Saskatchewan plan to run coal power plants beyond 2030 would be illegal, Guilbeault says - new federal law on carbon

[CdnFox]

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/saskatchewan-plan-to-run-coal-power-plants-beyond-2030-would-be-illegal-guilbeault-says

 

Federal regulations require all coal power plants to be closed, converted to natural gas or equipped with carbon-capture systems by the end of 2029

His comment comes as electricity generation becomes the latest jurisdictional battle over climate policy between federal and provincial governments.

Canada’s current climate plan aims for all electricity to be emissions-free by 2035, and regulations to enforce the target are expected later this year.

The draft policy published last year suggests that by 2035, all electricity will have to be clean — such as hydroelectricity, nuclear, wind or solar. Either that or the emissions will have to be abated somehow, such as with carbon capture and storage systems.

Under the proposal, some natural gas plants built before regulations are established would be able to operate after 2035 for an as-yet-undefined length of time.

This is insane.  No big deal for quebec or bc but that is a SERIOUS burden to put on the prairie provinces without offering a nickle to help out with the costs.

[August1991]

IMHO,

In Canada, this will be the big debate of the next several years - in English and French.

=====

People like Trudeau Jnr and his staff fly around the world - spewing CO2 - while we try to protect the planet, 

[ExFlyer]

And what are the feds (regardless who is in power) going to do???

Answer - nothing.

[CdnFox]

35 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

And what are the feds (regardless who is in power) going to do???

Answer - nothing.

The feds aren't the problem. The people allowing the feds to get away with what htey do is the problem. Chreitien said outright - You go to the conferences and you promise to keep people happy but you never 'do'. 

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

The feds aren't the problem. The people allowing the feds to get away with what htey do is the problem. Chreitien said outright - You go to the conferences and you promise to keep people happy but you never 'do'. 

The feds are the ones that set the rules and theoretical punishments.

Question still is, what would the fed do? My response is nothing, they cannot do anything.

[CdnFox]

On 5/19/2023 at 10:01 AM, ExFlyer said:

The feds are the ones that set the rules and theoretical punishments.

Question still is, what would the fed do? My response is nothing, they cannot do anything.

Ahh - i see, you mean what would the feds do to saskatchewan as punishment. I thought you meant what would they do about climate change.

They would have the power to shut down the plants i suppose but that would leave many without power - i  doubt other canadians would be ok with that and the gov't would risk losing a lot of support.

So i suspect they'd give them an "extension".

[ExFlyer]

10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Ahh - i see, you mean what would the feds do to saskatchewan as punishment. I thought you meant what would they do about climate change.

They would have the power to shut down the plants i suppose but that would leave many without power - i  doubt other canadians would be ok with that and the gov't would risk losing a lot of support.

So i suspect they'd give them an "extension".

after extension, after extension and so on and so on.

Point is, the feds (of all stripes) can not, have not and will not meet their own climate targets so they cannot punish any or group or province for not meeting the ones the feds set.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

after extension, after extension and so on and so on.

Obviously

Quote

Point is, the feds (of all stripes) can not, have not and will not meet their own climate targets so they cannot punish any or group or province for not meeting the ones the feds set.

Well it's kind of interesting - the CPC really didn't set targets so they didn't miss any - but the libs frequently set targets and deliberately miss them and they're getting flack for it - so now more and more i've seen they're moving away from 'set targets' and moving towards promoting an activity without stetting targets.  Like making all cars electric by 2030 or whatever. Or severely limiting fertilizer without any attached reductions that it'll achieve - or even the carbon tax which doesn't promise any specific reduction.

 

[CdnFox]

Well... THAT escalated quickly!

‘Come get me:’ Moe reacts to federal minister comments on ‘illegal’ power generation

https://www.ckom.com/2023/05/19/come-get-me-moe-responds-to-federal-minister-comments-on-illegal-power-generation/

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Point is, the feds (of all stripes) can not, have not and will not meet their own climate targets so they cannot punish any or group or province for not meeting the ones the feds set.

Well couldn't they scapegoat provinces for moves like this?

 

Also they could punish via tax transfers, theoretically.

[ExFlyer]

12 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Obviously

Well it's kind of interesting - the CPC really didn't set targets so they didn't miss any - but the libs frequently set targets and deliberately miss them and they're getting flack for it - so now more and more i've seen they're moving away from 'set targets' and moving towards promoting an activity without stetting targets.  Like making all cars electric by 2030 or whatever. Or severely limiting fertilizer without any attached reductions that it'll achieve - or even the carbon tax which doesn't promise any specific reduction.

 

Look, my point was and is, all Canadian governments have failed, and that included Harpers.

https://thenarwhal.ca/harper-s-timeline-canada-climate-change-2006-2014/

[ExFlyer]

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well couldn't they scapegoat provinces for moves like this?

 

Also they could punish via tax transfers, theoretically.

Many things can be done "theoretically" but, The Prairie provinces have no alternative electrical producing capability.

Cut off gas and coal, turn out the lights.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Look, my point was and is, all Canadian governments have failed, and that included Harpers.

https://thenarwhal.ca/harper-s-timeline-canada-climate-change-2006-2014/

Then your point is pretty much wrong. Your link says that. Sorry. A minority gov't isn't 'Harpers" gov't come vote time.

And - more interestingly, carbon emissions actually did go down during harper's time. There has been no bigger drop

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/CAN/canada/carbon-co2-emissions

Carbon emissions per capita stayed the same under justin but emissions themselves went up and the per capita only stayed low with massive amounts of immigration yearly. 

So how did harper fail? He made no promises, but actually delivered a lot. Justin on the other hand priomised much and emissions went up.

And you seem bound and determined to ignore my point about the shifting from targets to 'actions'.

This is going to be another one of those cases where you pout and run off isn't it. Just address the issues that are raised instead of the foot stomping would you?

[ExFlyer]

16 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Then your point is pretty much wrong. Your link says that. Sorry. A minority gov't isn't 'Harpers" gov't come vote time.

And - more interestingly, carbon emissions actually did go down during harper's time. There has been no bigger drop

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/CAN/canada/carbon-co2-emissions

.....

So how did harper fail? He made no promises, but actually delivered a lot. Justin on the other hand priomised much and emissions went up.

And you seem bound and determined to ignore my point about the shifting from targets to 'actions'.

This is going to be another one of those cases where you pout and run off isn't it. Just address the issues that are raised instead of the foot stomping would you?

Look, even when Harper was in power, we failed to meet our climate obligations.

Like it or not, play your partisan gamesmanship all you want, fact is all Canadian governments failed.  You are determined to ignore my point that they failed to meet internationally agreed upon targets.

No pouting. Prove to me that Canada met any of targets it has set out. They just keep moving the milestone out farther.

"Canada has had nine climate plans since 1990 and has failed to hit any of the targets in them."    https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/climate-change-canada-emissions-1.6397776

The "issue raised" is that Saskatchewan will continue to use coal to generate electricity and I think they will. I also said that the government, whomever they will be, cannot do anything about it as Saskatchewan has no other means to produce electricity. So, the threat is meaningless.

Edited May 22, 2023 by ExFlyer

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Look, even when Harper was in power, we failed to meet our climate obligations.

Harper didn't actually make any.  Now - if you want to say that is in and of itself a failure i suppose that might be fair.

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Like it or not, play your partisan gamesmanship all you want, fact is all Canadian governments failed.  You are determined to ignore my point that they failed to meet internationally agreed upon targets.

So we've gone from your initial statement that the feds (of all stripes) can not, have not and will not meet their own climate targets to the haven't met "internationally agreed on" targets.  Which you state includes harper.

Harper never made any. In fact he cancelled kyoto having pointed out that the libs didn't do it.

18 hours ago, CdnFox said:

 

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

No pouting. Prove to me that Canada met any of targets it has set out. They just keep moving the milestone out farther.

If i do will you again change the criteria?

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

 

The "issue raised" is that Saskatchewan will continue to use coal to generate electricity and I think they will.

That was the previous issue raised.  But you blew past my point entirely - guess ignoring it was more convenient than simply being  honest about it. This is becoming a little chronic with you.

The libs make promises and then fail to live up to them - and in fact they were the only ones in power long enough after making a priomise to deliver on them, THey're now getting chastized for that and i notice that they're switching away from targets.

Saskatchewan is an example of that (i gave other). SO now they'll be able to claim they did their job whether sask obeys or not.

[ExFlyer]

12 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Harper didn't actually make any.  Now - if you want to say that is in and of itself a failure i suppose that might be fair.

So we've gone from your initial statement that the feds (of all stripes) can not, have not and will not meet their own climate targets to the haven't met "internationally agreed on" targets.  Which you state includes harper.

Harper never made any. In fact he cancelled kyoto having pointed out that the libs didn't do it.

If i do will you again change the criteria?

That was the previous issue raised.  But you blew past my point entirely - guess ignoring it was more convenient than simply being  honest about it. This is becoming a little chronic with you.

The libs make promises and then fail to live up to them - and in fact they were the only ones in power long enough after making a priomise to deliver on them, THey're now getting chastized for that and i notice that they're switching away from targets.

Saskatchewan is an example of that (i gave other). SO now they'll be able to claim they did their job whether sask obeys or not.

As I said to you earlier. I do not need your agreement nor approval.

I stand by my no Canadian government has met it's target comment, as it is a well known fact

Edited May 22, 2023 by ExFlyer

[CdnFox]

Just now, ExFlyer said:

As I said to you earlier. I do not need your agreement nor approval.

I stand by no Canadian government has met it's target comment. .

Awww look - the leftie is pouting again

Whatever - come back when you can actually have an adult conversation without taking your ball and running home with your tail between your legs the moment someone disagrees with you. Very typical of you on the left tho.

[ExFlyer]

Just now, CdnFox said:

Awww look - the leftie is pouting again

Whatever - come back when you can actually have an adult conversation without taking your ball and running home with your tail between your legs the moment someone disagrees with you. Very typical of you on the left tho.

No pout at all.

Your partisanship only blinds you.

Once again, no Canadian government has met it's target.

When you come to the realization of that truth, maybe you can have the adult conversation you so wantonly desire LOL

[suds]

7 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Many things can be done "theoretically" but, The Prairie provinces have no alternative electrical producing capability.

Cut off gas and coal, turn out the lights.

What's wrong with nuclear, specifically the small modular reactors (SMR's) that Ontario's planning on utilizing? Saskatchewan's got the uranium and Canada's the world's #2 exporter of uranium. These reactors are built in factories and shipped to site. Up and running in less than 2 years from start to finish. Include that with increased wind and solar and there's no reason to be burning coal past 2030.

[CdnFox]

49 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

No pout at all.

Riiiight - that's why you're ignoring the point  i made

I get that you're ashamed of your liberal buddies performance and well you should be - they promise and never deliver. And i get you want to pretend that it's not JUST them when it is.  And further understand why you don't want  to address the point of them moving to 'downloading' climate change to provincial tasks like carbon taxes and hard dates for electric cars and in this case impractical electrical generation issues which they can blame on the provinces for not meeting.

I mean - i'd be ashamed if i'd voted for them as well.

But  the pouting -  man,  have a little pride. Own the mistakes of your party and then you can praise their successes.  If you can find any.

[impartialobserver]

I am not pro-coal, anti-coal, pro-green energy, or anything like that. However, this seems very short sighted and mostly wishful thinking. Coal.. like it or not, does not the massive economies of scale associated with wind or solar. Also, it is not as price-volatile as natural gas. 

[CdnFox]

16 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

I am not pro-coal, anti-coal, pro-green energy, or anything like that. However, this seems very short sighted and mostly wishful thinking. Coal.. like it or not, does not the massive economies of scale associated with wind or solar. Also, it is not as price-volatile as natural gas. 

Well the problem is that regardless of your thoughts on it - the goals are not achievable.

The praire provinces rely on coal and natural gas generation.  So - without those what can you do? you can't use solar or hydro to replace that, there's just not the capability to do so. You might reduce it a little but there's basically no way to replace it.

So nuclear? THe prairies are looking at that but it would be 15 - 20 years to replace all the existing power production with nuclear and the cost would be ENORMOUS trying to do it all at once. Meaning the power would have to cost 4 times what it does now or more.  Slowing replacing it over time or providing for growth using it is one  thing but doing it all within a short time? Forget it.

Alberta might be able to tap into BC's grid but even that would take years and bc couldn't replace ALL their power currently generated by coal oil or gas.

Basically the liberals are moving away from setting targets they cannot reach and are basically tasking the provinces with unacheivable goals so they can blame them.  Carbon tax, Manditory ev sales, now this, and other things being considered that simply can't be achieved like massive reductions in fertilizer or the like.

And some of them are contradictory - they want alberta and sask to sell nothing but ev's within 10 years - which is a massive increase in electrical use - while forcing them to close their electrical plants.

 

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, suds said:

What's wrong with nuclear, specifically the small modular reactors (SMR's) that Ontario's planning on utilizing? Saskatchewan's got the uranium and Canada's the world's #2 exporter of uranium. These reactors are built in factories and shipped to site. Up and running in less than 2 years from start to finish. Include that with increased wind and solar and there's no reason to be burning coal past 2030.

Absolutely nothing.

Thing is, they are not built overnight, if and when they can get all the regulatory issues resolved.

Then there is the cost.

In Ontario alone,we know that the cost of solar and wind generated electricity is not viable, cost effective and affordable.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, suds said:

What's wrong with nuclear, specifically the small modular reactors (SMR's) that Ontario's planning on utilizing? Saskatchewan's got the uranium and Canada's the world's #2 exporter of uranium. These reactors are built in factories and shipped to site. Up and running in less than 2 years from start to finish. Include that with increased wind and solar and there's no reason to be burning coal past 2030.

Dude, they will not even be able to begin construction in two years and before that it would be necessary to arrange for sites, and it would cost a massive amount of cash.

They are not building enough of them to tunr off the coal oil and gas by 2035 unless they commit today to a 'rush' program that nobody could afford.

[ExFlyer]

51 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Riiiight - that's why you're ignoring the point  i made

I get that you're ashamed of your liberal buddies performance and well you should be - they promise and never deliver. And i get you want to pretend that it's not JUST them when it is.  And further understand why you don't want  to address the point of them moving to 'downloading' climate change to provincial tasks like carbon taxes and hard dates for electric cars and in this case impractical electrical generation issues which they can blame on the provinces for not meeting.

I mean - i'd be ashamed if i'd voted for them as well.

But  the pouting -  man,  have a little pride. Own the mistakes of your party and then you can praise their successes.  If you can find any.

Oh stop. If you has d some sort of point, I would address it. All you do is belittle and call people that disagree with you a liberal or, you obfuscate the issue.

It is becoming less and less viable to have any type of conversation with you.

That is evident by your reaction to almost every person you interact with.

Your attempt at making everyone you disagree with a liberal is actually quite humorous and only displays your total disregard to other opinions.

Such as it is. You are what your are.

Edited May 22, 2023 by ExFlyer