Marc Patrone Podcast of September 24, 2021 covered lots of ground

I was once again invited to be on the Marc Patrone Show on SAUGA RADIO, 960 AM on Friday, September 24th as his closing segment and we covered some interesting topics including: Canada’s taxpayers picking up the cost of urban transit fares, electric buses, China’s sudden hate for cryptocurrency mining, the UK’s recent power problems on the brink of COP 26, the upcoming “climate change” pandemic and allocation of individual “carbon credits” and a quick look at the Artic and China’s interest in wanting to mine our natural resources.

You can listen to the podcast here starting at 1:25:50:

COP-26 Out Could be a Cop-Out                                                                                                                               

These past few days Boris Johnson, the UK’s PM and host of the upcoming COP-26 Climate Conference must be wringing his hands as the COP-26 Climate Conference being held in Glasgow from October 31st until November 12, 2021 is showing signs of major problems. 

On his home turf, the UK recently had to fire up a coal plant to avoid a blackout as their 24,100 MW capacity of onshore and offshore IWT (industrial wind turbines) went on holidays while natural gas prices soared.  The BBC article noted: “Over the coming months, those sky-high gas prices are expected to remain volatile. So, as well as forcing National Grid to make some tough choices about where we get our electricity from, it could also have a big knock-on on what we pay.”

As if to top things off for Johnson, new regulations associated with the electricity system and coming into force next year were recently announced and they state; “Electric car charging points in people’s homes will be preset to switch off for nine hours each weekday at times of peak demand because ministers fear blackouts on the National Grid. Under regulations that will come into force in May, new chargers in the home and workplace will be automatically set not to function from 8am to 11am and 4pm to 10pm.”

To put the foregoing in context the number of EV registered in the UK are approximately 300,000 out of 38 million vehicles which equates to less than 1%!  Prime Minister Johnson must surely have his fingers crossed that some of those recent events will not impact COP-26 and bring to mind, the realization reliable electricity cannot be supplied by those intermittent sources such as wind and solar usually referenced as “renewable” rather than “unreliable”!

The foregoing may be a strong signal to Prime Minister Johnson that his plan to end sales of all non-electric cars by 2035 is a non-starter unless they will forego being charged except perhaps once a year!

On top of the UK’s problems, the Spanish government has stepped into the fray as they recently moved to halt the record rise in power prices by; both reducing their taxes on energy and by curtailing what they referenced as “exceptional benefits”.  The article outlining the Spanish Government’s actions went on to state; “The government says the hikes in electricity bills are driven by spiraling prices of so-called carbon certificates, which give companies the right to release carbon dioxide; gas imports that Spain needs to complete its energy mix; and surging power demand in recent months.”

The amusing feature about the Spanish government’s actions is that back in December of 2020 “Renewables Now” were bragging Spain generated 43.6% of its power from renewables and had closed 3,486 MW of polluting power plants which were mainly coal-burning units during the year.

As is to make the COP-26 Conference outcome even more worrisome for PM Johnson, China advised Britain “it will not yield to international pressure for bigger improvements to its climate change commitments at the Cop26 conference in Glasgow.”  They will not be bullied into going green despite the visit from Alok Sharma, the UK senior climate change representative, who visited Beijing for pre-summit talks hoping to persuade China to “enhance” its carbon emissions reduction targets. It is worth noting China’s emissions stand at 28% of all global emissions and continue to climb. Without an “enhanced” commitment from them one should suspect COP-26 will fail to provide Johnson with the ability to claim it was a success!

Canada’s commitments at the Conference are presently unknown until the results of our election come to light.  What is known however, is one Canadian is playing a prominent role at COP-26 and that individual is Mark Carney whom I expounded on in prior articles.

PM Johnson back in January 2020 appointed Mark Carney (former Governor of the Bank of Canada and former Bank of England Governor) as his “advisor” for the conference. In addition, Carney is the UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance. I personally suspect Carney is not at all concerned about the outcome of the COP-26 Conference despite his lofty positions for the UN and PM Johnson.

Should COP-26 turn out to be a failure and Canadian voters couple that with the boot for Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party we should expect Carney’s fallback position will be to run for leadership of the Federal Liberal Party. 

Stay tuned!

Open letter to the Honourable Todd Smith, Ontario Minister of Energy

Dear Minister Smith,

Re:  Oneida Battery Park Project

I recently note you sent a letter dated August 27, 2021, to Ms. Lesley Gallinger, President and CEO of the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) in respect to the captioned.  The letter instructed IESO to negotiate a “draft” contract with the parties proposing the 250 MW battery storage project.

I was pleased to observe you couched your directive with the following instructions:

I will not consider a directive to the IESO asking it to execute the drafted final contract until:

• National Resources Canada’s determination regarding the $50 million in funding under the Smart Renewables and Electrification Pathways Program is known; and

• The ownership of the project is fully clarified, including the equity participation of both NRStor and Six Nations of the Grand River Development Corp.”

Along the lines of your directive I sincerely hope you are aware of an article I penned January 23, 2021 partially analyzing the project when it was first announced in a press release from the Federal taxpayer owned Canada Infrastructure Bank (CIB).  The press release indicated the CIB would invest $170 million of our hard-earned tax dollars. My article attempted to point out the negative impact the project would have on Ontario ratepayers despite our tax dollars being thrown at the project.  It now appears another $50 million of our tax dollars may be slated to join the $170 million already committed!

The other issue which I would point out is in respect to what recently occurred to a similar project in Southeast Australia.  An article on August 5, 2021 on the CNBC website was headlined: “Tesla Megapack fire highlights issues to be solved for utility ‘big batteries”.  The article noted: “There have been around 40 known fires that have occurred within large-scale, lithium-ion battery energy storage systems,” which should be considered; if this project is allowed to proceed.

What I wish to reiterate to you and IESO is; you must recall the Green Energy and Green Economy Act caused Ontario’s electricity rates to spike by well over 100%.  Projects such as this will add further costs to the system and negatively impact ratepayers including small and medium sized companies.  The effects will be a reduction in employment, drive manufacturers and other businesses elsewhere and create further energy poverty.

The possibility of fires on large-scale lithium-ion battery energy storage systems also cannot be ignored.  A fire such as happened in 40 cases would simply serve to increase emissions as would the mega batteries relatively short life span and their eventual disposal.

I sincerely hope the Ontario Ministry of Energy and IESO will bear the foregoing in mind before any approval is granted to proceed!

Your very truly,

Parker Gallant,

Parker Gallant Energy Perspectives

Friends of Science posts Video of my Part 1 of the Mark Carney(val) Series

Michelle Sterling of Friends of Science took a liking to my first article about Mark Carney and his unbridled interest in altering common economic theory for climate change adaptation.  Michelle liked it so much she posted a YouTube video on their site.  She has done a great job at conveying the messages I was trying hard to put down in written form which made the article somewhat lengthy.

You can tune into the video and watch it here:

Visiting FOS website can also be an interesting exercise with lots of great articles and observations including lots of videos disputing the eco-warrior claims and their site is here:

https://friendsofscience.org/

Mark Carney bows out of possible fall election

I was on the Marc Patrone show yesterday (July 21, 2021) on Sauga 960 AM and our chat was all to do with Mark Carney and his decision to bow out of running in the next Federal election this fall for the Liberal Party of Canada due to his commitment to stop “climate change” from happening!

You can listen to our conversation on NEWSTALK CANADA here if you are a subscriber:

https://newstalkcanada.com/?page_id=2527

OR  
You can listen to it on the 960 AM podcast for July 21st where our conversation starts at 25:50 and ends at 43:50:

Podcasts

The Mark Carney[val] is in Full Bloom[berg] Part 2

Part 1 of this series briefly reviewed Mark Carney and some of the many creations he played a hand in developing or where he takes part in; including biased organizations such as the WEF (World Economic Forum) where he is a trustee or as the UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance. The institutions and his creations are focused on altering the climate by using financial modeling.  The modeling seeks to either get the world to embrace socialism, globalism or perhaps communism and is cited as “The Great Reset’.  The WEF’s focus on “The Great Reset” tells us by 2030 “you’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy” and puts the Carney push in perspective.  The WEF just doesn’t tell us who will own everything?

The goal of The Great Reset and Carney’s role in it seems focused on using his credentials as former Governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England to convince the global financial community (central banks) to adapt the concept which will make the super-rich richer and the middle class poorer!

Just a few days ago the Washington Post carried an article titled; “Why Big Central Banks Are Becoming Climate Warriors” which carried the following comments related to Carney: “In 2015, former Bank of England governor Mark Carney raised an alarm about the “tragedy” of climate change and warned specifically about “re-pricing” events. That includes physical damage that destroys the value of assets (such as waterfront properties), imposes new liabilities on companies (as shown by California utility giant PG&E Corp.’s wildfire-driven bankruptcy) or sharply raises insurance prices. Another risk is a sudden slump in the value of certain assets because of drastic government action to combat climate change, like the introduction of a steep carbon tax or regulations that keep fossil fuels in the ground. “The speed at which such re-pricing occurs is uncertain and could be decisive for financial stability,” Carney said.” The Post didn’t fact check Carney’s claims as the article was a product of Bloomberg L.P. which is part of Carney’s friend/associate, Michael Bloomberg’s empire.

Is it any wonder why a September 2020 Gallop poll showed 27% have “not very much” trust and 33% “none at all” in the US mass media!

The focus of the super-rich is on “climate change” and a reduction of those nasty CO 2 emissions which keep the world functioning by generating food for us humans and all plant and animal life.  Here in Canada rumours have circulated that Carney would run for the Liberal Party in the next election. That rumour has been dispelled as he recently tweeted he wouldn’t run in the next election! 

His tweet explaining why said: “Climate change is the most important issue on the planet. I made commitments to @antonioguterres & @BorisJohnson to help make sure @COP26 is successful this November. As a goalie, I know you don’t skate off the ice in the 3rd period of a must-win game.” You might if the other team offered to double or triple your pay which I suspect would be the opposite for Carney if he agreed to run for parliament with no guarantee he would win. He would have to forego what he currently receives for the over fifteen plus titles and positions he currently holds to avoid a conflict of interest.

The reduction of emissions he claims are needed will reputedly be created by central banks regulating financial institutions to ensure they price in climate change risk when regulating financial companies. Those institutions will be regulated to both invest and/or lend money to borrowers with sustainability goals! This will be accomplished by instituting “carbon taxes” on all of mankind’s consumption driving up the price of everything. Companies will be required to offset their emissions by purchasing “carbon offsets” which is where the big money will be made at the expense of the consumer.

A recent article in the Financial Times headlined: Carney calls for ‘$100bn a year’ global carbon offset market quotes him saying;“The demand for this is going to be huge, because we have this big shift. More and more companies-and it will be a tsunami by Glasgow-will have net zero emissions plans,” said Mr. Carney. 

Bloomberg Green ran a recent article about a top U.S. seller of “carbon offsets”, Nature Conservancy which noted they were reputedly selling meaningless carbon credits to clients such as “JPMorgan Chase & Co., BlackRock Inc., and Walt Disney Co., which use them to claim large reductions in their own publicly reported emissions.” The article went on to state; “In 2020, companies purchased more than 93 million carbon credits, equivalent to the pollution from 20 million cars in a year.“ An article from GreenBiz on June 14, 2021 claimed: “Carbon offset prices on average stand at just $3-5 per metric ton of CO2 at present, with experts fearing that prices are far below the level required” meaning to reach Carney’s suggested $100bn a year they would have to increase by more than 300 times their current level.

The foregoing raises the question; why has the Trudeau led Liberal Party imposed a cost of C$170/tonne by 2030 when the market is currently trading at only US $3/5.00 per tonne? The current levy on Canadians is currently C$40/tonne or about 10 times the current market rate!

Needless to say, one of the Carney creations; Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets (TSVCM) recently morphed into Project Carbon, a Voluntary Carbon Marketplace pilot consisting (so far) of  CIBC, Itaú Unibanco, National Australia Bank and NatWest Group. They seek others to join them! Their stated aim, after claiming, “Corporations worldwide are using carbon offsets as a tool to implement their climate action strategies.” is “to support a thriving global marketplace for quality carbon offsets with clear and consistent pricing and standards and will provide a valuable pathway for our clients in their efforts to achieve a net zero goal.”  Presumably those “quality carbon offsets” are unlike those being sold by Nature Conservancy as noted above.

Just a presumption on my part but I suspect the real aim is to profit from the Carney creation and should all governments raise their “carbon tax” to Canadian levels their aim will be achievable.  No wonder another of his tweets stated “I fully support @JustinTrudeau & the @liberalparty and will do everything I can to help.”

It seems obvious Carney’s claim that “Climate change is the most important issue on the planet” is his narrative to fool the masses and Bloomberg L.P. aids the process via the media. His focus is clearly on consolidating wealth among the super-rich and that he joins the club!

The rest of us will own nothing and we will be happy!

The Mark Carney[val] is in Full Bloom[berg] Part 1

Over eight years ago rumours were flying around about future leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada (LPC) suggesting some members and sitting MPs were trying to convince Mark Carney to run for the leadership of the party to challenge Justin Trudeau.  A Globe and Mail article from December 15, 2012 about the rumour quoted Carney saying:  “Certain people want things to happen … the political world, it seems to me, is a world for optimists. I’m in a world that’s a world for realists.”   As suggested in his remark, Carney declined those pushing for him to run for leadership of the LPC! Shortly after the rumours were swirling, Carney went off to become Governor of the Bank of England until March 2020 when he stepped down.

Carney’s juggling Act begins:

After stepping down Carney was appointed as the UN’s Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance and the UK’s Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, appointed him  Finance Advisor for the COP26 UN climate change conference planned for Glasgow in November 2021

Then on August 26. 2020 Brookfield Asset Management ($600 billion of assets under management) announced Carney had been appointed Vice Chair and Head of ESG (environmental, social and governance) and Impact Fund Investing so his responsibilities, titles and presumably his income kept growing. At one point after he became Vice Chair during an interview, he was quoted stating “Brookfield is in a position today where we are net zero,” Carney said, referring to all of the company’s assets.”  Carney was challenged on that claim and had to walk back on it after being accused of a false claim by many who simply pointed to Brookfield’s investment portfolio. Since the foregoing happened Brookfield, ironically, have been trying hard to acquire Inter Pipeline and recently upped their offer price in a takeover attempt. One wonders how Carney as Vice Chair and head of ESG at Brookfield feels about that move away from his prior claim of “net-zero” and if he blessed it?   

Shortly after his UN appointment he launched what appears to be the big money maker in the world of those who are super rich and use the words “net-zero” in a manner opining; mankind controls the climate! The new entity; “Private Sector Voluntary Carbon Markets Taskforce (TSVCM) was established to help meet climate goals. The September 02, 2020 press release noted: “Initiated by Mark Carney, the group will deliver an action-oriented solutions blueprint. WASHINGTON D.C. AND LONDON – Today, a private sector-led taskforce was launched to begin scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets, which need to be grown and consolidated to help meet the goals agreed in the Paris Climate Agreement.”

Carney was and still is a member of the Group of Thirty and Co-Chairs their Steering Committee; “Working Group on Climate Change” (WGCC). The latter issued a report dated October 2020 titled “Mainstreaming the Transition to a Net-Zero Economy. This group of “economists” (principally) infer; “The evidence that climate change is posing unprecedented risks to our livelihoods is overwhelming.” and goes on to claim “these effects pale in significance compared to what might come. If the world continues on its current path”. Interestingly two of the “experts” presumably involved in generating the report were from BlackRock, the largest asset management firm in the world with over $8 trillion under management.  The scaremongering continues despite many factual scientific studies that show mankind’s influence on “climate change” is far below those “economic” predictions.

 Task Force for Climate-Related Disclosure
The Financial Stability Board established the TCFD to develop recommendations for more effective climate-related disclosures that could promote more informed investment, credit, and insurance underwriting decisions and, in turn, enable stakeholders to understand better the concentrations of carbon-related assets in the financial sector and the financial system’s exposures to climate-related risks.

During Mark Carney’s tenure as Governor of the Bank of Canada and then as Governor of the Bank of England he also served as Chair of the FSB (Financial Stability Board) from 2011 to 2018 and during that time he created TCFD (Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures) with none other than Michael Bloomberg as the Chairman. “The Financial Stability Board established the TCFD to develop recommendations for more effective climate-related disclosures that could promote more informed investment, credit, and insurance underwriting decisions and, in turn, enable stakeholders to understand better the concentrations of carbon-related assets in the financial sector and the financial system’s exposures to climate-related risks.”

Just before (September 17, 2020) the aforementioned WGCC report was issued, Mark Carney was added to PIMCO’s (Pacific Investment Management Company with assets exceeding $2.2 trillion) Global Advisory Board.  They noted; “Mark’s extensive experience as an economist and central banker, combined with his focus on transforming climate finance, makes him an invaluable addition to this renowned group of thinkers,” said Emmanuel Roman, PIMCO’s Chief Executive Officer.” One wonders with all the responsibilities Carney had by that date just how much time could he devout to “this renowned group of thinkers”?

In February 2021 “Stripe”, a global technology company (market value of $115 billion) building economic infrastructure for the internet, announced that Mark Carney, the former Governor of the Bank of England and the Bank of Canada, had joined the company’s board of directors.”  

His Holiness Pope Francis appears to have been the inspiration in the founding of the Council for Inclusive Capitalism with The Vatican and surprise, surprise, Mark Carney is on their Steering Committee. The “Council” members reputedly have $10.5 trillion in assets under management and $2.1 trillion in market capitalization.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation and was founded by Charles Schaub in 1971 and advocates for an “inclusive and sustainable economy for all.”  Based on what is evident the words “inclusive” and “all” references the super-rich like Bloomberg, Fink, Gates and others.  Mark Carney is on the WEF’s Board of Trustees where none other than Laurence Fink (BlackRock) is also a trustee.  They are joined by Canada’s Finance Minister, Chrystia Freeland and Mr. “climate change” himself, Al Gore.  

Carney is also a board member of the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE) self-described as a, “independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical policy solutions.” The foregoing is their claim but they have been on about the effects of “climate change” for well over a decade so anyone who is a “climate realist” would not support the “nonpartisan” allegation!

Carney is also a member of Bloomberg Philanthropies founded by multi-billionaire Michael Bloomberg. They report: “In 2020, Bloomberg Philanthropies invested $1.6 billion around the world. Over his lifetime, Mike has so far given $11.1 billion to philanthropy.”  It certainly appears a fair portion of that money was aimed at fighting “climate change”.

Carney’s biography also states he is a member of the Board at the Hoffmann Global Institute for Business and Society at INSEAD (The Business School for the World) but beyond his appearance at an INSEAD function as a speaker the search on their website and elsewhere turned up nothing.

Yet another Carney creation via “MARK CARNEY’S PRIVATE FINANCE HUB” is GFANZ where he is the Chair.

Image

If one totes up the aforementioned entities Mark Carney created or is the Chair or Vice-Chair of and those where he holds a directorship or is on a steering committee you will reach the number fifteen (15). One would surmise most of those positions would require him to spend considerable time on the myriad of details associated with revising financial theories that have been around for centuries and combining those theories with the complexities of “climate change”! Nevertheless, he seems intent on convincing us he is the world’s reigning champion of juggling and can keep those fifteen responsibilities in his eye sight while achieving the goals set for him.

We all will be affected by his efforts to redefine financial issues and achieve net-zero. We must focus on his failures such as his false claim as Vice-Chair of Brookfield Asset Management, “we are net zero”!  There are surely more falsehoods to follow!  

How did Carney get so many auspicious appointments and what are he and his circus of super-rich benefactors and unelected UN bureaucrats aiming for?  Oh, it must be because he is “in a world that’s a world for realists.” How could we forget!  

NB: Stay tuned for Part Two of this series that will provide better insight on the foregoing question.

‘Record’ Heatwave 2021 was nothing compared with 1930’s

I was on the Marc Patrone Show on Sauga 960 AM this morning to talk about the recent heat wave they experienced out west. I was inspired by a chart posted by Tony Heller which led to the interview. I sent the chart out to many and it is the one below. In addition Marc and I also discussed an article (or two) I am researching. It has to do with the incredible influence Mark Carney (former Governor of the Bank of Canada and Governor of the Bank of England) has in the world of the “climate change” religion. He holds this influence with the super rich and many naive politicians around the world who also believe mankind is reputedly responsible for such things as the aforementioned heat wave. Many of the super rich see an opportunity to become richer; is what appears to be behind this push.

You can listen to our chat for todays (July 13, 2021) podcast starting at 1:04:45 and ending at 1:22:45 here:

If you are a subscriber to NEWSTALK CANADA you can listen here:

https://newstalkcanada.com/

Who gets the carbon credits for recycling wind turbine blades and other burning questions?

As a climate change “realist” this past week has been what I would term, over the top. It seemed there is total confusion about what we should do and what we should avoid to push for net-zero emissions and move to the “circular economy”.  Some examples:

Industrial Wind Turbines are not yet part of the Circular Economy          

Cement giant LafargeHolcim and GE’s renewables wind turbine unit are teaming up and the purpose is “to explore the recycling of wind turbine blades.” The main objective of the partnership is to focus on “circular economy solutions”.  The same article notes one of the largest companies producing IWTs, Vestas, in early 2020 said it was aiming to produce a “zero-waste turbine” by 2040.  If one gives some thought to the Lafarge/GE team you conclude recycling fiberglass, etc. blades should result in the handing out of “carbon credits”! Both of those team members would presumably want them as they both are facing rising costs associated with “democratic” governments punishing them with a carbon-tax due to their emissions. The proponents of renewable energy from wind turbines must now be wringing their hands in confusion as they had pushed the concept that energy produced from them was emissions free but refused to admit their manufacturing generated emissions and that the blades were not recyclable.  It should also be noted that cement if it was a country would reputedly “rank fourth in the world as a climate polluter.”  IWT, based on many research papers could, “warm the surface temperature of the continental U.S. by 0.24 degrees Celsius, with the largest changes occurring at night when surface temperatures increased by up to 1.5 degrees.”  So, will those carbon credits be shared or will they both be rewarded with the carbon tax we consumers are paying now and in the future?

Swiss CO2 law defeated at the ballot box means no carbon tax for the Swiss  

The Swiss held a vote on a CO2 law, based on the “polluter pays” principle,”. It targeted “road vehicles, air traffic, industrial emissions, and the renovation of buildings. Those who cut their CO2 emissions would have benefited from exemptions.” Presumably those who didn’t “cut emissions” would pay an emission tax. Switzerland’s government now has a problem as they have committed to the EU they would cut their emissions. 

It was interesting to note “Urban cantons including Basel, Zurich and Geneva voted in favour of the bill.  But 21 of the 26 Swiss cantons struck it down.”  One should suspect had Canadians voted on the recent move by the Trudeau led government to impose the increase to $170/tonne on emissions the outcome may well have turned out similar. Most large urban community voters seem to fail to realize the outcome will drive the cost of living up as the “carbon tax” climbs whereas the rural communities have a much better understanding of basic economics!

Interestingly the nay side “argued that Switzerland will not make a critical difference to global climate efforts since the real game-changers are China and the United States when it comes to reducing CO2 emissions” which many sane Canadian voters also understand.

So, the question is; when will Canadian voters be given the opportunity to vote yay or nay to the carbon tax?

Meteorologist Says Snow in June In Line With Historical Snowfall on Avalon                                          

The forgoing story about snow in Avalon, Newfoundland June 10, 2021 caught my eye due to having recently watched a video with Natural Resources Minister, Seamus O’Regan doing the introductory speech in a video at the launch of the Ottawa Climate Action Fund (OCAF).  As an aside, OCAF is proposing to spend $57.4 billion tax dollars to make the City of Ottawa achieve “net-zero” emissions by 2050. In the opening welcome from O’Regan he opined about last winter stating, “average temperatures of 10 degrees higher than normal in the height of winter” in parts of Labrador suggesting it was caused by climate change. What he failed to say was average winter temperatures in Newfoundland and Labrador can swing widely by as much as 30 degrees so 10 degrees hardly seems unusual. Nevertheless If you’re pushing the “net-zero” theory to justify handing out tax dollars to groups like OCAF you may only want to present information that is one-sided.

The question someone in the media should ask O’Regan is; do you think snow in June is caused by “climate change”?

Centre Block renovation to take until at least 2030 to complete, cost up to $5Billion                     

Another article that caught my eye was once again all about Ottawa and referenced how the renovation associated with the Peace Tower and Centre Block was not only going to cost taxpayers $5 billion but would also not be completed until 2030 or 2031.  One of the strange issues arising out of the renovation had nothing to do with the $57.4 billion the City of Ottawa wants to spend to make the city reach “net-zero” as the Peace Tower and Centre Block are owned by the Government of Canada. The article noted:

It’s being promised by PSPC (Public Services and Procurement Canada) that the renovation will result in transforming the “largest energy consumer and greenhouse gas emitter” within PSPC’s portfolio of federal buildings into a carbon-neutral facility with significant reductions to energy and water consumption.”

I’m sure PSPC has numerous properties emitting “greenhouse gas” but probably none of them are places where so many politicians are present so perhaps, as taxpayers, we were aware of where the largest “carbon emissions” emanate from; when parliament actually sits. 

Putting aside the fact that our parliamentarians spew “greenhouse gas” one wonders why PSPC didn’t look for alternatives to spending all those tax dollars?  Was the only choice to spend $5 billion to make it “carbon-neutral” or perhaps they should have considered buying some of those California “Global Emission Offset Credit’s” priced at US $20.32/tonne for June 2021? $5 billion would buy a lot of those “offset credits”!

PwC to add 100,000 jobs in US$12 billion strategic revamp

An article in the Financial Post last week stated “PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP is investing US$12 billion across its global business in an overhaul targeting better audits, digitization of services and greener operations.” The article went on to note: “The professional-services provider will hire 100,000 employees and develop the skills of existing staff over the next five years as it seeks to respond to the post-pandemic operating environment” and went on to state; “The firm’s spending will also focus on responding to environmental, social and governance (ESG) trends across its operations.” ESG was a creation of the World Economic Forum (WEF) which was founded by the German economist Charles Schwab.  ESG is fully supported by the big four audit firms as it will allow them to increase their audit bills and some of those funds will presumably result in hiring more staff with those (whatever they are) ESG audit skills. It will also allow the big investment firms like Bloombergs, Brookfield, etc. to make lots of money trading those carbon credits that many firms will be required to purchase due to regulations and “Acts” imposed by government bodies at all levels.

My question is related to the foregoing imposition of ESG!  ESG imposition seems destined to make the very rich even richer and those in the middle and poorer classes poorer and is that it’s objective?

A bird stands in the way of India’s green goals  

India has so far escaped the need to impose carbon taxes but they do seem concerned about “climate change” so have been handing out contracts for more coal generation as well as wind and solar generation. This article indicates they have received push-back from the Wildlife Institute of India on the latter contracts and they were successful pushing for buried transmission lines in order to save an endangered bird known as the “great Indian bustard”.  The Supreme Court ruling supported the Institute but now the developers are crying because burying the transmission lines will reputedly increase costs to them by $4 billion.

The question I would have for the Canadian judicial system is why in most cases when similar objections were raised by opponents of wind and solar generation in Ontario and elsewhere did the rulings handed out favour the developers and ignore wildlife proponents?

IESO and OEB join forces to support innovative projects to help meet province’s growing energy needs

The IESO (independent Electric System Operator) and the OEB (Ontario Energy Board) recently issued a Press Release announcing they have formed a new partnership. The partnership “would test the capabilities of Distributed Energy Resources (DERs) in providing services at both the local and provincial levels.” The DER resources they want to test are identified as: Some examples include rooftop solar panels, battery storage units and demand response devices, such as smart thermostats, that help reduce or shift consumers’ electricity usage.”  While industrial wind turbines are missing from the examples one should assume they are part of the mix as approximately 600 MW (megawatts) of their capacity are already part of the DER!  Ontario’s ratepayers have already experienced those “innovative projects” (sarcasm intended) which caused electricity rates to jump over 100% creating energy poverty while driving energy dependent businesses out of the province. IESO will also subsidize those “innovative projects” via their Grid Innovation Fund (GIF) while the OEB will provide “temporary relief” from regulatory guidelines.

My question is; why is the Minister of Energy allowing this to happen when the outcome has already been clearly demonstrated?

Conclusion  

From all appearances it appears confusion reigns supreme throughout the world when itcomes to the question of “climate change”, and the myriad ways governments and their regulators are dealing with it.  It is time realism is deemed important in respect to the global movement to effectively increase energy poverty and for governments to respect scientific opinion that has been tossed aside by the super-rich out to increase their wealth while harming the rest of mankind!

The time has arrived for governments to answer our “climate realism” questions!

Ottawa spending billions to get to net zero

Marc Patrone, host of the weekday show from 9 AM to 11 AM had me on as a guest this morning (June 17, 2021) to talk about the City of Ottawa’s “Energy Evolution”. While we discussed the foregoing briefly we also touched on several other energy related subjects such as the Line 5 pipeline and what the Ford Government has done in respect to the electricity sector in Ontario and the wind projects.

You can listen to the podcast starting at 1:17.37 here:

If you are a subscriber to NEWSTALKCANADA you can listen here:

https://newstalkcanada.com/?page_id=2527