A great article, Fred, and very timely. Years ago, Ontario Hydro embarked on a campaign called Live Better Electrically. But since the technology wasn't as developed as it is now, with LED household lamps as a simple example, the campaign failed. Other energy sources were cheaper at that time. But as the article makes abundantly evident, electricity—along with selling our oil overseas and keeping Canada's electrical infrastructure up to date—is unquestionably the best course of action for our future prosperity.
Several more comments about the post above: The campaign was wound down in the early 1970s. Demand actually increased, and supply wasn't adequate. As Brad indicated below, prices went up, and OH had to quickly change their focus to energy conservation.
Also, a few years before the campaign and several years after, copper production in the two major copper producers at that time (Chile and Congo) was severely reduced due to geopolitical events in both countries. This resulted in Canadian homebuilders using aluminum wire instead of copper. However, they still used outlets, switches, and connectors designed for copper only, which resulted in some serious fires in the affected homes. The fact that aluminum and copper didn't coexist well was unknown until later when suitable electrical devices were developed and retrofitted into the affected properties.
Even the condo where my wife and I live, built in 1974, uses aluminum wiring in each unit. All electrical components are AL/CU compatible, thankfully.
This situation applies to unintended consequences that can occur when marketing departments embark on traditional initiatives, but the science is not fully developed or even understood at the time!
Mark Carney is certainly aware of the role electricity will play in Canada and beyond going forward. He recently announced a $70 billion investment package in upgrades to Churchill Falls and the Gull Island hydroelectric project that will create the equivalent electrical output of 18 Hoover Dams. It is billed as the largest clean energy investment in North American history. Huge and amazing.
The critical issue in the case you state is who produces the electricity, and how do they produce it. You've listed the renewable ways in which it can be produced, but not the non-renewable ways by which much of it is produced - coal and natural gas being the most prominent (and yes, burning coal has been steadily reducing, but look at what Trump is trying to do in the US). What is the supply chain from producer to consumer?
Electricity generation and distribution is a provincial responsibility, and each province has its own approach, including whether the market is regulated (ie: price controls). All one has to do is look at the cost to the consumer of electricity in the provinces to see what effect this can have. The cost to the consumer in Alberta is considerably higher than consumers in any other province.
In Alberta, most is produced by burning natural gas, by business corporations. The cost of production is therefore based on the world market price of the natural gas. Once it is produced, it goes into a wholesale and retail chain which is unregulated, and of course there are profit margins built into each link in that chain. In most other provinces everything from production to consumer use is handled by a provincially-owned crown corporation, and the cost to the comsumer is controlled.
Adding to this is the fact that there isn't (or won't be) enough electricity produced to satisfy consumer demand and the demand that AI data centres every province is trying to attract will require - at least for the first few years. A pretty elementary economic principle is that when demand exceeds supply, the price goes up.
Timely for sure Fred, and appreciate how you always deliver the facts without endless analysis. Consider you a national treasure along side Tod Maffin. Interesting you both live in the same area
A great article, Fred, and very timely. Years ago, Ontario Hydro embarked on a campaign called Live Better Electrically. But since the technology wasn't as developed as it is now, with LED household lamps as a simple example, the campaign failed. Other energy sources were cheaper at that time. But as the article makes abundantly evident, electricity—along with selling our oil overseas and keeping Canada's electrical infrastructure up to date—is unquestionably the best course of action for our future prosperity.
Several more comments about the post above: The campaign was wound down in the early 1970s. Demand actually increased, and supply wasn't adequate. As Brad indicated below, prices went up, and OH had to quickly change their focus to energy conservation.
Also, a few years before the campaign and several years after, copper production in the two major copper producers at that time (Chile and Congo) was severely reduced due to geopolitical events in both countries. This resulted in Canadian homebuilders using aluminum wire instead of copper. However, they still used outlets, switches, and connectors designed for copper only, which resulted in some serious fires in the affected homes. The fact that aluminum and copper didn't coexist well was unknown until later when suitable electrical devices were developed and retrofitted into the affected properties.
Even the condo where my wife and I live, built in 1974, uses aluminum wiring in each unit. All electrical components are AL/CU compatible, thankfully.
This situation applies to unintended consequences that can occur when marketing departments embark on traditional initiatives, but the science is not fully developed or even understood at the time!
Mark Carney is certainly aware of the role electricity will play in Canada and beyond going forward. He recently announced a $70 billion investment package in upgrades to Churchill Falls and the Gull Island hydroelectric project that will create the equivalent electrical output of 18 Hoover Dams. It is billed as the largest clean energy investment in North American history. Huge and amazing.
The critical issue in the case you state is who produces the electricity, and how do they produce it. You've listed the renewable ways in which it can be produced, but not the non-renewable ways by which much of it is produced - coal and natural gas being the most prominent (and yes, burning coal has been steadily reducing, but look at what Trump is trying to do in the US). What is the supply chain from producer to consumer?
Electricity generation and distribution is a provincial responsibility, and each province has its own approach, including whether the market is regulated (ie: price controls). All one has to do is look at the cost to the consumer of electricity in the provinces to see what effect this can have. The cost to the consumer in Alberta is considerably higher than consumers in any other province.
In Alberta, most is produced by burning natural gas, by business corporations. The cost of production is therefore based on the world market price of the natural gas. Once it is produced, it goes into a wholesale and retail chain which is unregulated, and of course there are profit margins built into each link in that chain. In most other provinces everything from production to consumer use is handled by a provincially-owned crown corporation, and the cost to the comsumer is controlled.
Adding to this is the fact that there isn't (or won't be) enough electricity produced to satisfy consumer demand and the demand that AI data centres every province is trying to attract will require - at least for the first few years. A pretty elementary economic principle is that when demand exceeds supply, the price goes up.
Timely for sure Fred, and appreciate how you always deliver the facts without endless analysis. Consider you a national treasure along side Tod Maffin. Interesting you both live in the same area