part of the plant that exploded was the part that generates additional electricity using the waste heat (in the form of high pressure steam) from the gas turbines. So, we at least know which part of the plant is broken.
The aftermath: controversy over restarting the plant

As you might have guessed, this catastrophic explosion caused extensive damage to the power plant, rendering the entire facility inoperable. However, only a week after the explosion, Calpine asked the California Energy Commission (CEC) for permission to make a few temporary modifications in order to safely restart the plant. Since the explosion apparently didn’t damage the gas turbines at all, Calpine wanted to install equipment that would allow the gas turbines to operate and completely bypass the damaged steam turbine. (For you energy nerds out there, that effectively turns what was a combined cycle power plant into a simple cycle or “peaker” power plant.)

The plan to restart the power plant was not without controversy. The power plant is located in the city of Hayward, and both the city and its community members fought back. The city argued it was premature to restart the power plant without conducting an investigation into the exact cause of the explosion and without studying the potential impacts on local air quality (which has been a controversial issue since the plant’s beginnings).

The city’s concerns about air pollution are not to be taken lightly, but it’s also by no means a simple issue. Because the plant will effectively be operating as a “peaker” plant, it seems likely that the plant will be dispatched for fewer hours, so it will run less and emit less air pollution. However, it’s also possible that the plant will start and stop more frequently, which produces more air pollution emissions than steady-state operation and could drive up emissions. All things considered (including the findings of a related analysis I conducted on power plant emissions), I suspect that overall emissions will not increase. But power plant dispatch is complicated, so it’s hard to say with certainty.

The city’s other concern was with restarting the plant before fully understanding the cause of the explosion. The city was particularly worried for the safety of the surrounding community because, as they put it, a “catastrophic explosion should not occur at such a young facility.” And I totally agree–the plant is only eight years old, so something obviously went very wrong, and it seems prudent not to restart it until we’re positive that the issue that caused the explosion in no way affects the parts of the plant that would resume operation.

But there’s another powerful force at play here.

California’s grid is currently in a precarious position, with barely enough generation capacity to get the state through the summer heat. The CAISO, the grid operator in most of California, has already had one close call, and they’ve been doing everything in their power to line up additional electricity generation for this summer.

Wanting the Russell City Energy Center back online ASAP, the CAISO threw in their support for the temporary power plant modifications that would allow the plant to come back online to provide 300-350 MW of capacity, roughly half of its 600 MW nameplate capacity. While 300-350 MW is not that much capacity in the grand scheme of things, when California experienced rotating power outages last August, the CAISO was only 500–1,000 MW short. So an extra few hundred megawatts could actually be the difference between a close call and more rotating power outages.

The CEC was faced with two bad choices: expedite the return to service of a power plant that had just exploded for reasons still unknown, OR keep the plant offline and jeopardize state-wide grid reliability. Ultimately, convinced by the prospect of more rotating power outages this summer, the CEC approved Calpine’s request to make temporary modifications that would bring the power plant back online ASAP.

Despite the unexplained explosion two months ago, the California Energy Commission voted to bring the Russell City Energy Center back online to shore up grid reliability. Photo: CEC

Some parting thoughts

California is in a bad spot right now. Because grid conditions are so tight and the state barely has enough power to get through the summer, California officials are pulling out all the stops to prevent rotating power outages from reoccurring. For example, Governor Newsom has gotten into the bad habit of waiving air pollution requirements, allowing backup generators (e.g., diesel backup generation at data centers) to run every time grid conditions get tight. Now, California regulators are rushing to get the Russell City Energy Center back online despite a massive and still unexplained explosion at the power plant only two months ago.

There is a light at the end of the tunnel: California regulators recently mandated the addition of a huge amount of clean generation capacity to the grid. When those resources come online, the state’s grid should be in a much better position. But it’s going to take at least a few years for the bulk of those resources to get built.

Until then, California is faced with nothing but bad choices. California officials are stuck choosing one of the bad options and hoping for … something better than the worst.

Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS) And Hydrogen Paradises Are Fossil Fuel Delay Tactics

"Driving through Hell." Photo by Jose Pontes.


ByZachary Shahan 

CLEANTECHA

Published 2 days ago

I drafted this title before I saw the news break about a study that dismantles the “blue hydrogen” argument. In fact, a reader sent in the news within a minute or so of me drafting that title. The reason I was “inspired” to write this piece is that I keep seeing very serious people (and sometimes very humorous people) who are trying to do very good things for the future of humanity go out there and either promote carbon capture & storage (CCS) and hydrogen or at least put them on the table and treat them as parts of the puzzle. My problem with them is that I think they are very powerful and effective delay tactics, and my concern is that they have momentum on their side at the moment, especially the latter of the two.

The realm where this is a problem is not the realm of consumer technology and theoretical debates about what the future of energy looks like. The realm where this is a problem is the political and policy realm. Governments of the world have to help manage and guide major infrastructure and utilities, especially when it comes to essentials like energy and transport. Sometimes they do that well. Sometimes they make mistakes. Also, let’s be frank — not many world-leading engineers and physicists sit at the desk of great governmental power. They rely on experts for all variety of topics, including energy and infrastructure. And the problem is that a lot of nefarious, selfish, short-sighted “experts” can sneak their way into the decision-making room. So can some misguided experts who do indeed know a lot about the subject matter but somehow have a tendency to come to the wrong conclusions.

The smoke screens of CCS and hydrogen create two big problems. First of all, they are money dumps, sucking up government funding that could be used for truly helpful improvements and solutions — faster deployment of solar power, wind power, and EV charging stations; procurement of electric vehicles for governmental fleets; greater incentives for consumers to install energy efficiency, renewable energy, or electric vehicle technologies.

Secondly, both CCS and hydrogen hype tell people, “We don’t really have to change much. We can just capture the carbon and bury it. [No, it’s not that easy, and it’s also bloody expensive.] We can stick to a fuel-based transport system rather than switch to charging at home, work, and destination. [The latter is often actually more convenient, not less convenient, but don’t let that secret get out.]” The message with both is basically to not worry about anything, not do anything, and leave it to some obscure experts to solve all our problems for us in a few years. I can see why that’s tempting, but it is definitely misleading and counterproductive. Looking at it most cynically, the people who push so hard for CCS and hydrogen as our saviors could be specifically trying to delay the cleantech transition. Well, some of them no doubt are.

No matter if hydrogen and CCS pushers are lobbying for these because they are trying to delay real solutions, because they think everything should be on the table, or because they are some of the most climate-concerned citizens of the world and they’ve just been convinced that this is the magic we need, what we actually need is for people with the power to stop governments (and private investors, for that matter) from misguidedly putting billions of dollars into programs for these “solutions.” Those of us who have the power to do so also need to speak up and explain that we have cost-competitive solar, wind, battery, and pure electric car solutions that need to be deployed at the fastest pace possible — as if we are entering World War 3 and these are our weapons. We need to say that we don’t want our money wasted on faux solutions based on magical thinking that is overly complicated and not tied to economic realities.

A lot of money is going to go into climate solutions and potential climate solutions in the coming decade. Wasting a large percentage of that on fossil fuel delay tactics is not just a bad idea — it has the potential to destroy society to a level we’ve never seen.

Also, let’s remember, the absolute best things we can do are to drop fossil fuel vehicles (by biking, walking, or driving/riding in electric vehicles) and drop the use of fossil fuel generated electricity (most easily for those with their own roof, by going solar).

New Study: Renewables Much Cheaper Than Fossils — Levelized Cost Of Electricity (LCOE) Study
LCOE of renewable energy technologies and conventional power plants at locations in Germany in 2021. Specific plant costs are considered using a minimum 

By Zachary Shahan
Published 1 day ago

Another study came out recently showing that solar and wind power are the cheapest options in town for new electricity supply. This has been the case for at least a few years, as study after study after study has shown, and as indicated by the majority of new power capacity coming from solar and wind. (It’s less clear why anyone is installing any fossil fuel power plants at this point in time.)

Yes, this is essentially a “dog bites man” story at this point, but it’s an important one to keep telling since the majority of the population would most certainly be shocked if you told them this. It would be as if they had only ever been told that humans bite dogs.


This new study comes from Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems (ISE), a highly respected research institution in Germany. The study examines the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of different types of power plants, which basically means the average cost per kWh over the “life” of the projects. That often means stretching out the analysis by 20 years or so.

Comparison of the LCOE (levelized cost of electricity generation) from renewable energy technologies with the operating cost of existing fossil fuel power plants in 2021, 2030 and 2040.

Being a German institute, Fraunhofer ISE did the analysis for Germany. That makes it all the more impressive, though, since Germany has solar resources comparable to Alaska’s (not a joke). Less sunlight means less opportunity to recoup your costs. Nonetheless, solar panels are so cheap now and solar power plant systems are so streamlined that solar is just cheap, cheap, cheap. It helps that sunlight is free and there are no moving parts that are prone to breaking.

The solar PV cost range identified in this study was from 3.12 euro cents per kWh to 11.01 euro cents per kWh. Solar power plant costs themselves were estimated to range from 530€/kWp to 1600€/kWp.


This is a regular analysis that Fraunhofer ISE conducts, and this is the 5th edition of it, but this is the first time that the researchers have included energy storage as part of the analysis. In this case, a solar PV system with battery energy storage has an LCOE of 5.24 euro cents per kWh to 19.72 euro cents per kWh. In the case of a utility-scale solar PV farm with batteries, it’s still the case that nothing is expected to be cheaper except for onshore wind power, which ranges between 3.94 euro cents per kWh and 8.29 euro cents per kWh.



The Fraunhofer team also forecasted how these figures will change by 2030 and by 2040. The short version is: solar and wind will get even cheaper. Though, the prices are not expected to change a tremendous amount in that time. The LCOE of natural gas, however, is expected to go up significantly. In particularly, the price of CO2 is supposed to rise, making natural gas an coal power plants even more expensive than they are today.

For more, see the Fraunhofer news release about the new study or the study itself: Study: Levelized Cost of Electricity [PDF 7.6 MB].

WRITTEN BY Zachary Shahan
Zach is tryin' to help society help itself one word at a time. He spends most of his time here on CleanTechnica as its director, chief editor, and CEO. Zach is recognized globally as an electric vehicle, solar energy, and energy storage expert. He has presented about cleantech at conferences in India, the UAE, Ukraine, Poland, Germany, the Netherlands, the USA, Canada, and Curaçao. Zach has long-term investments in Tesla [TSLA], NIO [NIO], Xpeng [XPEV], Ford [F], ChargePoint [CHPT], Amazon [AMZN], Piedmont Lithium [PLL], Lithium Americas [LAC], Albemarle Corporation [ALB], Nouveau Monde Graphite [NMGRF], Talon Metals [TLOFF], Arclight Clean Transition Corp [ACTC], and Starbucks [SBUX]. But he does not offer (explicitly or implicitly) investment advice of any sort.

Canada's biggest public pensions heavily investing in fossil fuels, new report suggests

Pension funds say oil and gas investments can be leveraged in transition to cleaner energy


Baneet Braich · CBC News · Posted: Aug 13, 2021

Pumpjacks pump crude oil near Halkirk, Alta., in June 2007. A new report by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives suggests that Canada's largest public pension plans continue to invest in fossil fuel companies despite growing concerns about climate change. (Larry MacDougal/The Canadian Press)

Canada's biggest public pensions continue to invest heavily in fossil fuels despite rising concerns about climate change, according to a new report.

The Canada Pension Plan's (CPP Investments) total fossil fuel investments across its entire portfolio have increased from $9.9 billion in 2016 to $11.6 billion in 2020, according to the report by Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, a left-leaning research group.

In the report, the researchers noted that they did not know where and how all the investments had been allocated, and instead focused on the changes in the number of shares invested in oil and gas. The researchers found that the number of shares in companies involved in oil and gas held by the CPP by the end of 2020 was 7.7 per cent higher than at the beginning of 2016.

Abandoning oil and gas a utopian impossibility, Alberta's premier says

Big finance considers climate change a major investment risk. Is your pension prepared?

The pension funds have said that they agree a swift transition toward a low-carbon economy has been a priority to fight climate change. The report stresses that although the pension plans have publicly stated they are climate action leaders, they have not significantly reduced investments in fossil fuels. The researchers argue that continued investment in fossil fuels by the pension plans shows they aren't doing enough to grapple with the scale of the climate crisis.

"It is really angering," said James Rowe, an environmental studies professor at University of Victoria and lead researcher on the report. "This fund whose goal is actually to facilitate our future security, is actually undermining it with its investments. It's maddening."

James Rowe, an associate professor at the University of Victoria and one of the lead researchers of the report, says the small amount of progress by pension funds isn't enough to satisfy the global call to end investments in fossil fuels. (Submitted by James Rowe)

CPP Investments says its investment strategies are set up to mitigate the fluctuations of any single sector, including oil and gas.

"The premise of the report is misleading given that year to year exposure to any single sector is meaningfully determined by fund growth," Frank Switzer a spokesperson for CPP Investments wrote in an email to CBC News.
Greener energy a priority for pension funds

Financial disclosures from the pension funds show they have drastically increased investments in what they consider green technology over the last five years.

CPP Investments' renewable energy priorities in areas like wind, solar and hydro have significantly grown since the Paris Agreement, an international deal to combat climate change, from $30 million in 2016 to $9 billion in 2020, according to the report.

"We require the companies in which we invest to have viable transition strategies and we're holding them to account," Switzer said.

WATCH | Oil and gas industry can help in transition to low-carbon energy, exec says:



If you weaken the oil industry, who will build the complex energy facilities of the future?
3 months ago
2:37Suncor Energy CEO Mark Little says oil and gas companies have a role to play in transitioning the world to low-carbon sources of energy. 2:37

Likewise, Quebec's pension plan, Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (CDPQ), reduced its investments in fossil fuel stocks by 14 per cent between 2016 and 2020. However, it does have 52 per cent more fossil fuel shares than CPP Investments, according to the report.

CDPQ has reduced its exposure to investments in oil and gas by half since 2017 and now represents about one per cent of its overall portfolio, CDPQ spokesperson Maxime Chagnon wrote in an email response.

He said the fund also has set targets to be carbon neutral by 2050.

More action, urgency needed: researchers

Despite the progress, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives researchers say it's not enough to satisfy the global call to end investments in fossil fuels.

Rowe says Canadians are being undermined by having their pension plans increasingly invested in fossil fuel companies.

"Regardless of what steps you may be taking for the climate, the CPP is undermining them with these dirty investments made on our behalf and without our consent," he said.

UN sounds alarm on 'irreversible' climate impacts, but offers hope

What the new UN report warning of climate impacts means for Canadians

Using software that analyzes real-time financial market data, the researchers took a snapshot of pension fund investments on Dec. 31, 2020, and found that the funds held $2.3 billion in investments in member companies of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, a large and powerful Canadian oil and gas industry association.

The snapshot also highlighted investments of $674.04 million in TC Energy, formerly known as TransCanada, the Canadian pipeline company — $329.9 million from CPP Investments, and $344.14 million from CDPQ.

The report says the pension plans do not make clear how the funds are distributed or used.



WATCH | Divestment movement 'gaining enormous steam,' activist says:
Why it's environmentally and financially smart to divest from fossil fuels, says Greenpeace Canada

3 months ago News
Keith Stewart says it's time to stop the money pipeline to the oilpatch. 2:19

Though both pension plans have climate change strategies in place, CPP Investments cautions against total divestment. Instead, they argue that their investment in oil and gas can be leveraged to assist other companies as they transition to cleaner energy.

"We do believe that using blanket divestment will impede the world's ability to transition," CPP Investments CEO John Graham said in a Canadian Club of Toronto webinar in June.

CPP Investments recently allocated $315 million for the Carbon Trunk Line, a CO2 transportation pipeline in Alberta. Its emissions reduction is equivalent to taking approximately 350,000 cars off the road, according to a media release by Enhance Energy, a Calgary-based carbon capture company.

Margot Hurlbert is a University of Regina professor and the Canada Research Chair in climate change. (University of Regina Photography Department)

One expert agrees there should not be total divestment of oil and gas, as some industries, including greener innovations such as electric vehicle operations, still require it to produce their products.

"Pension funds/institutional investors have a duty to address climate-related financial risks and opportunities … more advice from climate and legal experts is well warranted," said Margot Hurlbert a University of Regina professor and Canada Research Chair in climate change.

The report calls on the Canadian government and public pension funds to disclose all pension investments to the public.

The researchers urge the pension plans to immediately design a plan for greater investments in renewable energy and align with calls by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for world governments to reduce CO2 emissions to limit warming to 1.5 C.

Corrections
A previous version of this story stated that CPP Investments had invested $674.04 million in TC Energy. In fact, that amount was from investments by both CPP Investments and CDPQ.

Aug 13, 2021 12:17 PM ET

Accusations of cronyism follow Shandro ally's appointment to AHS board

Author of the article: Bill Kaufmann
Publishing date: Aug 13, 2021 • 

Alberta Health Minister Tyler Shandro speaks In Calgary on Friday, July 9, 2021. PHOTO BY JIM WELLS /Postmedia

The naming of a close ally of Alberta Health Minister Tyler Shandro to the Alberta Health Services board has raised accusations of cronyism and renewed concerns over the direction the province’s medical system is taking.

On Monday, the AHS announced the appointment of Hartley R. Harris, president of Calgary-based Catch Engineering and chair of Energy Industry Electrical Engineering Associates.

“Hartley’s skills and experience will provide a fresh perspective to the AHS Board and to Alberta’s healthcare system as we continue to transform our healthcare system and move forward with the recommendations outlined in the AHS Performance Review,” AHS Board Chair David Weyant said in a press release.

But watchdog group Friends of Medicare contend Harris lacks qualification for the position and said the appointment reeks of cronyism, pointing to Elections Alberta records showing he served as chief financial officer for Health Minister Tyler Shandro’s 2019 election campaign.

Those same records also indicate Harris donated $2,281 to that campaign.

“Definitely there’s a conflict of interest there. . . The cronyism is a huge concern,” said the group’s executive director Sandra Azocar. “We’ve been calling for the governance of AHS to be done by public health experts like doctors.”

She said Harris’s business background and affiliation with the UCP sends another signal the government is serious about privatizing more of the province’s public health care system, some of which was recommended in a review completed in 2020.

“With legislation from this government and the plan to outsource to the private sector the jobs of 11,000 support workers, we know that push to privatization is real,” said Azocar.

The recent appointment of prominent business figure and academic Dr. Jack Mintz to the AHS board rings similar alarm bells, she said.

Jack Mintz of the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary. PHOTO BY DON HEALY /Postmedia

“When you have people you can’t trust to (advance public health care), it’s a huge concern,” said Azocar.

According to the AHS website, board members are paid $14,250 a year and $665 per meeting to a maximum of $1,900 a month while committee chairs are annually paid an additional $1,900.

NDP health care critic David Shepherd said the government has been creating a crony-laden “echo chamber” on boards and commissions with Harris’s appointment the latest example.

“If you want to create good government policy, you want diversity at the table, but they have no interest in hearing from someone who doesn’t agree with them,” he said.

“It certainly gives the appearance they’d rather do business with their friends than look after the health of Albertans.”

Harris couldn’t be reached for comment Friday.

A spokesman for AHS said the AHS couldn’t comment on Harris’s appointment because it’s a provincial government matter.

A spokesman for Shandro’s office said Harris’s appointment was a solid choice for the AHS board and castigated critics of the appointment as partisan hacks.

“Mr. Harris is an exceptionally well qualified board member, and we’re grateful to him for his willingness to serve,” Steve Buick said in an email.

“The attempt to smear him is a disgrace and a new low in hypocrisy for the Friends of Medicare — a front group for the NDP and public-sector unions.”

Amazon Funding Spurs Union Exodus From Consumer Group Boar

Josh Eidelson
Fri, August 13, 2021,


(Bloomberg) -- Three major unions have quit the board of the nation’s oldest consumer advocacy organization, claiming funding from Amazon.com Inc. has compromised the group’s progressive mission.

In separate letters last month, the presidents of the United Food & Commercial Workers, the Communications Workers of America and the United Auto Workers wrote that their groups were resigning immediately from their roles on the board of the National Consumers League, citing the Seattle-based e-commerce giant’s involvement with the group.

“Unfortunately, it has become increasingly clear over the last several months that NCL leadership now prioritizes donations from anti-worker companies like Amazon ahead of its historic pro-labor and pro-consumer mission,” the presidents of the CWA and UFCW wrote. The auto workers’ president said in the union’s letter that the consumer group’s “decisions around partnering with Amazon and the subsequent board discussions” had left it with no other choice., but to resign.

NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg declined to comment, saying in an email that it was “an internal board matter.” Founded in 1899, NCL says on its website that the group’s official mission is “to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad.” The board chair is a representative of the Service Employees International Union and one of the vice chairs comes from the AFL-CIO. Spokespeople for Amazon, SEIU, and the AFL-CIO didn’t immediately respond Friday to requests for comment.

Amazon’s rapid growth, its expansion into sectors like grocery stores and parcel delivery, and its aggressive and successful efforts to defeat unionization efforts among its workers have made it a primary target and antagonist of the U.S. labor movement and progressive politicians allied with it.

NCL’s donors last year included tech, finance, aviation, and pharmaceutical companies as well as unions and law firms, according to its 2020 annual report, which noted it had “supported union organizing and minimum wage increases in states across the country.”

In March, the nonprofit organization issued a measured statement regarding the unionization election then-under way among Amazon warehouse employees in Bessemer, Alabama. NCL said at the time that it supported workers’ right to unionize, that employees were “seeking a stronger voice” on issues such as productivity expectations and that it hoped the company would honor the choice its workers made. “We have partnered with Amazon on issues of great import to consumers, including fighting fraud and supporting financial literacy for teens and appreciate the company’s dedication to those concerns and its pledge to support a $15 an hour minimum wage nationally,” NCL said in the same statement.

Amazon employees voted against unionization, but a National Labor Relations Board hearing officer has said that result should be thrown out due to misconduct by the company. Amazon has denied wrongdoing.

City hopeful as they aim to become second hydrogen hub in Canada

(Derek Brade/CHATNewsToday) An employee works at the Methanex facility in Medicine Hat. Methanex is one of the partners of the newly established task force that hopes to make the region a hydrogen hub

By Tiffany Goodwein

Aug 13, 2021 | 6:06 PM


MEDICINE HAT, AB– It has been dubbed a $100 billion a year industry by provincial energy analysts, and now the city of Medicine Hat, and the southeast region are hoping to become the second industrial hydrogen hub in all of Canada.

A task force, consisting of city officials in Medicine Hat, Brooks, and other partners has formed with the hopes of bringing industry investment to the region. Methanex, which produces hydrogen and CF Industries are also included as members, something the city said is key to their strategy.

“The intent of the task force is to essentially establish the parameters for creating a new hydrogen economy for southeast Alberta and, ultimately what that means in new jobs and new industry,” said Erik Van Enk, director of investments and strategic planning with Invest Medicine Hat

Van Enk said the task force is hoping to establish the region for hydrogen production specifically blue hydrogen and green hydrogen, a net zero product that is fuelled by renewable resources.

The first industrial hydrogen hub was established in Edmonton earlier this year.

Mayor Ted Clugston said the region is well-positioned to become a hydrogen hub due to its exiting infrastructure and other factors.

“ So with the blue hydrogen we have methane and we have carbon storage. When you refract the methane molecule you can’t be admitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. That totally defeats the purpose so hopefully, we can start putting it back in the ground with some of our old gas wells,” Clugston said.

The city also said their access to renewable resources such as solar and wind farms also gives them an edge, in comparison to Edmonton when it comes to producing green hydrogen.

“The hub in Edmonton is more geared towards blue hydrogen and the use of gas to power the electrolysis process, and what we are looking to do is likely have more of a green hydrogen angle given the abundance of solar and wind projects in South East Alberta,” Van Enk said.

In 2014 the city started to exit the oil and gas industry, as prices began to tank, and they are hopeful hydrogen production will bring jobs, that skilled oil and gas workers can transition to.

“ The same skill sets required to extract oil and gas, a lot of the same infrastructure, pipelines, some of the wells in the area can actually be repurposed, in terms of monitoring wells, for a carbon capture utilization and so that is the overall vision here, is putting people back to work,” Van Enk said

A study that looks at the viability of the region as a hydrogen hub is underway and will be completed in early 2022.

Sustained anti-Kenney protests mark new political culture for Alberta


AUGUST 14, 2021


Joe Wipond left the McDougall Center in downtown Calgary on Wednesday around 1 p.m., after leading a rally against Alberta’s plans to close COVID-19 testing centers, contact tracing and isolation requirements. He headed east, away from the dull crowd, to be set up in a quiet spot for the TV interview. The police chased.

Dr. Wipond, an emergency room physician, has emerged as one of the most prominent critics of Premier Jason Kenny. In late July, the physician became the de facto leader of daily rallies against the United Conservative Party’s handling of the pandemic. In Calgary, protesters have gathered outside McDougall, a provincial government building; In Edmonton, he has generally rallied in the legislature.

UCP activists portray Dr. Vipond as a shill for the NDP. Anti-maskers and vaccine conspiracy theorists call him a snake oil salesman, a fascist, and a fraud. Protesters show up every day, trying to drive out Dr. Vipond and his supporters. When they get too close, a beefy friend casually steps in between him and the doctor.

Continuous demonstrations are not part of Alberta’s political culture. The daily rallies mark a new level of frustration with Mr Kenny’s government, with newcomers chanting alongside union veterans with political activism. And Alberta’s growing distaste for the UCP could extend beyond provincial politics if disgruntled voters take out their grievances on Canada’s Conservative Party candidates in the next federal election, which is expected in September.

As Dr. Wipond left McDougall with his unofficial bodyguard and TV reporter, a Calgary Police Service officer jumped on a bike to track him down. The officer followed from afar, as all three prepared for the interview.

When a counter-protester passed by, the officer spoke on his radio and another CPS member showed up. The pair moved to a place close to Dr. Wipond, where they could quickly meet between the doctor and his critic, who was talking on a megaphone a few feet away. He let the respondent do his job.

On Friday, Dr. Vipond and others like him declared a partial victory. The province’s chief medical officer of health, Dina Hinshaw, delayed the closure of testing centres, and said those who test positive for COVID-19 should continue to isolate. Contact tracing, however, will still be wound up.

Dr Hinshaw said the latest decision was based on examining data from the United States, where states with low vaccination rates have seen an increase in children’s hospital admissions. Asked whether Friday’s turnaround was an acknowledgment that people like Dr. Wipond are right, Ms. Hinshaw addressed political tensions in the province.

“One of the most important things that has happened during the pandemic is the polarization and the difficulty of having a respectful dialogue between differences,” he told reporters. “And I believe that, with very complex and even wicked problems like COVID-19, we do well to hold onto positions rather than recognize that we have common interests. Service is not available.”

He said he was not perfect. But neither, Dr. Hinshaw said, are those who have different views on what the province should do

“It’s important that we open up space for respectful dialogue, and to share perspectives, to be able to have that discussion,” she said.

With the backing of the government, the organizers of the rally have canceled plans to hold demonstrations this weekend. However, the political fallout will continue. Mr Kenny was a top lieutenant under former Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and voters associate him closely with the federal Conservative Party.

Morgan Turrigan was a regular at McDougall rallies, and has said that she is new to this type of activism. She comes from a family of devoted conservatives and belongs to the Conservative Party of Canada. That membership fee, she said, was the only political donation she had ever made.

Ms Turrigan said she votes based on policy rather than ideological allegiance, but her anger at the UCP will determine how she votes in federal elections.

“I will not vote for the opposition in this election because of what Alberta is doing,” she said.

Before Alberta’s reversal, she contacted federal Conservative lawmakers to inform them she would not vote for Conservatives unless they tried to persuade their provincial counterparts to reconsider their COVID-19 strategy.

“It’s affecting my vote, because I can’t believe they don’t stand to say: ‘Hey provincial guys, stop doing this,'” she said.

It will take years for conservative parties to win him back, and others in his social circle feel the same way, she said.

Mark Lehman is another newcomer to the activist scene. He is a retired businessman. That said, performing makes them uncomfortable. But he attended McDougall rallies because he thought UCP was putting lives at risk.

“I thought it was time for people like me – who are probably not uncommon – to be there. To offer support,” Mr. Lehmann said. He is a longtime conservative, and supported the UCP in the last election. But, he added: “Never again.”

Dan Furst, a corporate attorney in Calgary, attended McDougall rallies when he could fit them into his schedule. He said he had previously worked in political activism, but he is more comfortable writing letters.

About attending rallies, he said, “I don’t like doing that.” “It always seems that the ghost of violence is never far away.”

Kenney needs to own decision after Alberta

 slows lifting of COVID-19 measures: MRU

 professor

By Kirby Bourne 630CHED
Posted August 13, 2021 


WATCH: While it’s Dr. Deena Hinshaw, Alberta’s chief medical officer of health, who makes the recommendations about COVID-19 protocols, the final decisions are made by the premier and his cabinet. Tom Vernon takes a look at that process and reaction to recent decisions

After Premier Jason Kenney was nowhere to be found at a news conference announcing Alberta will not be moving forward yet with the lifting of some COVID-19 measures, one political commentator is calling on him to step up and own his decisions.

“If he wants to look like he’s a leader, which seems to be his desire, then he should be taking responsibility for his good decisions as well as the ones that need to be modified or changed,” Lori Williams, an associate professor at Mount Royal University’s faculty of policy studies, said.

READ MORE: Alberta keeping COVID-19 measures for another six weeks

Alberta puts pause on further lifting COVID-19 restrictions until Sept. 27, says province’s top doctor

On Friday morning, Alberta’s chief medical officer of health announced the province would be delaying the lifting of remaining COVID-19 measures, including testing, tracing and isolation requirements.

“We are not going backwards. We are pausing to monitor and assess before taking a step forward,” Dr. Deena Hinshaw said in a news conference.

“If monitoring confirms our original expectations that a rise in cases will not lead to high levels of (hospitalizations) and we do not see evidence of increased risk for severe disease for children, we will proceed with implementing the next set of changes after Sept. 27.”

While Education Minister Adriana LaGrange was on hand to outline the steps the province will be taking to protect students when they go back to school in September, the premier was not at the news conference. Nor was he at the news conference announcing the government would be lifting those measures.

“He’s trying to put some distance from it because he doesn’t want the political blowback,” Williams said. “In essence, it looks like he wants to get the credit for being a leader and ahead of everybody else, but he doesn’t want any of the criticism that has gone with that.”

When the province announced Alberta would stop testing, contact tracing and isolation requirements, feedback was swift from within the province, the country and even around the world, Williams said.

In Alberta, daily protests at the legislature in Edmonton and MacDougall Centre in Calgary began and grew larger day by day.

READ MORE: Albertans protest ending mandatory COVID-19 isolation, masking and testing changes

The government rolling back those decisions was likely directly linked to those protests as well as the other blowback, Williams said.

“There’s been a whole lot of momentum built to criticize the government now and I don’t think it would be very difficult to get those protests going again if there’s another measure taken by the government that’s unpopular.”

The decision to pause the lifting of those measures was made Thursday night at an emergency cabinet meeting and at the advice of Hinshaw.

Alberta may put plans to lift COVID-19 protocols on hold: sources

NDP health critic David Shepherd spoke to reporters after Hinshaw’s announcement Friday morning. He also said Kenney is trying to distance himself from the conversation, hoping that “Albertans memories are going to be short.”

Shepherd called on Kenney to step up and own the decision, while also continuing to ensure Albertans, businesses and schools get the support they need to continue to deal with COVID-19.

“Instead we see them ducking and hiding and bobbing and weaving because they don’t want to deal with potential political fallout with potentially some of their far-right base, potentially with some of their own caucus, as we saw this spring.”


READ MORE: Kenney says UCP needs to be ‘on the same team’ after vote to oust dissenters

Former UCP caucus members and current independent MLAs Drew Barnes and Todd Loewen released a joint statement Friday morning, saying this announcement is “at least the third time the premier has broken his word to Albertans when it comes to pandemic management.”

“At this point there is no reason for any Albertan to trust this premier when it comes to pandemic policy,” they said.

During the news conference Friday, LaGrange and Hinshaw were asked about the political ramifications of the changes.

“(Hinshaw) brought forward further recommendations, again we’re following the science and the advice of our chief medical officer of health. She has served us really, really well and we thank her for her dedicated service to Albertans,” LaGrange said.

 Edmonton

Alberta return-to-school plan says public health, schools don't need to share COVID case info

Social Sharing

• Facebook

• Twitter

• Email

• Reddit

• LinkedIn

Alberta Health Services will not inform school authorities of individual cases of COVID-19 at school

Janet French · CBC News · Posted: Aug 13, 2021 8:39 PM MT | Last Updated: August 14

Alberta's chief medical officer of health, Dr. Deena Hinshaw, left, and Education Minister Adriana LaGrange outlined new school guidance on Friday that is a marked change from how schools managed COVID-19 cases during the last school year. (Jason Franson/The Canadian Press, Scott Neufeld/CBC)

New guidelines for Alberta schools will greatly reduce the flow of information between educators and public health authorities about COVID-19 cases.

The five-page guidance document released Friday says that Alberta Health Services (AHS) won't tell schools when a student or staff member has tested positive for the illness, and that schools aware of positive cases don't have to tell AHS.

No one who works in or attends a school needs to share a positive test result with school administrators, though they are still advised to isolate.

The recommendations follow Alberta's decision to phase out contact tracing in most settings and are a marked change from how schools managed COVID-19 cases during the last school year.

Cases will not scuttle classes, Hinshaw says

At a news conference Friday morning, Alberta's chief medical officer of health, Dr. Deena Hinshaw, also said classes will no longer have to be sent home to isolate, even if the school is aware of a COVID-19 case.

"We recognize that intervention, which I believe was necessary last year prior to widespread vaccine availability, is highly disruptive and causes significant harm," Hinshaw said.

The plan was unveiled as daily COVID-19 cases increase in the province, with 582 new diagnoses reported on Friday.

With no provincial school mask mandate included, except on school buses until Sept. 27, Education Minister Adriana LaGrange told school boards it's up to them to take any additional measures they think are necessary in their communities.

Hours later, Edmonton Public Schools revealed all students from kindergarten to Grade 12 and staff will be expected to keep masking this school year.

With children under 12 ineligible for a vaccine and just slightly more than half of 12- to 19-year-olds vaccinated in the province, board chair Trisha Estabrooks said it is the safe and prudent choice.

"Ideally, we want kids in classes learning with their peers, learning face to face with their teachers," she said. "If we have this measure that will lessen the disruption in our classrooms and keep kids and staff as safe as possible, why wouldn't we do this?"

At a special public school board meeting Friday afternoon, superintendent Darrel Robertson said he hopes the mandatory masking will encourage more families to choose in-person learning this fall.

Both Edmonton public and Catholic schools extended their deadline for families to make that choice until Aug. 19 at 4 p.m. MT.

Edmonton Catholic Schools said it plans to release its back-to-school plan on Monday.

Critics say return anything but normal

At the news conference, LaGrange heralded the return to classrooms as "normal," saying students can look forward to field trips, team sports, school clubs and celebrations such as graduation ceremonies.

"It was hard for me to hear that everything is going to be going back to normal," said Roxanne Weyermann, an Edmonton teacher who has three young children. Her oldest child will start kindergarten next month.

Roxanne Weyermann, far right, and her husband, Jonathan, are concerned about the province's public health guidance for schools during the pandemic as classes approach this September. Their son Nathanael, front centre, will start kindergarten this year. (Travis McEwan/CBC)

She wanted to see mandatory masking and distancing rules stay in place across the province — at least until children can be vaccinated. She worries children who voluntarily wear masks could be stigmatized.

The Alberta Teachers' Association was pleased to see an in-school vaccination program beginning in junior and senior high schools on Sept. 7.

But president Jason Schilling said waiting until more than 10 per cent of the school population is absent with an illness before calling AHS, as the guidance recommends, is a "recipe for disaster." In a large urban high school, it could mean waiting until more than 200 people are sick.

The Opposition NDP slammed the United Conservative Party government's plans. Health critic David Shepherd said with the end to contact tracing, and paring back of testing after Sept. 27, the government is withholding information parents and school administrators need to make informed decisions about their children's health.

How his plan to open the Canadian Rockies to coal mining set Alberta’s Jason Kenney against country music stars

By Alex BoydCalgary Bureau
Sun., Aug. 15, 2021


Corb Lund is not enjoying this interview.

The lanky Juno-winning musician, known for his playful lyrical takes on rural life on the Prairies, is calling while on his way home to southern Alberta after a stint in studio in Edmonton working on some new music. But he hasn’t phoned to talk about his latest project, or even the one before it, an album released to critical acclaim in the middle of a pandemic.

Instead, he’s stolen time from his primary gig to talk about a side project that has recently rebranded him as an emerging, albeit reluctant, advocate: stopping a controversial plan to open up the Rocky Mountains to coal mining.

“I would rather be playing music, frankly,” says Lund, sounding exasperated.

“I blame the government. I don’t even blame the coal companies, because coal companies are going to coal-company, right? That’s what they do. It’s the government allowing them to do it.”




Last spring, the Alberta government set off a firestorm with the quiet removal of a 44-year-old policy preventing most open pit coal mining in the iconic mountain range. At a time when pandemic polarization seems to have split Albertans into warring camps on just about everything, coal mining might be one of the few areas of common ground.

In short, most people are mad.


The provincial government maintains that a new plan is required because the old coal policy was “largely made obsolete through more modern oversight,” Jennifer Henshaw, press secretary to Energy Minister Sonya Savage, said in an email. The old one doesn’t even mention climate change, she points out.

The mines would also bring in revenue at a time when the province is struggling to recover from the double whammy of the pandemic and plummeting oil revenue — in 2017, the Alberta government collected $15.7 million from coal production on publicly owned land.

But the anger is such that the current government, which flaunts big trucks and cowboy hats with an enthusiasm that’s notable, even for Albertan politicians — Premier Jason Kenney is preparing for a tour of the province in his signature blue pickup truck — is facing pushback from what might seem like an unexpected source: country music stars.

Alberta’s conservative history can tempt outsiders to paint the whole province with the same political brush, an impression reinforced by the current government, which has embraced the rural parts of the province as its base.

But its coal plans have united environmentalists, many conservatives and several First Nations as well as big country names, exposing the many shades of grey in terms of how Albertans think of political allegiance, resource development and even the future of their province.

“I know that some of the current politicians tried to frame this as a bunch of urban busybodies but honestly, I know more rural people against it,” Lund says.

“It’s a very wide coalition of people.”

A rising chorus

Over the past six months, a movement of sorts has coalesced around Lund, who, in addition to speaking out in interviews and online, has hosted a horse ride and a protest concert in the sprawling ranch country located in the mountain foothills south of Banff National Park. He’s even publicly mused about attempting a referendum under new government legislation that allows private citizens to put issues to the ballot.

One by one, other members of Canadian country royalty have joined the chorus.

Paul Brandt, whose hit songs include “Alberta Bound,” once used as a soundtrack for Ford commercials, tweeted that “Corb Lund is right,” alongside photos of him fishing in a gleaming stream. Terri Clark tweeted that the Canadian Rockies are “part of my soul” and linked to Lund’s Facebook page.

In a video posted online, Terry Grant, otherwise known as “Mantracker,” from the show of the same name in which he used tracking skills and a horse to hunt down contestants, came out strongly against the mine. “I grew up down there, chasing cows and cowboying, guiding and hunting. It’s amazing country.”

Of course, there will always be critics who argue that entertainers should stay out of politics.

Corb Lund is usually one of those critics.

“I don’t normally speak about stuff like this,” he says. “A lot of times when people in positions of notoriety or celebrity or whatever speak out about stuff, they don’t really know what they’re talking about. They’re kind of stupid, and I didn’t want to be that guy.”

To that end, in the past few months, he’s taken on a crash course in coal, speaking to politicians, coal lobbies, scientists and conservationists.

The Rockies are iconic to Albertans, and the opposition is built on concerns that mines will open up vast pits to extract the coal beneath, and at the same time pollute the water, harm wildlife and knit access roads and rail lines across land that is in many ways undisturbed.

Before a long weekend in May

The furor began over a year ago, with an email sent to media on the Friday afternoon before the May long weekend. In it, the government announced it was replacing the “outdated” 44-year-old coal policy that had prohibited much mining in the Rockies.

Instead, the government was bringing in what it called “modern regulatory processes, integrated planning and land use policies.” While the government said sensitive land in the eastern slopes, for example, would continue to be protected, coal companies would be able to apply to develop new projects.

“Government is placing a strong focus on creating the necessary conditions for the growth of export coal production,” the release read.

The reaction was swift.

The Alberta Wilderness Association pointed out the move had the potential to open up more than 4.7 million hectares of environmentally sensitive lands to coal exploration. A group of ranchers whose grazing leases were suddenly eligible for mining, and the Ermineskin and Whitefish Lake First Nations moved ahead with legal action, arguing the changes had been made without required consultation.

In January, the government said it had “listened carefully” and announced it was cancelling 11 coal leases and would pause any future lease sales. The old policy was eventually reinstated while a five-member panel was tasked with consulting with Albertans about a new way forward. Suggesting how widely the issue resonated, a preliminary survey done by the panel found the majority of Albertans felt the development of coal affected them.

Meanwhile, the federal government has waded into the fray, armed with the argument that issues of climate change and pollution are national matters.

Federal Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson announced in June that Ottawa would conduct an environmental review of any new coal project that could potentially release selenium, a mineral found in Alberta’s coal beds that is toxic to fish.

Last week, Ottawa rejected the Grassy Mountain proposal, one of the most high-profile projects, after a joint review panel concluded it would have major environmental effects.

But the real litmus test will come this fall, when the Alberta government goes back to the drawing board on a new coal policy.

Alberta premiers — then and now



Most of the coal currently being eyed by commercial interests in Alberta lies within a 20-kilometre-wide band of rolling foothills that runs along the eastern edge of the Rockies south of Banff National Park.

Falling roughly between a winding secondary highway known as the Cowboy Trail — a nod to decades of local ranching history — and the Rockies proper, the eastern slopes are considered one of the last patches of the true Prairie ecosystem that once blanketed much of the continent.

It’s important habitat for grizzly bears and threatened species such as westslope cutthroat trout; and the water that flows through here feeds much of the southern half of the province — including the city of Calgary.

Coal mining is not unheard of in this part of the world. To the south, the Crowsnest Pass, one of the few passable routes between Alberta and British Columbia, is still shot through with old mine shafts. But the use of coal for energy waned in the 1960s and then, in 1976, Alberta brought in a coal policy that put management of water first and restricted much new coal development.

At the time, David Luff was a brand new government employee who had been hired the year before to help implement the coal policy and develop a plan for the eastern slopes.

The premier of the day, Peter Lougheed, still casts a long shadow in Alberta politics. Luff says he believes Lougheed, through the coal policy, was implementing a long-term vision of stability and prosperity for the province that Luff argues was ahead of its time.

“In 1976, people didn’t talk about climate change, they weren’t worried about drought. They weren’t worried about the forest fires that we now see on a yearly basis,” he says. “None of that was really on anyone’s radar.”

The policy protected much of the land and encouraged coal companies, which had to get special permission for most open-pit mines in Alberta, to move to B.C., where mines have released so much selenium it’s now ending up in Montana.

Since the removal of the Lougheed-era policy, Luff says companies have already begun to explore future mine sites, building roads and sinking core holes into the rock to probe for coal.

“With the rescinding of the policy, the government was stating water is no longer important. Water is not the highest priority; coal development is the highest priority. And Albertans found that to be fundamentally wrong,” Luff says.

A different kind of coal

Coal is one of the emerging villains of the fight against climate change, and Canada has committed to phasing out coal-fired electricity by 2030. Alberta is currently on track to accomplish that even earlier and hopes to transition off by 2023, officials say.

But a complicating factor here is there are different types of coal. Much of what the Alberta government is looking to produce is what’s called metallurgical coal. With more carbon and less ash and moisture than regular coal, also known as thermal coal, metallurgical coal is used to make steel and even Canada says it can’t be phased out just yet.

According to the provincial website, Alberta still produces about 25 million to 30 million tonnes of coal every year from its remaining nine mines — two of which produce metallurgical coal, and the remaining seven of which are devoted to thermal, much of which is sold to other countries.

But the federal environment minister says that while the first priority is eliminating thermal coal, eventually the same thing will happen to metallurgical.

“There are a number of different processes and technologies that people are looking to deploy that will help us to reduce those emissions and move us away from metallurgical coal,” Wilkinson said, pointing to a couple of Canadian companies that are trying out electric furnaces to make steel.

Luff, for his part, is not anti-industry. He would go on to become an assistant deputy minister in the energy department, then become a vice-president for the Canadian Association for Petroleum Producers before creating his own consultancy company, but he worries that government is putting profit ahead of the long-term interests of Albertans.

He worries Alberta’s politicians aren’t playing the long game here, which he argues shows industry switching away from coal, even for steel production. The potential risk to the province’s drinking water and an iconic part of the province won’t be done away with so easily.

“Maybe it’s just a lack of understanding that, yes, Alberta is a province that benefits from the development of its resources, whether it’s oil and gas, or timber development and so on. But Albertans also recreate, and spend a great deal of time in the mountains, in northern Alberta in the boreal forest — hiking, canoeing, fishing, hunting — and many Canadians, I don’t think, are aware of that,” he says.

“Albertans do look to find a balance between the development of resources, but also ensuring that the environment and social values will be maintained in perpetuity.”

‘I don’t know what he’s thinking’

Two and a half years into its maiden term — a significant chunk of which involved navigating a global pandemic — Jason Kenney’s United Conservative government is no stranger to controversy.

There was the time at least seven MLAs and senior government officials were caught travelling for the holidays despite official advice, or the time Kenney himself was photographed having drinks on the balcony of the so-called Sky Palace — a government office that a former premier tried to turn into a luxury apartment that is now Albertan shorthand for government arrogance — with a group of ministers, including the health minister, while flouting pandemic rules.

There is growing evidence Albertans are getting fed up. While many leaders have enjoyed pandemic bumps to their approval ratings, Kenney has the lowest level of support of a premier in the country.

According to an Angus Reid poll from June, his approval was sitting around 31 per cent, or about half of where it was when he swept to victory two years ago.

But while much of the pushback against Kenney’s government has tended to splinter along political lines — his rule-resistant COVID-19 response seemed designed to appease a rural base, experts say — the fury of coal stands out for its cross-partisan appeal.

When he was running to be leader of the newly minted United Conservative party four years ago, Kenney stood in front of a green and white sign emblazoned with his signature and what he called the Grassroots Guarantee — a promise that policy would be developed by membership and not by leadership alone.


It was an attempt to throw off the shackles of conservative arrogance in the province, and yet it’s been a challenging promise to deliver on, says Lori Williams, a political scientist at Calgary’s Mount Royal University.

A small poll in February found that almost seven in 10 Albertans surveyed were against development of formerly protected areas and half strongly opposed getting rid of the coal policy specifically and yet the government has plunged ahead with changes. Some government MLAs have spoken of an inability to get Kenney’s ear.

“The inability to respond to the concerns that are being raised by his base is a bit surprising,” Williams says.

Kenney came to power by combining the province’s two Conservative parties, and as his popularity drops, it’s a partnership that risks unravelling. He’s struggled to keep the right wing of the party intact, which some have speculated explains why he’s pushed ahead with the development often favoured by the right.

“I don’t know what he’s thinking,” Williams says. “I often wonder if he knows the Alberta that he is now governing; it’s not the Alberta that he left in the 1990s. But sometimes he governs as if it is that Alberta.”

‘This is just about me not wanting the Rockies ruined’

Lund, who says he agrees with some ideas on the right and some on the left, says this isn’t about politics.

“I don’t like any political parties. I don’t like groups of people in general. I don’t trust them. I only trust individuals. So this is just about me not wanting the Rockies ruined for everyone,” he says. “And turns out that’s resonated across political lines.”

Fellow musician Brett Kissel was raised on a ranch north of Edmonton but grew up on country music stages — he recorded his first album at age 12 and has since had four singles hit No. 1 on Canadian country music charts. After watching one of Lund’s videos about coal this spring, he immediately called him to ask how he could help, he says.

He agrees this is not about politics. He’s made public appearances with Kenney and says there are a number of things the current government has done well since the pandemic began.



Personal relationships aside, he says, he’s decided to speak out because of what he considers a “bad deal” for Alberta. As he sees it, the government has backed itself into a corner — if it backs down now, it will invite environmentalists to fight back on other causes. But he argues that the time has come for the province to heed the voices of the province.

Speaking a few hours before stepping onto the stage in Quebec for one of his first post-pandemic appearances this month, he said it’s a comment on Alberta politics when even the “true blue Albertans” are starting to push back.

“We’re pro oil. We’re pro industry. We’re pro money. We’re pro generational wealth. So even us, we’re the ones who are like, ‘Yeah, no, this is too far,’” Kissel says.

He says he feels for the people who work in coal who were looking forward to new opportunities — only to have those new mines threated by the pushback. The musicians who have spoken out have all received significant heat for that reason, he says.

Still, he calls the mine proposals a “bad deal” for the province, with the promise of a few hundred local jobs and “miniscule” royalties.

“It’s very difficult when we are talking about other people’s livelihoods,” he says. “But you know what, the pros for this situation do not outweigh the cons that are going to be for the rest of the province.”

Right now, the government is awaiting the coal policy committee’s report, which is due by Nov. 15. Although “we cannot speculate on the content or details of a modernized provincial coal policy,” the report will “inform” the new plan, the Alberta energy minister’s press secretary said in an email.

A clearer timeline for a new policy is expected this fall.

Lund and others will be watching.

“I feel like the wind is in our sails, but I think we need to keep pushing until we have a new policy in place that clearly sorts this out so that we don’t have to deal with it again, five years from now,” he says.

“In this divided time, it’s been refreshing to see that we can all agree on clean water at least, right?”

Alex Boyd is a Calgary-based reporter for the Star.