Saskatchewan rejects Clean Electricity regs, extends carbon tax revolt

20 Replies to “Saskatchewan rejects Clean Electricity regs, extends carbon tax revolt”

1. Thanks Brian for keeping the public and the Legislature informed.

2. Excellent, this will go to some third rate party hack lawyers, er, the Supreme Court of Canada, and they will side with the Libranos. Then Sask will either initiate separation, or fold. Either way, instructive.

3. I doubt anyone will be going to carbon jail. It would be political suicide for the very unpopular Trudeau Liberal government with its even more unpopular carbon tax to start throwing provincial government politicians in jail. Can you imagined the news : Trudeau charges provincial cabinet minister for the crime of decreasing home heating costs during a cost of living crisis in a province where winter temperatures can reach lows of -40C.

   Something that rarely gets mentioned when talking about renewable energy at saskpower is that most of that renewable energy comes from hydro stations. IIRC, saskpower has around 900 MWs of hydro, the equivalent of 3 Shand Power Stations, scattered around the province. Unlike wind and solar, it is both reliable and affordable renewable energy.

   1. Hydro is not always reliable either. Periods of drought will reduce hydro output.

      1. Not a big problem at saskpower. The majority of the hydro stations are in the north and they rarely have drought that reduces hydro production. On a (very) rare occasion they’ve had too much water which caused high downstream water levels to reduce hydroelectric production. The only hydroelectric power station not in the north is on lake dienfenbaker, which is a massive waterbody. That hydro station occasionally has to reduce production, usually for a few weeks until spring melt/runoff from the Rockies makes its way east. They’ve also had to curtail production for nesting birds which is environmental regulation craziness.

         But coal and gas plants also have derates and shutdowns. All power production forms have issues that create problems. Coal, nat gas and hydro are all reliable workhorses for saskpower and work well together. Although I’m not a fan of coal power (familiarity breeds contempt, I guess). Nuclear would be the sensible addition to the grid. Wind and solar are garbage in our climate.

         1. Ever since SaskPower started putting out daily statistics on power generation in September 2021, rarely has hydro power averaged more than 300 megawatts on any given day. Low water conditions over recent years have absolutely had an impact. I watch this daily. On Dec. 2, it was 286 megawatts. The “north” as you say, is still the Saskatchewan River, which flows from the south. The truly northern hydro stations are tiny afterthoughts, like the 5 megawatt, 1939-built Wellington Power Station. https://www.saskpower.com/our-power-future/our-electricity/electrical-system/where-your-power-comes-from

            1. Nipawin, where the big hydro stations are located, are definitely considered to be northern Saskatchewan. Nipawin (biggest plants), Athabasca (small units) and Island Falls (100MW) were collectively called northern hydro at saskpower.

               Coteau Creek is in a major overhaul (approx 200MW plant is well over 50 years old). Not sure what’s going on in the Nipawin area since the Nipawin station alone is nearly a 300 MW unit and there’s 2 other stations on that system.

            2. Forgot to mention that Nipawin is on the Saskatchewan River, east of where the North Saskatchewan and South Saskatchewan rivers converge. Lots of water, lakes and rivers in that area. Great for fishing (winter and summer) plus boating, snow mobiling, cottages and many outdoor activites. Pretty area but very long, dark winters.

            3. LC, my late stepdad and a few hundred other workers built the Nipawin Dam in the early to mid 80s.

4. Fabulous … Sask has balls.

5. The UK should follow this example
   https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/uk-pays-wind-farms-13-billion-shut-down-when-its-windy

   1. I mean follow Saskaball’s example.

6. Can someone answer me this: why the refusal only applies to the home heating carbon tax. Doesn’t the tax penalize and raise the cost of all kinds things.
   To me focusing on only one element of a broader onerous tax hardly counts as standing up to Ottawa.

   1. Ottawa exempted home heating oil from the carbon tax a year ago. Saskatchewan extended the tax exemption to natural gas and electricity used for home heating.

      1. That still doesn’t answer the question. Oil, natural gas and electricity are used for much more than home heating so why the focus only on that.
         That’s like saying we can live with the carbon tax as long as it’s tailored to our liking.

7. Yet … Sask. is a proponent of carbon capture? Agreeing that Co2 is a “pollutant” that must be stuck underground?

   https://www.saskatchewan.ca/government/news-and-media/2021/september/07/saskatchewan-announces-carbon-capture-utilization-and-storage-priorities

   How can you be AGAINST a sin tax on a “pollutant” … while essentially certifying it is a dangerous “pollutant” that must be stopped!!??

   1. There’s the folly in a nutshell; CO2 is not a pollutant.

   2. EXACTLY!!!

      And this is why I see these politicians as puppets. They’ll still implement the scam for their masters, but “manage” the roll-out based on the local perceptions.

      They have to be seen as listening to the people, all while not really listening to the people. So they tinker with window dressings.

      Down the road the scam will still be pushed out in full; only the roll-out schedule will vary by area.

8. Ottawa wants you flyover country hillbillies dead. The End.

9. Screw Trudeau! Secede and join the US! Trump has already extended a veiled invitation to all persecuted Canadians, and with the exception of southern Ontario & most of Quebec, we would welcome you with open arms. Hell, we would even trade New York if it wouldn’t botch the deal…