STIRLING: Trudeau Liberals funding group that hypes unlikely green benefits

The green-extreme Canadian Climate Institute has been Xeeting a clip of Kate Harland, a so-called ‘mitigation’ expert, claiming that once people make the “Big Switch” away from fossil fuels to a decarbonized, electrified world, people will “save up to 12% on their energy bills by 2050.”That seems to be a highly optimistic forecast. sEven the Canadian Climate Institute’s report, “The Big Switch: Powering Canada’s Net Zero Future,” indicates that Canada will have to build out our power generation and grid by 2.2 to 3.4 times over what it is today, by 2050. Since it took us 100 years to build the existing Canadian power generation facilities and delivery infrastructure, how likely is it that we can double or triple that in 25 years? And get energy for less?The Canadian Climate Institute’s full Xeet makes the following claims: “A big switch away from fossil fuels will have Canadians spending less on energy. That is because electric technologies are much more energy efficient than fossil-based ones. The cost of renewable power is also now the cheapest source of new power.”Really?Comparisons of energy sources should be done using the Full System Levelized Cost of Electricity (LFSCE) as shown here. The LFSCE compares the costs of serving the entire market using just one source, plus storage. For each generating technology, the installed capacity and the amount of storage are optimized to minimize the total system costs while meeting electricity demand throughout the year. In Germany and Texas, the LFSCE for the wind & solar mix is 13 times and 6 times more expensive than natural gas combined cycle technology, respectively.Canadian Climate Institute is a federally registered ‘charity’ which is presently 76% funded by the federal environment ministry. (Previously, it was 98% funded by government; only 2% of its $6.4 million in revenues come from receipted donations (CRA 2023).) As per its Annual Report, the balance of its revenue appears to be from big green philanthropies. The board and advisory boards are peppered with the usual suspects from the climate activist community.The optimistic view of the Big Switch promoted by the Canadian Climate Institute is sharply contrasted by a March 2024 report issued by the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC). There’s no short, sexy title, but if I could make one up it would be “Billions for Blackouts.”Instead the laborious title reads: “AUC inquiry into the ongoing economic, orderly and efficient development of electricity generation in Alberta - Module B” and it methodically assesses two expert reports and various stakeholder inputs.“The transition of the electricity system is often described as a balance between three pillars: decarbonization, affordability and reliability,” writes the AUC.That’s about the most cheerful line in the executive summary. “…the intermittent nature of renewables, as well as other characteristics of inverter-based resources, will have increasing impacts to the grid as they make up a larger portion of Alberta’s generation supply mix.”Quoting a few items from the executive summary verbatim should wake you up, Alberta. Decarbonization will be difficult, expensive, and you’ll end up with a less reliable power grid.Renewables are impacting many different aspects of system reliability.Under the current market design, expected unserved energy in the late 2030s is significant and there is potential for unprecedented load-shed events. An increased rate of decarbonization, i.e., net zero by 2035 instead of by 2050, will exacerbate supply adequacy issues.Under the current energy market design, increased renewables will exacerbate supply adequacy issues.Renewables lower pool prices and increase volatility, reducing the signal for dispatchable generation to enter the market. Energy storage can play a role in reducing supply adequacy issues but is not a complete solution and is not expected to be economic.Given the scale of expected unserved energy, minor changes to supply mix assumptions do not alleviate supply adequacy concerns.An increased rate of decarbonization, i.e., net zero by 2035 instead of by 2050, will exacerbate affordability issues.Investors are concerned about the current level of policy uncertainty.By the late 2030s, under the existing market framework, consumers would be paying significantly higher rates for electricity, while receiving a substantially lower level of reliability.Sounds like the Canadian Climate Institute does not have a grip on reality when it comes to the Big Switch from fossil fuels to electrification for everything.If people need any more evidence that Net Zero is dangerous nonsense, CLINTEL has just published Samuel Furfari’s scathing review of the Draghi Report on the Competitiveness of the European Union. Furfari was Senior Official in the European Commission in the field of energy for 36 years.Some of what Furfari says of Europe will ring true for Canadians: “Some environmentalists have proposed restricting freedom in order to force a reduction in CO₂ emissions, which is pointless and unattainable. It would be a moral mistake to abandon prosperity when we know that purchasing power and energy prices no longer allow many Europeans a satisfactory quality of life or even health care.”So, 'The Big Switch' or 'Billions for Blackouts?'