Three major economies are making very different bets about what will power the next generation of industry. Canada’s choice may matter a hell of a lot more than your hydro bill.
I'm glad that the need for electricity as the future has become the main direction for Canada, and also happy that we have so many ways of getting there. I've mentioned before, in other responses, that we sell the oil we produce, we don't burn it. It may be passing the environmental buck, but the countries that do burn it haven't yet developed alternatives. Besides, we need the money to build the new Canada.
With regard to the USA's drive for coal-fired electrical generation we need to remember that that's all they've got. They're running low on oil and gas and what they have they would rather sell then burn because profit is more important than need. They import oil from us to process it and resell it.
They import uranium and refuse to use sunshine in the red states where it's most prevalent. Coal is so Fortress America!
The statement you made, while off the cuff, leads to your next report, the one on defense systems. That statement was "Canada already starts with an advantage most countries would kill for." Our neighbor to the south has demonstrated that style of thinking and action. Ask Venezuela.
Good information but awful AI-style writing. This mess was nearly impossible to read.
I absolutely abhor the choppy single-phase sentences and non-paragraphs that AI generates. PLEASE learn how to write properly so that those of us who learned proper grammar will continue to follow & read your Substack page.
this is so ironic Fred because I've been wanting to comment on your style for awhile now and say how refreshing it is. I for one tire of always incorporating new information about the state of our country and the world these days. I praise the work you do to pick out the main points so thank you! Funny, but I remember doing that myself when in university- looking for the main points in my studies, narrowing it down, and leaving out all the irrelevant wordiness so common at the university level. Anyway, I know you will take all feedback seriously and that you have the humility and ego strength it takes to use what you feel works. Thanks again for your work at this. We need it!
It's a double-edged sword. I also have difficulty following the choppy style. However I recognise that it allows you to cover a lot of ground in a short time. Problem is (for me) it forces the reader's brain to jump from thought to thought without preamble or intro. The reader must make the connections, not the writer.
The comment is valid, however, it is also worth noting that AI helps speed things up and improves your productivity so that you can get more of your thoughts and research out per unit time. It is a trade off of course.
I'm glad that the need for electricity as the future has become the main direction for Canada, and also happy that we have so many ways of getting there. I've mentioned before, in other responses, that we sell the oil we produce, we don't burn it. It may be passing the environmental buck, but the countries that do burn it haven't yet developed alternatives. Besides, we need the money to build the new Canada.
With regard to the USA's drive for coal-fired electrical generation we need to remember that that's all they've got. They're running low on oil and gas and what they have they would rather sell then burn because profit is more important than need. They import oil from us to process it and resell it.
They import uranium and refuse to use sunshine in the red states where it's most prevalent. Coal is so Fortress America!
The statement you made, while off the cuff, leads to your next report, the one on defense systems. That statement was "Canada already starts with an advantage most countries would kill for." Our neighbor to the south has demonstrated that style of thinking and action. Ask Venezuela.
Thanks Fred! Stay warm everyone, start walking haha
Good information but awful AI-style writing. This mess was nearly impossible to read.
I absolutely abhor the choppy single-phase sentences and non-paragraphs that AI generates. PLEASE learn how to write properly so that those of us who learned proper grammar will continue to follow & read your Substack page.
Fair criticism, Rob.
I deliberately write conversationally, but I can see your point about overdoing the short sentences and one-line paragraphs.
When everything gets a dramatic line break, nothing is dramatic anymore. 😂
I’ll take that one aboard.
The research and facts matter most to me, but so does making the damn thing pleasant to read.
Thanks for sticking around long enough to tell me.
this is so ironic Fred because I've been wanting to comment on your style for awhile now and say how refreshing it is. I for one tire of always incorporating new information about the state of our country and the world these days. I praise the work you do to pick out the main points so thank you! Funny, but I remember doing that myself when in university- looking for the main points in my studies, narrowing it down, and leaving out all the irrelevant wordiness so common at the university level. Anyway, I know you will take all feedback seriously and that you have the humility and ego strength it takes to use what you feel works. Thanks again for your work at this. We need it!
Well said. I do the same. I am sure as you and I did in the day trying to take four to five pages of lecture notes in 50 minutes between classes.
Agree!
It's a double-edged sword. I also have difficulty following the choppy style. However I recognise that it allows you to cover a lot of ground in a short time. Problem is (for me) it forces the reader's brain to jump from thought to thought without preamble or intro. The reader must make the connections, not the writer.
The comment is valid, however, it is also worth noting that AI helps speed things up and improves your productivity so that you can get more of your thoughts and research out per unit time. It is a trade off of course.