No more cheap reliable coal fired generation in AB.

[ALBERTAFARMER4]

According to AF4's figures burning a half kilogram of coal produces .9 kg of CO2. Seems farfetched. Me thinks he/her/it is attempting to seed doubt with a blizzard of conflicting data.

1L of gasoline weighs 0.75kg and produces 2.3kg CO2.

[Oliver88]

And nature can tell the difference between the CO2 released from coking coal making steel, from the CO2 released from thermal coal making electricity. Only the latter causes catastrophic global warming, of course
It's the same theory about how burning fossil fuels to power an electric vehicle doesn't release any CO2 as opposed to burning fossil fuel directly in an internal combustion engine.

When coal is shipped across the ocean to be used to make steel in a country full of environment stewards like China the GHG emissions are calculated at 0. The best part of this green steel is that a significant amount will be shipped back across the Pacific Ocean again to North America.

Maybe common sense = net zero?

[foragefarmer]

Shouldn't have Alberta and Sask been developing some hydro electric dams like other provinces were in Canada. Do they have any at this time? Do either provinces have nuclear power stations?

Sask is a importer of Manitoba Hydro which is deemed clean energy. Were the major rivers in Sask unable to be dammed years ago for a renewable electric supply ?

Obviously Sask doesn't have a big enough electric power source of their own. Or did they just want to use only coal and screw further development.

I guess those in Sask asking what clean energy electric source they can use to plug in their Tesla, your already buying Manitoba hydro.

[Sheepwheat]

Sask has several hydro dams. But try building one now. They’re worse than pipelines to the insane among us.

[furrowtickler]

Shouldn't have Alberta and Sask been developing some hydro electric dams like other provinces were in Canada. Do they have any at this time? Do either provinces have nuclear power stations?

Sask is a importer of Manitoba Hydro which is deemed clean energy. Were the major rivers in Sask unable to be dammed years ago for a renewable electric supply ?

Obviously Sask doesn't have a big enough electric power source of their own. Or did they just want to use only coal and screw further development.

I guess those in Sask asking what clean energy electric source they can use to plug in their Tesla, your already buying Manitoba hydro.

Good luck building one now with environmental regulations and First Nations rights . It would take 10-15 years from paper to ever get one built now and cost overruns would make it not even worth while ? How’s that proposed hydro dam in BC coming along ?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

According to AF4's figures burning a half kilogram of coal produces .9 kg of CO2. Seems farfetched. Me thinks he/her/it is attempting to seed doubt with a blizzard of conflicting data.

That actually does make sense. There is more mass of CO2 as a byproduct than there is hydrocarbon to start with.
Combustion liberates the H which weigh very little, then the C is bonded to two Oxygen which came from the air, which are much heavier than the H's.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Forage, you will have to ask Chuck or the other NFU apologists about why we can't build renewable, sustainable hydro electric
The NFU is very publicly opposed to hydro, as is every other supposedly green environmental group along with indigenous groups. I'm all in favour

[foragefarmer]

Good luck building one now with environmental regulations and First Nations rights . It would take 10-15 years from paper to ever get one built now and cost overruns would make it not even worth while ? How’s that proposed hydro dam in BC coming along ?

I don't live in B.C. nor does Manitoba sell them hydro.

So what excuses was Sask using 20-30 years ago from building hydro dams? Doesn't northern Sask have some of the largest Uranium deposits in Canada? Why not nuclear power?

Sounds to me your governments of past and present were only interested in developing oil and gas all the while happily using coal as the power source. Now the shit hits the fan.

I guess you guys have no choice but to defend coal as Sask is backed into a corner and of coarse Moe has to wake up and open his mouth now.

And before you all get your panties in a knot I feel oil and gas will always be needed in the future.

[furrowtickler]

I don't live in B.C. nor does Manitoba sell them hydro.

So what excuses was Sask using 20-30 years ago from building hydro dams? Doesn't northern Sask have some of the largest Uranium deposits in Canada? Why not nuclear power?

Sounds to me your governments of past and present were only interested in developing oil and gas all the while happily using coal as the power source. Now the shit hits the fan.

I guess you guys have no choice but to defend coal as Sask is backed into a corner and of coarse Moe has to wake up and open his mouth now.

And before you all get your panties in a knot I feel oil and gas will always be needed in the future.

Agree , not defending anything . 20-30 years ago they were not thinking the world will end in 4 years due to climate change ?
Yup been saying for years more nuclear should have been looked at .
Sask not backed into a corner , don’t take long to throw up a few more Natural gas power plants that work very well . The one here hums right along with low CO2 output to satisfy the climate wingnuts

[Sheepwheat]

Agree , not defending anything . 20-30 years ago they were not thinking the world will end in 4 years due to climate change ?
Yup been saying for years more nuclear should have been looked at .
Sask not backed into a corner , don’t take long to throw up a few more Natural gas power plants that work very well . The one here hums right along with low CO2 output to satisfy the climate wingnuts

20 to 30 years ago the ndp were in power. People were leaving in droves. Under a million people in those days.

Current govt looking at small reactors. The ndp is against that I imagine. But there is hope as sask has turned a corner from being the socialist utopia of Canada, to the most conservative province as a people, not necessarily including government wise.

We certainly have the resources here. I imagine Trudeau will do all he can to stop the nuclear idea, just like he does with any other source of job growth or alternative ideas the west may have. So don’t hold your breath.

[jazz]

Sask has the lowest debt per capita in the country, why would we want to ruin that trying to build hydro dams that never pay for themselves.

NG generation pays off in 3 yrs. Our coal plants paid themselves off decades ago. Nuclear will take 10 yrs to permit. Small Modular nuke tech has been used on subs for 50 yrs and for some reason, we cant get one built until 2035.

[furrowtickler]

It’s the frantic push of the climate agenda and attack on “fossil fuel CO2” that’s going to leave some areas in a very bad spot for energy. Just as predicted, they are forcing the cart way before the horse .

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Sask has the lowest debt per capita in the country, why would we want to ruin that trying to build hydro dams that never pay for themselves.

NG generation pays off in 3 yrs. Our coal plants paid themselves off decades ago. Nuclear will take 10 yrs to permit. Small Modular nuke tech has been used on subs for 50 yrs and for some reason, we cant get one built until 2035.

Because the economics of using natural gas for power generation have changed irreversibly recently.. with Russian supplies coming offline, possibly permanently in some cases, we will be selling ours on the world market at world prices, sooner or later.
The glut of essentially free gas as a byproduct is over for the foreseeable future.
This will improve the economics of hydro and nuclear. We can export the fossil fuels, and consume the electricity at home.

As usual, government enforced programs are completely out of sync with reality. We should have been burning the excess gas for electricity for the past decade, while building out our export infrastructure and keeping the coal in the ground for when we need it. Instead we have done exactly the opposite.

[TASFarms]

That actually does make sense. There is more mass of CO2 as a byproduct than there is hydrocarbon to start with.
Combustion liberates the H which weigh very little, then the C is bonded to two Oxygen which came from the air, which are much heavier than the H's.

Normally if your paying for something by weight the scale has to be calibrated. I don’t think you would be able to weight the amount your getting carbon taxed on

[AlbertaFarmer5]

It’s the frantic push of the climate agenda and attack on “fossil fuel CO2” that’s going to leave some areas in a very bad spot for energy. Just as predicted, they are forcing the cart way before the horse .

And to guess which notorious fossil fuel exporters are laughing all the way to the bank right now, after foisting this green scam upon us?