It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Budget redux lets look at who actually pays the most for the Government of Canada. Courtesy of the Government of Canada. And with big tax cuts to corporations in the Conservative budget business will again pay less than you and me.
With the Conservatives increase in sin taxes and income taxes to offset the GST cut and corporate tax cuts, you and me will still be paying more than those who make the profit off our labour, big business.
The federal government’s budgetary revenues came from a variety of taxes and other sources.
Personal income tax is the biggest revenue source. In 2004–05, it provided $89.8 billion in federal funding. That’s more than 45 per cent of all federal revenues.
Revenues from the goods and services tax provided $29.8 billion, or 15 per cent of total federal funds.
Corporate income tax raised about $30 billion, just over 15 per cent of federal finances.
A number of other taxes—such as non-resident taxes, customs import duties, energy taxes and excise taxes on alcohol and tobacco—made up $16.7 billion, or nearly 81⁄2 per cent of revenues.
As well, employment insurance premiums, which are treated as part of general revenues, contributed $17.3 billion to federal finances, or 8.7 per cent of the total.
And other revenues—such as earnings by Crown corporations and the sale of goods and services—provided the remaining $14.9 billion, or 71⁄2 per cent of total revenues. This included a one-time $2.6-billion net gain from the sale of the federal government’s remaining shares in Petro-Canada.
For more than 30 years, Canada has been promising to do its part in solving these crises by reining in our hugely oversized fossil fuel burning. Instead, we keep cranking up the amount we burn. That's according to the data in the latest BP Statistical Review of World Energy.
This data also shows that Canada is dragging its feet on expanding climate-safe and less-deadly energy sources that we need to switch to — like hydro, nuclear, wind and solar. As a result, fossil fuels’ formidable lead in Canada’s energy use keeps growing.
Canadians now burn more fossil fuels per person than any of our peer nations in the wealthy Group of Seven (G7) or the European Union. And while nearly all these nations have managed to reduce their climate pollution since 1990, Canada hasn’t. We still emit far more.
Canada’s multi-decade failure to reduce fossil fuel burning has left Canadians and our economy increasingly exposed to the rapidly metastasizing climate crisis.
To illustrate Canada’s ever-growing fossil fuel problem, I’ve created a series of charts using the latest BP energy data.
Burning up
My first chart lets you compare Canada’s energy use last year to what we used back in 1990, the year Canada first promised to reduce climate pollution.
Back then, Canadians burned seven exajoules of fossil fuels.
(Note: An "exajoule" (EJ) is an energy metric used by BP and others to compare different sources of energy. It is roughly equal to the energy from burning 163 million barrels of oil.)
Over the next 30 years, instead of reducing our carbon burning as promised, we kept cranking it up. Last year, we burned nine exajoules worth of fossil fuels — two more than in 1990.
For scale, the combined nations of Central America currently burn about one exajoule worth of fossil fuels each year. So, Canada has increased its fossil fuel burning by two Central Americas worth since 1990. That’s the path to a chaotic climate future, not a safe one.
The chart’s green bars show how much climate-safe energy Canada uses. This increased by just one exajoule — only half as much.
Canada’s multi-decade failure to reduce fossil fuel burning has left us and our economy increasingly exposed to the rapidly metastasizing climate crisis. #ClimateCrisis #cdnpoli #FossilFuels @saxifrages writes for @NatObserver Fossil fuels are pulling away
As my next chart highlights, fossil fuels' already formidable lead over cleaner alternatives has grown even larger.
Back in 1990, fossil fuels had a three exajoule lead over climate-safe energy sources in Canada. Now, the gap has grown to four exajoules.
Three decades ago, the climate task facing Canadians was to eliminate seven exajoules of fossil fuel energy. That’s a lot of energy to replace or cut back. But back then, we also had several decades ahead of us to engineer a graceful energy transition.
Instead of acting, Canada burned up precious decades while making the problem even larger. Today, Canadians face a much larger task — eliminating nine exajoules per year worth of fossil fuels. And we have far less time remaining to do it. The climate crisis is now hammering away with increasing fury on our communities, food supply, security, economy and the rich ecosystems we cherish and depend on.
The impacts will keep growing more dangerous until we’ve eliminated all fossil fuel burning.
Coal gains squandered
There is one form of fossil fuel that Canada has acted on — coal burning in power plants.
This effort was led by Ontario with its Cessation of Coal Use Regulation back in 2007. The provincial government calls this the "single largest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction action on the continent." It remains Canada’s biggest climate success so far.
But, as this next chart highlights, all of Canada’s hard-won climate progress from coal cuts was wiped out four times over by our huge surge in oil and gas burning.
For those who like geeky details, coal burning declined by 0.7 EJ, while oil and gas burning surged by 2.7 EJ.
One step forward, four steps back.
On the positive side, Canadians are close to eliminating coal-burning power plants. Less than half an exajoule of coal burning remains. And Canada has laws on the books to shut down most of that.
But the flip side is that Canada has now played its coal card and, yet, fossil fuel burning continues to rise.
To make any meaningful climate progress now, Canada must make large and rapid cuts in our oil and gas burning. These now total 95 per cent of our fossil fuel burning.
However, Canada has been green-lighting economic and climate policies that do the opposite. Both oil and gas burning have risen relentlessly in Canada. Both hit all-time highs in 2019.
Global speed bumps
So far, the only thing that has slowed down Canada’s fossil burning has been two major global crises.
In 2009, the sudden global financial meltdown turned down Canada’s fossil burner — for a single year. And in 2020, the global COVID pandemic did it again.
But even these global crises were just temporary speed bumps in Canada’s determined acceleration off the climate cliff. In both cases, fossil burning rebounded strongly the next year.
In fact, it took just one year for Canada's fossil gas burning to erase the pandemic dip and surge to a record high in 2021.
Both these global economic crises also put a damper on Canada’s climate-safe energy. According to the BP data, Canada’s climate-safe energy peaked in 2017 and has been struggling through years of decline since.
Overall, though, Canada’s energy trends have been remarkably stable since 1990. Fossil fuel burning keeps rising. And it keeps rising much faster than climate-safe energy. The gap between climate-safe energy and climate-destructive energy keeps growing larger. And the amount of fossil fuel burning that Canadians must eliminate to preserve a livable climate keeps growing larger as well.
There is no sign in this data that Canada is turning the corner on its fossil fuel addiction. Super burners
So far, we’ve looked at the total fossil fuel burning in Canada.
Another revealing comparison I found in the BP data is in the amount of fossil fuels burned per person.
My next chart shows fossil fuel burning per capita among Canada’s peers in both the G7 and the European Union. Combined, these 31 nations hold more than half the world's wealth, produce half the global GDP, and emit a third of the climate pollution.
Where are Canadians?
Fossil fuel burning per capita in G7 and EU nations. Data from the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2022.
Yep, sadly, we are in first place — burning the most per person.
Canadians now burn nearly four times more fossil fuels per person than the global average; triple the French or British; and more than twice as much as the Germans and Japanese. Heck, even the Americans now burn less per person than we do. They used to burn a lot more than we did, but even the land of Trumpian climate denial and yahoo oil cowboys now burns less than us.
And, of course, all our oversized fossil fuel burning comes with oversized heaps of climate pollution. Climate rogue
My final chart shows the climate progress these same nations have made since 1990.
Green bars show reductions in climate pollution. As you can see, nearly all our peers in this group have reduced their emissions. Not Canada. We are one of the few climate rogues — still polluting more.
Climate pollution changes from 1990 to 2020 in G7 and EU nations. Data from each nation's National Inventory Report to the UNFCCC.
The Europeans have cut their climate pollution — by a third.
The British have cut their climate pollution — in half.
We’ve cranked ours higher. Is this really who we want to be?
If Canadians ever want to get off our treadmill of rising fossil fuel addiction and endless climate failure, we could adopt the same carbon budget policies that have been working so well for our Commonwealth peers in the U.K.
At this point, we know what works and what doesn’t.
Continuing with climate arson isn't our only option. We can choose a different and more hopeful path.
I do not know how to explain why Canada is doing so badly except that there must be corruption in the Cabinet.
f nordvie | 9 hours ago
5 years ago, Ontario was ahead of its schedule, to reach 2030 goals. And none of its work, or Quebec's, or BC's, or anyone else's, counted for a dawdly-doo in the federal figures, because they were all wiped out by the petro industries in AB and SASK.
And then we got Doug Ford. I don't say "we" elected Doug Ford, bc I played no part in that.
James S | 9 hours ago
Isn't a very large portion of Canada's consumption of fossil fuels related to a very small number of industries, including oil and gas extraction/refining, cement production, and to a lesser extent steel and aluminum smelting? These per capita charts suggest that 'ordinary' Canadians are doing all that burning which I don't believe is the case. At the same time, it's a well known fact that Canadian domestic consumption is much higher than Scandinavian domestic consumption, and so 'ordinary' Canadians have much in the way of improvements to make. However, while the climate doesn't care about who is producing carbon, I think we need to keep the record straight as to the fact that key industries in Canada who are mostly international conglomerates with widely held international shareholdings, are the ones that are putting these big numbers on the backs of ordinary Canadians. It is these same companies, as well as the Canadian Banks that keep the country's carbon output high while lobbying our so-called democratic representatives to allow them to keep making money at the expense of our climate futures.
Geoffrey Pounder | 7 hours ago
"Canada's overall emissions growth over the 1990 to 2020 period was driven primarily by increased emissions from oil and gas extraction as well as transport." "In 2020, the oil and gas sector and transport sector were the largest GHG emitters in Canada, accounting for 27% and 24% of total emissions, respectively."
Buildings, electricity, heavy industry, agriculture, "waste and others" (light manufacturing, construction, forest resources, coal production) account for the remainder. These five categories average around 9% (range: 7-12%). "The Heavy industry sector consists of emissions from mining, smelting and refining, pulp and paper, iron and steel, cement, lime and gypsum, and chemicals and fertilizers." Cement accounts for less than 2% (10-11 Mt) of Canada's total 730-740 Mt. ECCC: Greenhouse gas emissions https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environment...
Ultimately, just about all this economic activity is driven by consumption, i.e., by consumers here and abroad. Industry does not exist for its own sake. No consumers, no industry. Cars, light trucks, motorcycles, bus, rail and aviation account for 13% of total emissions. Not including the upstream gas and diesel production upstream to fuel them. Fossil fuels power our cars, natural gas heats our homes, agriculture puts food on our table, forestry provides our lumber and paper products, etc.
Dorothy Henaut | 5 hours ago
Our government certainly has the power to stop subsidizing the fossil fuel industries, which is a major factor in the fact that Canada is a rogue nation, perhaps even the worst rogue nation with regard to fossil fuels and bringing on climate Armageddon.
The only reason I can see that the Trudeau government is subsidizing the ridiculous carbon capturing and opening up more oil fields in the Atlantic and elsewhere is that he lives in a millionaire‘a bubble and his reality has very little to do with the real world that is rapidly burning up.
The day when federal ministers are willing to have lunch with citizens groups and climate activists the way they do with petroleum CEOs there might be some changes.
Meantime, Trudeau’s name is going to go down in history as the man who made Canada a rogue nation that largely affected the demise of the natural world as we know it, as well as an inestimable number of people in the world. Sometimes I wonder why he doesn’t think if that.
Feds try to reclaim $347 million insurance payout to Suncor linked to Libya unrest
Christopher Reynolds, The Canadian Press
The federal government is trying to reclaim nearly $350 million in insurance paid to Suncor Energy Inc. in the wake of political unrest in Libya.
The oil giant claimed $300 million in risk mitigation payments for losses linked to Libyan energy assets after fighting between rival political factions spread to the country's oil crescent region in 2015, a Federal Court judge said in a ruling this week.
The total — $347 million with interest — was determined by an arbitrator in 2019.
But Export Development Canada, which insures against losses caused by political violence, argues that Suncor's oil production facilities still deliver returns for the Calgary-based company.
"According to EDC’s May 15, 2022, notice of arbitration, the Libyan assets continue to have significant value and generate revenue for Suncor and its subsidiaries. EDC seeks to recover the amounts realized in connection with the assets until the $347 million has been repaid in full," judge Christine Pallotta wrote in the decision Monday.
Suncor, which did not respond to a request for comment, says on its website that operations there continue to be impacted by political upheaval.
"As of the end of 2015, production in Libya remains substantially shut-in given the political unrest. The timing of a return to normal operations remains uncertain," the site states.
Suncor also froze exploration in the oil-rich country in 2011 after civil war broke out, culminating in the capture and killing of president Muammar Gaddafi. "The period of force majeure under its contractual obligations has since ended in Libya, and Suncor has restarted exploration activities," the site says.
Suncor first built up its presence in Libya through Harouge Oil Operations, a joint venture with the state oil company in which Suncor has a 49 per cent stake dating back to 2008.
With the two main parties in the court standoff unable to agree on an arbitrator, the judge on Monday appointed one to handle the insurance case and denied a request from four Suncor subsidiaries to be removed from it.
The insurance claim was paid under a policy underwritten by Export Development Canada for Petro-Canada in 2006, which Suncor then came into following their merger in 2009.
"The relevant claim related to Suncor’s oil operations in Libya was received following the Arab Spring movement that began in the early 2010s," the Export Development Canada spokeswoman Jessica Draker said in an email Wednesday.
"As EDC and Suncor are in active legal proceedings, we are limited in what we can share. The ongoing arbitration between EDC and Suncor is a private process and is therefore confidential."
By the end of 2022, the exposure of the Crown corporation's political risk insurance portfolio sat at $359 million, down from $2.81 billion in 2015, according to its annual reports.
"We stopped issuing new policies within this program in 2020," the latest one states.
About 57 per cent of the portfolio lay in the Africa and Middle East region, a far higher share than any other area.
The oil giant claimed $300 million in risk mitigation payments for losses linked to Libyan energy assets after fighting between rival political factions spread to the country's oil crescent region in 2015, a Federal Court judge said in a ruling this week.
The total — $347 million with interest — was determined by an arbitrator in 2019.
But Export Development Canada, which insures against losses caused by political violence, argues that Suncor's oil production facilities still deliver returns for the Calgary-based company.
"According to EDC’s May 15, 2022, notice of arbitration, the Libyan assets continue to have significant value and generate revenue for Suncor and its subsidiaries. EDC seeks to recover the amounts realized in connection with the assets until the $347 million has been repaid in full," judge Christine Pallotta wrote in the decision Monday.
Suncor, which did not respond to a request for comment, says on its website that operations there continue to be impacted by political upheaval.
"As of the end of 2015, production in Libya remains substantially shut-in given the political unrest. The timing of a return to normal operations remains uncertain," the site states.
Suncor also froze exploration in the oil-rich country in 2011 after civil war broke out, culminating in the capture and killing of president Muammar Gaddafi. "The period of force majeure under its contractual obligations has since ended in Libya, and Suncor has restarted exploration activities," the site says.
Suncor first built up its presence in Libya through Harouge Oil Operations, a joint venture with the state oil company in which Suncor has a 49 per cent stake dating back to 2008.
With the two main parties in the court standoff unable to agree on an arbitrator, the judge on Monday appointed one to handle the insurance case and denied a request from four Suncor subsidiaries to be removed from it.
The insurance claim was paid under a policy underwritten by Export Development Canada for Petro-Canada in 2006, which Suncor then came into following their merger in 2009.
"The relevant claim related to Suncor’s oil operations in Libya was received following the Arab Spring movement that began in the early 2010s," the Export Development Canada spokeswoman Jessica Draker said in an email Wednesday.
"As EDC and Suncor are in active legal proceedings, we are limited in what we can share. The ongoing arbitration between EDC and Suncor is a private process and is therefore confidential."
By the end of 2022, the exposure of the Crown corporation's political risk insurance portfolio sat at $359 million, down from $2.81 billion in 2015, according to its annual reports.
"We stopped issuing new policies within this program in 2020," the latest one states.
About 57 per cent of the portfolio lay in the Africa and Middle East region, a far higher share than any other area.
Thursday, July 06, 2023
Thunder Bay
Road trips lose power as charger outages leave northern Ontario EV drivers stranded
Social Sharing
Facebook
Twitter
Email
Reddit
LinkedIn
Non-Tesla EV drivers couldn't go from Thunder Bay to Sault
Some electric vehicle drivers in northern Ontario say the charging network between Thunder Bay and Sault Ste. Marie is failing those who don't drive Teslas.
CCS and CHAdeMO fast chargers in Marathon, White River and Wawa were down for most of June; the Ivy location in White River has been out of service since mid-April.
Tesla chargers in the region were still working, according to reports on the forum PlugShare, where drivers update each other on charger status, but they are not currently compatible with non-Tesla vehicles.
"June was a rough month for this area," said Real Deschatelets, a volunteer with the Electric Vehicle Association of Northern Ontario (EVANO).
"There was a huge zone between Sault Ste. Marie and Terrace Bay that had no fast charging available. Even Level 2, there was almost nothing. … The biggest disappointment in owning an EV is public charging — public fast charging."
The federal government has been promoting EV adoption as an important pillar in the fight against climate change, offering incentives worth $5,000 off the purchase price of a vehicle.
Fewer Canadians seriously considering EV purchases
Ottawa wants EVs to account for 20 per cent of all new vehicles sold by 2026, and plans to phase out sales of vehicles with internal combustion engines by 2035.
But a new survey published last week by J.D. Power found only around a third of Canadians are considering EVs as their next vehicle purchase, and that number is trending downward. Those who reject EVs cite limited range and lack of charging stations as key reasons.
Ian McEwan's experience illustrates their fears.
McEwan set off on a road trip to Halifax last month in his new Ford F-150 extended range vehicle.
He topped up his charge in Nipigon and Terrace Bay, but the Petro-Canada app listed the company's chargers in Marathon in Wawa as out of service.
McEwan decided to get his car juiced up instead at the Ivy charger in White River. But when he got there, he discovered the charger was down too.
"Do I go forward, where I have enough power to get to, but not past [Wawa]? Or do I go backwards and hope I have enough [charge] to make it back to Terrace Bay?" he asked.
Complicating the risk assessment was the fact mobile phone service is spotty between cities in parts of the region, meaning a person with a dead battery could easily find themselves at the side of the road with no way to call for help.
In the end, McEwan pressed forward to Wawa, but was unable to find a working charger.
So he booked a room in a hotel and arranged a tow truck to get his vehicle to Sault Ste. Marie the next day.
"I was talking to the tow truck driver and he said, 'Oh this happens a lot because it has been down for at least two months,'" he said.
Suncor Energy, which owns Petro-Canada, did not respond to CBC's inquiry about its charging station outages.
Supply chain delays blamed for long outage
However, drivers posting on PlugShare reported the Wawa charger was back online on June 28.
The Marathon charger was working again on June 30.
A spokesperson for Ivy told CBC News the White River charging station was down due to a damaged transformer, and "there are significant delays in obtaining transformers, which has resulted in an extended timeline for bringing this station back online."
One towing company and hotel operator in White River said it's a "horrendous inconvenience" when the chargers aren't operating.
'Towed about a half a dozen out of White River'
"I think we've towed about a half a dozen out of White River," Angelo Bazzoni said when asked how many drivers he'd had to rescue in June due to dead batteries.
"Some of them we've accommodated in our motel property where … people spent the evening, and were able to slow charge their vehicles and get into Thunder Bay."
Deschatelets has emailed several MPs and met with Thunder Bay-Superior North MP Patty Hajdu about the issue.
She said the government has spent more than $1 billion on charging infrastructure since 2015, but it does not build chargers itself, relying instead on proponents to do so.
There are approximately 45,000 chargers across Canada right now, she added.
The goal is to have more than 84,000 by 2027.
In a statement to CBC News, Natural Resources Canada also reiterated the government's work to fund charging infrastructure, adding it does track charging ports on an interactive map.
"The federal government recognizes the importance of having a fully functional and reliable charging system," the statement reads. "Federal programs fund a fraction of project costs to ensure project proponents are committed to the long-term viability of their charging infrastructure, which helps support greater reliability. Reliability is also factored into application processes and funding requirements."
Deschatelets said he has also spoken with Petro-Canada and Ivy, which operate the chargers in the northern region.
He said he hopes Tesla's plans to open its chargers to all EVs will improve the situation for drivers.
"People would be losing their minds if gas stations all went down in this whole area — that's the reality of EVs right now."
Saskatoon
Electric vehicle users say travel plans have to be adapted due to unreliable charging infrastructure in Sask.
Social Sharing
Facebook
Twitter
Email
Reddit
LinkedIn
'It's not accelerating like I would have hoped,' says one of
Electric vehicle drivers say they are having to grapple with a slowly growing infrastructure in Saskatchewan.
As of July 3, there were 1,446 electric vehicles, or EVs, registered in Saskatchewan, according to Saskatchewan Government Insurance (SGI).
Glenn and Shannon Wright of Vanscoy, Sask., were among the first 40 registrants of EVs in Saskatchewan and have been driving their car for daily commute for the past five years, saving what they estimate is about $21,000 worth of gasoline.
"There was very little charging infrastructure then. It was very difficult. It's not accelerating like I would have hoped, yet I see new gas stations building all around," Glenn said. "We need more clean infrastructure as we try to decarbonize."
Glenn said there is a lot of misinformation around EVs in Saskatchewan which is a contributing factor to their slow adoption. Wright has run in Saskatchewan elections for the NDP, the Green Party and as an independent candidate. He is also a board member of SaskEV, a group of EV drivers and enthusiasts in Saskatoon, and said their membership is inching closer to the 100 mark.
Nipawin is one of some central and northern communities that were starting to address the need for charging stations to make the areas friendly to tourists. The town had planned to install three charging stations. Many members of the public opposed the move and in an unanimous decision recently, the council rescinded that motion.
"Not installing charging in Nipawin is hurting the community from tourism dollars and it's making it less accessible for people," he said, noting he can understand some concerns around mining for car material among others.
"It's sort of like 1950 where a community is saying we don't want power to run through the community, not realizing the benefits that come with it… it's unfortunate that Nipawin made this decision. They will regret it."
Joel Cardinal, chief administrative officer for Nipawin, said the town was eligible for a federal grant through Éco-West Canada.
"But the general consensus among the public was very much against the installation. They think this is something private businesses should pursue," Cardinal said.
"It's a fair point that this decision would close off the town essentially from any EV traveller willing to come to town. We still might have to put this infrastructure down the line. There is a void and the pressure to provide such service will only grow."
WATCH| Lack of electric vehicle charging stations in Sask. impacting summer travel plans for some:
Summer road trips have begun but if you are an electric vehicle driver, hitting the highway can be challenging. As CBC's Pratyush Dayal reports, the lack of charging stations can hurt tourism.
Charging deserts in Saskatchewan
Glenn said presently Highway 1 and Highway 16, or the Yellowhead Highway, are two highways in Saskatchewan that are well serviced with charging stations.
"But if you are beyond those two, it's much more difficult to find reliable charging infrastructure."
Glenn said on the route to Meadow Lake, La Loche, La Ronge and any place north of the latter, there are many gaps with almost no superchargers and only a few level two charging stations available. The level two charging stations can provide roughly 40 kilometres of distance for every hour of charging.
"Many EV drivers have to make a detour to Swift Current from Saskatoon in order to access high speed charging, as there is no infrastructure on the direct path from Saskatoon to Calgary," he said.
The couple said EVs should be looked at as a public service as there are no profits to be made there. However, the environmental benefits are abound. They suggest removing provincial sales tax on EVs to boost their adoption in the province.
"There are charging deserts in the province where you have to go out of the way to find a charging station," Shannon Wright said. "There are gaps in the infrastructure."
Scott McGregor, spokesperson for SaskPower, agrees. He said SaskPower's Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program, which is supported by Natural Resources Canada's Zero Emission Vehicle Infrastructure Program, will have 20 communities that will be awarded up to $200,000 to install fast chargers.
"Six contracts have been awarded in Davidson, Outlook, Prince Albert, North Battleford and Yorkton. First two are in service and the other four by the end of the year. Three additional would be next year," he said noting all are level three chargers.
SaskPower does not track the number and levels and locations of chargers in Saskatchewan, McGregor noted.
Shannon said many of the initial chargers were put up at gas stations which would mean waiting at that location for an hour while their Chevrolet Bolt charges.
"We are stuck in a cultural mindset that you are driving a car, so you need to stop at a filling station made for cars. People building these stations don't have EVs or are not thinking about it."
She said a charging station by restaurants, museums, libraries or civic centres would be more apt. Additionally, EV owners should be billed for the amount of energy they consume to charge their vehicles and not the time they spend charging, Shannon said.
The couple have had black smoke blown at their car from diesel trucks or "shown the finger" for driving an EV with a rear side reading "an electric car would save you $300 a month".
Jim Clifford, an associate professor at University of Saskatchewan, recently took a long trip driving his Tesla Model Y range from Saskatoon to Vancouver to San Francisco and back.
"Saskatoon is probably in one of the worst populated zones in North America. Roads to Kindersely, Rosetown, all the way to Calgary, have no superchargers or level 3 charger of any kind," he said.
"It takes an hour and a half to drive down to Swift Current to charge and then again take onto the long journey."
Clifford said the technology is ready for mass adoption for EVs but in Saskatchewan, it does not exist past Lac La Ronge.
"Saskatchewan is probably one of the worst provinces in Canada for EVs," he said, noting how B.C. is leading the way to boost EV infrastructure.
"BC Hydro, the provincial electricity company, has started building fast chargers everywhere, so one can now get up to Jasper using the BC Hydro network."
A model, Clifford said, Saskatchewan can replicate to boost tourism and connect EV travellers from other provinces to all the fishing and hunting areas in the province. He said Tesla is installing its chargers in parts of the U.S. and Canada and it could be an opportunity for SaskPower to swoop in.
"SaskPower is aware of other jurisdictions taking initiative and installing their own charging stations but there are no present plans to follow that suit. But we are always reevaluating," McGregor said.
Clifford said other communities should also think about including EV infrastructure as it is a great way to bring people into community, stores and cafes as their EVs charge.
"The biggest pike I ever caught was at the dam in Nipawin in October 2020. I am probably not going to go there unless there is EV infrastructure. I might rather go fishing near [Prince Albert] where there is that infrastructure."
Regina resident Naval Madiratta owns two Teslas and said he too would not take a trip to Nipawin.
"I won't set out to any area that doesn't have superchargers. I would spend my tourism dollars in more progressive communities," the 38-year-old said. "Saskatchewan is probably the worst I have seen in my travel for EV infrastructure."
As vehicle manufactures, like General Motors and Volvo, are planning on switching to Tesla's extensive charging network beginning early next year, Madiratta said there would be more demand, especially for Teslas which just take $12 for the full tank.
"Going out to some less travelled areas in Saskatchewan can be a hiccup. Last year, my friends and I went to Denver, Colorado from Regina. On the fastest route to take, there is no supercharge between Regina and Glendive, Montana. It's almost 350 to 400 kilometeres," he said.
A longer route with an added hour of detour to Weyburn would have to be taken but the group took their "chance and arrived with two per cent battery at Glendive".
At the Elk Ridge resort near Prince Albert National Park, Madiratta said there were only level two charging spots available in the vicinity which would have meant up to nine hours of charging to get the vehicle going.
"Unless you are by the water for nine hours, it's not the best solution. I had my portable charger, so we pulled out the stove and plugged my portable charger into the stove outlet and we charged my and my friend's car. It was inconvenient," he said.
"We need more level three charging stations in Saskatchewan. Those chargers are not for the people living in that community, but people travelling to that community. That will give them an opportunity to capture some tourism dollars."
Saturday, October 15, 2022
Canada leading, not lagging, global green energy transition, but more to do: Freeland Yesterday
WASHINGTON — Canada is leading, not lagging, the global energy shift in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland said Friday, dismissing the notion that her recent call to arms was aimed in part at her own government.
Canada leading, not lagging, global green energy transition, but more to do: Freeland
Freeland raised eyebrows this week with a sweeping state-of-affairs speech in D.C. that urged democracies to spend more "domestic political capital" to ease a growing energy crisis — a message some observers say Ottawa itself should take to heart.
To the contrary, Canada is in high gear when it comes to kick-starting green energy projects, Freeland insisted, citing federal investments in the country's critical-minerals sector and the net-zero components of the Strategic Innovation Fund as examples.
The effort, she said, dates back to 2015, when the Liberals introduced a price on carbon, runs through the renegotiated North American trade deal and touches on the Biden administration's newly passed Inflation Reduction Act.
"What I wanted to do first and foremost is say to the world, 'Look, Canada gets it. This is what we are doing,'" Freeland told a news conference as she wrapped up a week at the International Monetary Fund and World Bank annual meetings.
Key to that effort, she said, is putting government policies and investment in place and attracting more private capital into those projects — and if her speech Tuesday has that effect, so much the better.
"I don't want in any way to suggest Canada's behind — if anything, I think Canada is really in the lead on so many issues here. But we have to do even more," Freeland continued.
"Climate change is real. And climate action is a huge economic and industrial project. It's going to require significant investment — public, private, Canadian, international — and it's going to require us to build a lot of stuff."
That strategy will continue to include liquid natural gas, she added, describing it as an "important transition fuel," not only to countries in Europe feeling the impact of the war in Ukraine but also in the developing world, where there are fewer alternatives to coal.
Critics say Canada has been a laggard in building the facilities to export liquid natural gas, or LNG — most recently when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau answered Germany's pleas for more by suggesting such projects made little business sense.
"(LNG) will be an important contributor to the green transition in the world and to providing energy security for our partners," Freeland said. "As the prime minister said over the summer, we will always be looking at economically viable LNG projects."
On Tuesday, Freeland used a speaking engagement at the D.C.-based Brookings Institution to urge democratic countries to confront the hard economic truths of the war in Ukraine and join forces in forging a new path forward.
The reality, she said, is that the modern-day dangers of autocratic regimes like Russia and China will not vanish with Russia's defeat in Ukraine, and it's long past time that the "non-geographic West" find a way to end the world's dependence on "petro-tyrants" like Vladimir Putin.
She sang the virtues of "friend-shoring" — a term coined this past summer by U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen to describe fortified, climate-friendly, shock-resistant supply chains that rely mainly on like-minded neighbours and allies.
On Friday, she pointed again to the example of the big-budget climate, health and tax package Congress passed over the summer, a measure that originally included electric-vehicle incentives that could have crippled Canada's auto sector.
The version President Joe Biden signed into law included Canadian-made vehicles, and also required eligible cars and trucks to have batteries containing critical minerals from countries with which the U.S. has trade deals, of which Canada is one.
At the same time, though, she welcomes Canada and the U.S. competing with each other when it comes to attracting foreign investment for green energy and carbon-capture projects.
"There is nothing wrong with — indeed, a lot very good about — a healthy competition among the world's economies, to say, 'You know what, I want to do the green transition best and fastest,'" she said.
"Canada is definitely up for that."
Freeland also reiterated Friday her call for Russia to be kicked out of the G20, but she stopped short of offering any specific Canadian measures to expedite that process, or any details on whether the effort is moving forward.
She said she spoke directly to Russia's representatives who were among the ministers and central bank governors — the "firefighters" in attendance at the IMF and World Bank meetings this week.
"The arsonist has no place in a meeting of the firefighters."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 14, 2022.
On a visit to both countries this week, Joly said she found a growing appetite for liquefied natural gas from Canada beyond a looming megaproject.
A major export terminal is set to open in 2025 in Kitimat, B.C., with Japanese and Korean companies holding a 20 per cent stake.
"We will become a major supplier of key energy for them, starting in 2025," Joly said in a Thursday interview from Seoul.
"There is a lot of interest for all of us to go even further."
Joly said these types of projects will help Canada shore up energy security in the region, where China and Russia have been growing increasingly assertive.
"Japan and Korea were already very close to Canada, but it is now in Canada's interest more than ever, that they be best of friends," she said.
"We know that there's a lot of instability in the world, and when that's the case, Canada reaches out to the world to create more stability."
Joly said a series of missiles that North Korea launched over Japan this month loomed large in her talks with local officials and the Canadian navy.
She visited HMCS Vancouver, which is undertaking exercises to monitor sanctions on North Korea "in view of their reckless actions," Joly said. That often means monitoring ships that stop near each other, to see whether goods or fuel are being transferred.
In September, the Vancouver sailed through the Taiwan Strait alongside a U.S. warship to demonstrate Canada's position that the area near mainland China counts as international waters.
Joly's visit also touched on existing work to make more Canadian critical minerals available for Asian firms building electric vehicles and parts.
In Tokyo, she co-launched formal talks aimed at having Canada and Japan share military intelligence.
Joly's weeklong visit wraps up Saturday. She said the intent is to build on close ties with allies ahead of an Indo-Pacific strategy that should outline Ottawa's approach to dealing with China.
"The goal right now is to lay the foundation for the strategy," she said.
Joly has previously said that a major summit the Chinese Communist Party is holding next week will help inform Canada's Indo-Pacific strategy, which she has promised to release by the end of this year.
Opposition parties have argued the strategy is long overdue, and business groups say they need Ottawa to clarify the regions and industries where it wants closer ties, and which countries Canada deems to be riskier.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 13, 2022.