Thanks, Geoffrey. One of the consistent lessons learned in clean energy development is that it’s going to take a menu of options — so yes, geothermal where it makes sense, but that doesn’t preclude maximizing solar, wind, energy storage, and as a cornerstone for all the rest, going all-in on energy efficiency.

Shouldn’t we look into reviving old wells and investigating Geothermal? There appears to be a good case for investment as the technology is improving all the time.
We are looking at new energy technologies in the UK, as we have a long history of innovation, going back centuries.

Wellhmmm…replying from the province where nuclear cost overruns essentially bankrupted North America’s second-biggest power utility a few decades ago, I would strongly recommend that you take another look at how well renewables can *stabilize* the grid if the planning is done right. The issue is not that renewables+storage can’t get the job done, nor even that they aren’t cost-effective — they can deliver, and their cost is generally plummeting. It’s just that an old, clunky, centralized grid isn’t set up for a modern mix of distributed energy supplies.

But many grids are old enough at this point that they already need massive capital investment to bring them up to date. If we’re spending anyway, why not spend smart, for a change, and use that money to take advantage of the best technologies available (beginning with solar, wind, batteries, heat pumps, demand response, vehicle-to-grid technologies), rather than defaulting to more familiar grid models that really aren’t fit to purpose in the 2020s and beyond?

Thanks, Ryan. YES, we absolutely have to sweat the details on the impacts of clean energy development, and keep at it until it’s solved. But the point the renewables industry is making is that none of these issues are new or unknown, and the moratorium was neither needed nor justified as a way to address them. Climate hawks, meanwhile, are making the point that Smith et al might have a shred of credibility on the impacts of renewable development if they were showing as much concern about abandoned wells and 1.3 trillion litres of toxic tailings.

Abandoned wells aren’t a taxpayer liability. Some may become one, but not the entire $260 billion-worth – that only happens in the hypothetical scenario which all O&G companies in AB go bust tomorrow. Do you know what % of abandoned wells get turned into orphans versus those that are successfully reclaimed?

The 10s of millions in unpaid municipal taxes, while I agree are unacceptable, amount to less than 1% of government revenue (~10s of *billions) from companies who did pay their taxes.

Totally agree that clean energy impacts will be lower, but this is a bit more complicated that you seem to let on. Copper mines, which are part and parcel to our decarbonization plans, will also create billions of liters of toxic tailings, no? Should we have a game plan in place to deal with when a copper mine goes bankrupt? Isn’t that the spirit of this moratorium, or am I missing something? Should we proceed as we did 60 years ago with oilsands development and NOT consider these things, again, because we might risk investment?

Any human activity has environmental impacts. Any responsible industrial activity has to take those impacts in account, and if we really mean that, no local impact should just be written off as the price of progress. But it is a *huge* exaggeration to suggest that the impacts of clean energy are in the same universe as oil and gas development.

I’ll see your 27 million trees, though I’m curious about how you arrived at that number, and raise you 1.3 trillion litres of toxic waste in tailings dams that the oil sands industry has no plans to deal with. Then on the next round, I’ll bid another $260 billion (not my own money, so it’s an easy bid) for the abandoned oil and gas wells the fossil industry has left strewn about Alberta, as though their moms and dads didn’t teach them to clean up after themselves when they were finished playing. If you’re still in the game after that round, we can get into the millions in unpaid local taxes that deadbeat fossils have been holding back from rural municipalities that are essentially single-industry towns and now struggling to deliver services.

What’s that you were saying about 27 million trees? Shall we continue?

Oh, absolutely! Everything under a megawatt is still in play.

Thing is, the transition is here and growing, because it has to. Green technologies bring in more investment in many jurisdictions than does Big Fossil Fuel companies……..for obvious reasons.

I hope this decision to throw up barriers for the emerging economy makes enough of us angry, that we proceed with the micro generation we perhaps thought we could do without. Solar is ideal for distributed power……..and it would be interesting to see how long it would take Danielle and her minions to try and shut down individuals opting for rooftop solar….

It’s only a matter of time before some communities could have those virtual power plants that are already making a difference in jurisdictions like California……when power emergencies happen because of extreme weather.

Forward, my fellow Albertans.