Guest Opinion: Canada Following the Example of Wrong “Emissions”

Article content

The Trudeau administration, like other governments in the World Trade Organization/G8 orbit, has set Canada on an ambitious path to neutralize its global climate impact by 2050.

Article content

By that arbitrary date, Canada will, in theory, be completely free of greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere from human activities, primarily by the same amount drawn from the atmosphere by other human activities in Canada. will be regulated to the point where it is offset by

Article content

The name of this policy is Net Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions or NZ-GHG.

NZ-GHG controls the world’s climate regulators by fine-tuning exaggerated climate change concerns, misconceptions about the importance of hydrocarbons to Canada’s economic productivity, and Canada’s global GHG emissions If you think it looks like yet another outlandish and possibly painful policy crusade based on the arrogant notion of

But don’t take my word for it. Let’s take a look at the European experience that this government often tries to imitate.

Article content

As summarized in a recent article in wall street journal, the UK, Germany and France have learned very painful lessons from pursuing NZ-GHG policies. Most notably, traditional power generation capacity (coal, natural gas, nuclear) and the diversity of fuel sources will decline.

They have significantly stagnated or curtailed coal and nuclear power, and have been unable to increase production from renewable sources at the mercy of Vladimir Putin’s energy ploys. to shine brighter.

As a result of Europe’s increasingly expensive dependence on natural gas (with most of the Decided that the fee should be capped at $2. Annually ($3,170 CAD per year), the excess costs go to ordinary taxpayers (the same people paying too much for electricity today).

Article content

Germany plans to cap home and business electricity bills with new subsidies worth around €65 billion (c$85 billion). This subsidy is recovered by the power producers (who were in compliance with the government’s demands on power production, but are collected through a “windfall profit tax” on power producers). there is no profit from it).

According to France wall street journal“turned the state utility EDF into a subsidized piggy bank and ordered the company to limit the rise in energy prices.”

Canada’s pursuit of NZ-GHG may not send the country into a similar frenzy, but that’s how the stakes are.

As in Europe, promises of renewable power have not materialized.

The cost curve for wind and solar power has not declined as rapidly as promised, battery technology has not emerged as promised, and conventional power generation in Canada, like Europe, has stagnated or declined. I’m here.

Policy makers in Ottawa and the capital city should consider Europe’s experience with NZ-GHG over the long term. This is the path to a non-responsive, non-adaptive energy system that is costly, unreliable and highly exposed to geopolitical risks.

Canada would do well to learn from Europe’s example, scrap the NZ-GHG framework before it gets out of hand, and explore other ways to protect Canadians from potential future risks of climate change. I guess.

Kenneth Green is a senior researcher at the Fraser Institute.

Guest Opinion: Canada Following the Example of Wrong “Emissions”

Source link Guest Opinion: Canada Following the Example of Wrong “Emissions”

Related Articles

Back to top button