By Hugh Holland
People are increasingly concerned about the rapid growth in misinformation, hate speech, and violence in the public discourse. While the Internet, social media, some conventional media and even some politicians all contribute to and amplify these negative trends, what is the biggest underlying cause?
A revolution is a dramatic and wide-reaching change in people’s ideas about the way something works or should work. Big changes are hard to do. The bigger the change, the more resistance to that change. The US cannot make needed amendments to its constitution that was written 235 years ago, even though today’s population is almost 1,000 times bigger. They still have not adapted the metric system even though it is used by most of their industry. So, it should be no surprise that there is resistance to changing the global energy supply that affects almost every aspect of life on the planet.
For centuries, the global population was less than a billion people, and the predominant sources of energy were biomass (firewood), waterpower, wind, oxen, horses, and human effort. Since then, the global population has grown to almost 8 billion people and 80% of our primary energy is now coming from fossil fuels. With each new age, the use and efficiency of energy have increased significantly, but unfortunately so have the levels of severe environmental pollution that are now affecting the climate of every country.
This situation demands an energy revolution for 3 good reasons:
1. The world’s top 2,500 climate scientists have strong evidence that we have until 2050 to achieve net zero emissions or face irreversible catastrophic climate change.
2. At current consumption rates, proven global reserves of oil and gas will be depleted in about 50 years, and some countries (E.g., Europe) could face crippling shortages much sooner than that.
3. 85% of the world’s proven oil and gas reserves reside in only 15 of 195 countries including Canada. That mismatch has kept the world in conflict over energy resources for over 100 years. The new clean energies (wind, solar, hydro, hydrogen, and advanced nuclear) offer the possibility of every country becoming self-sufficient in clean energy. That will help to reduce grinding poverty, unsustainable population growth, conflict, and troublesome mass migration. Like old energy, each type of new clean energy has unique strengths and weaknesses, but we need as much of all of them as we can muster.
The most extreme anti-government rhetoric seems to be emanating from Texas and Alberta. Why is that? What do Texas and Alberta have in common? Both are by far the biggest producers of oil in their country. Both are at or among the top in GDP per capita in their country, and both have the lowest or among the lowest state taxes. Consequently, both have many people who have become very wealthy from the production of oil and gas and who fear their privileged positions are threatened by the inevitable global revolution toward zero-emission energy. All this has pitted Texas and Alberta against federal governments that have broader country-wide and international responsibilities.
So, what can be done to ease the tensions between oil and gas producing states and federal governments, and therefore help to return to more productive dialogue and restore social harmony?
Texas and Alberta both have all the expertise and resources needed to be leaders in developing the new clean types of energy. Federal governments can shift tax incentives for, and expedite approval of, new clean energy projects. Here are some examples of initiatives by the Government of Canada.
- An effective price on carbon emissions to engage everyone fairly in the effort to reduce emissions.
- Goals and incentives for zero-emission vehicle sales to reduce our own domestic consumption of oil.
- Support for small modular reactors that can eliminate emissions from oil sands extraction, making our oil more salable for both domestic and export markets that will still need it for the next 30 years.
- Carbon capture and reuse projects to mitigate emissions from natural gas operations.
- The Trans-Mountain and BC Coastal Gas Link pipelines being completed in 2023 to carry oil and gas to those who lack adequate domestic supply, even with declining demand.
- A new offshore oil well and a new green hydrogen facility in Newfoundland to help Europe with emerging shortages.
In summary, some key points are worth repeating. There are 3 very good reasons for this energy revolution. And there is still time to mitigate these 3 reasons, provided there is not too much resistance to the needed changes. But fear of the inevitable is emanating from oil and gas producing states and provinces and is a major cause of short-sighted thinking, misinformation, conspiracy theories, and vitriol infecting today’s public discourse. Our federal government can and is helping to turn the energy revolution into a positive force for the oil and gas producing provinces as well as the entire country. Like old energy, each new type of energy has its strengths and weaknesses. But we need them all.
Hugh Holland, Huntsville
Hugh Holland is a retired engineering and manufacturing executive now living in Huntsville, Ontario.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox so you don’t miss anything!
Click here to support local news
Linda Dove says
A cogent and thoughtful piece Hugh. I’m hopeful that alternate sources of energy can become more readily a part of general home and commercial building as well – will the way we travel abroad change again? Seemingly long term goals are in fact rushing to meet us
Anna-Lise Kear says
Thank you, Hugh Holland for a review in lay-persons vernacular.
Dave Wilkin says
Interesting article Hugh. Here’s another thought. For sure there is resistance to change in Alberta and Texas, understandably, given how much they have to loose.
I would suggest a bigger challenge comes from developing countries, especially in Asia and Africa. The West fails badly in helping them with their top priorities, like lowering energy poverty.
Canada can do much more, given our world class energy sector.
Joanne Tanaka says
Thanks for your thoughtful,informative overview. Difficult to change mindsets when so much investment in oil and gas needs to be shifting. Our elected leaders are trapped in short term election cycles and are fossil fuel addicts like the rest of Canadians spending our petrodollars. Human energy in creativity, optimism and collaboration will untangle us from our mess.
Bob Braan says
If Quaise geothermal works out all countries could be self-sufficient.
No more fighting over oil and gas.
It’s an offshoot of MIT fusion research.
Far cheaper than fusion.
Results FAR sooner. Good or bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Bu5JFGJJp8
Bob Braan says
Ontario has so much excess power at night there is a proposed 2.5 cents per kWh overnight rate coming up for EV charging or anything else.
https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ontario-moving-forward-with-ultra-low-overnight-electricity-rate-1.5858981
Only $75 per year for “fuel” for an EV instead of per tank of gas.
2.5 cents per kWh is cheaper than natural gas for your water heater.
That would mean more expensive natural gas water heaters would be obsolete.
I already have my hot water heater and hot tub on timers so they only heat at the least cost time of day.
Timers on other devices as well.
If you opt for the new rate you should try to avoid the new 25 cents (instead of the current 17 cents) per kWh peak times.
A toaster oven uses 1/4 the power of a full size oven so even at 25 cents it’s much cheaper to operate.
Bob Braan says
Unlike most of the rest of the world Canada has always been super low CO2 emission power.
80%+ non-fossil fuel power. And climbing. Mostly hydro and nuclear.
Ontario is 96%.
Doug Ford prefers expanding CO2 spewing natural gas use, not only for power to replace Pickering, but for home heating as well.
Backwards. Rapidly.
https://www.ontario.ca/page/natural-gas-expansion-program
Too bad the Greens didn’t win Muskoka. It was close.
Conservation of energy is FAR cheaper than building any new generation from any source.
Energy demand had been going down in Ontario since 2005 from 157 TWh to only 132 TWh in 2017 in spite of the population going up.
Not any more.
Ontario used to have big rebates for energy saving devices until Doug Ford nuked them all.
He also nuked the EV rebate that many provinces have on top of the federal rebate.
Tesla had to take Doug Ford’s Ontario to court to be treated fairly. And won.
Is Ford ever going to get with the program and embrace the revolution?
Doubt it.
Climate change? What climate change?
Cons typically don’t believe climate change is real.
The popular Ostrich Solution.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-delegates-reject-climate-change-is-real-1.5957739
Ray Vowels says
I was born in 1940 and the first time I visited Toronto a lot of home were still heated with coal and hydro was just becoming popular I remember the one light bulb used to go real dim if there was a power drain someplace I think it was still DC at the time. I was raised in the country with no power no running water and no central heating just a couple of wood stoves. What I’m saying is I don’t think anyone wants to go back and live like that and I’m not sure we didn’t produce more pollution then than we do now, As far as global warming goes and that seems
to be the big worry now I don’t think there is much we can do to stop it one thing for sure there is a lot more that causes it than just burning fossil fuel. Each one of us produce heat from our bodies then you take all the parking lots that are paved we all know how hot they get in summer or year around down south then you take all the stores with big auto doors every time you walk up to them we all feel the heat come rushing out in winter so many things to think about.