The Yes Agenda: Canada Has 110 Clean Energy Projects Ottawa Should Hear About

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Yesterday, a number of clean energy groups in Canada launched the YES Agenda. It's very interesting and lots of interesting alternatives to the current focus of the Canadian government and some provincial governments on investing in oil, gas, LNG pipelines and so on. Emi, your organization was part of the YES Agenda. Maybe you can give us an overview of what the YES Agenda is. [00:00:24] Speaker 2: Yeah, thank you very much for having me. The project started because Prime Minister Carney said that he wants to hear what people are for and not what people are against. So Climate Action Network Canada, we're a membership-based organization. We have about 200 members that are, you know, labor groups, ENGOs, indigenous-led organization. And we have now established 110 concrete examples of what a clean energy future can look like. So you can see our YES Agenda Explorer. It's an interactive map that's developed by our partner, Adamant. And, you know, the reason why we're doing this is because we're at a generational time. Governments are advancing all of these large-scale infrastructures that will shape Canada's economy and also our energy systems for, you know, decades to come. And so we are doing our part by adding a path to YES for the right projects at the right time. We know that clean electricity delivers lower cost, energy reliability, energy security, and it also builds a competitive economy. The cost of fossil fuel dependence has never been clear in our society. We have all these volatile oil and gas prices, tariff uncertainty, and also a rising cost of living. You know, 60% of Canadians have now experienced climate impacts with another, you know, another summer of wildfires, heat, waves, floods. I'm sure we've all experienced it. And throughout all of it, oil and gas companies are now collecting record profits. We also know that solar and wind are now the cheapest form of new energy. But, you know, Canada is only making up under 9% of Canada's electricity generation, which is well below the G7 average of 19%. I thought we had world-class wind and solar. Why are we not, you know, bringing that up to par with all of our G7 allies? So, you know, is Canada going to be a leader in this new energy era, or are we going to be left behind with all of these stranded assets that the government is currently considering? [00:02:19] Speaker 1: I mean, that is a lot to unpack there, but let's start going through it. And one of the points I want to make, because my audience would agree with what you're arguing, this is a consistent point that we've made over the years in our journalism, is that the global energy system is changing. It's being transformed by new clean energy technologies. That has now accelerated, and for a variety of reasons, you know, including the rise of China and their manufacturing of batteries and, you know, wind turbines and EVs and so on. But one of the things I wanted to ask you is, in the Canadian conversation, I would say that civil society voices like the ones you're talking about, the Climate Action Network, the organizations that are members of your network, their voices have not been heard to the extent that others have. Would you agree or disagree? [00:03:15] Speaker 2: I definitely agree with that. I think the public discourse and the media is much more focused on the fossil fuel projects. And yeah, the public, there's, there's a lot more focus that goes towards these projects. And the reason why we wanted to have this project established is also to, you know, one of the reasons we're doing this is because these projects are not getting enough attention in public. And what we found out through our report and through our project list is that, you know, there is this, this nation building situation happening in the clean energy sector. There's a lot of very interesting stories, like a legacy oil gas field that's being, you know, transformed into geothermal facility. And they're using the, the excess heat to, to heat up their greenhouses. So, you know, they can grow these fresh produce in their communities. All of these kind of stories that are, that are tied to just transition that are not being showcased, that, that people are not aware of. And to, to make it clear that, you know, we, we have a choice as to which path we take, and we have a choice as to, to which, which, you know, which future do we want to be a part of? Again, are we going to be part of this clean energy era and make sure that we're part of this global competitive economy or not? And so I definitely agree with that. We've also seen a lot of lack of access to, to decision makers from, from more of like a CSO side of things. You know, they, they, they not, they're not taking as many meetings with us as we used to. So we're, we're definitely seeing, seeing that as a barrier of access for, for us as well. [00:04:48] Speaker 1: That is reflected in the conversations and interviews that I'm having with folks in the energy and, and, and political and in the policy circles is that the federal government doesn't want to hear competing narratives. It doesn't want to hear data that contradicts the decisions that it's already made, the strategic decisions. And, you know, we get into trouble all the time for doing work in, in Asia, like on Chinese oil demand, Indian oil demand, Chinese LNG imports where are, you know, and the role of gas in their system. Nobody wants to hear that. And it's like, they put, you know, their fingers in their ears and go, la, la, la, la, I don't want to, no, don't give me facts. Don't give me facts. We've already agreed on these things. And now I, you know, you're telling us that, that the, the civil society groups like Climate Action Network used to have access to decision makers, to policy makers, to civil servants. And that's been scaled back and that's consistent with what we're hearing. [00:05:47] Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely. There's, you know, really good work done by environmental defense. They have a, a really good lobbying report, um, that they, you know, sometimes put out with, with fossil fuel lobbyists. Um, and yeah, they, they, their hires are, their numbers are much higher than, than what we were able to do. And of course that, that might have to do with, you know, financial like access to, to more time and stuff. But yeah, we're, we're, we're definitely seeing a little, a little, a lot, a lot more difficulty to have those conversations. Um, I've had a lot more success, um, at the provincial level, um, than the federal level personally. But that, that, that, that is kind of a common thread that we're seeing in our space. [00:06:26] Speaker 1: Let's talk about some of the projects because you mentioned geothermal, and this is up in Fort Nelson in, uh, Northeast British Columbia. It's, it's, uh, fairly far north and, uh, some of these, uh, it's, uh, over, uh, uh, I don't know, pool of a reservoir of hot water. Uh, and they're, so they're using, I think traditional geothermal, uh, development, uh, so geothermal from the, uh, the conventional geothermal, uh, is one way. And then of course, one of our favorite stories here is ever technologies out of Calgary, which does closed loop geothermal and it's ready to, to scale at, uh, at, um, you know, scale globally. Now, here's the interesting thing. The, uh, uh, Ontario Power and Generation, you're in Ottawa, OPG released a report and it said the cost per megawatt hour of a small modular reactor is $149 and ever, as an example, sent, thinks that it will get down in the 65 to $75 range. So here you have two sources of firm, uh, uh, uh, dispatchable electricity competing ever, the, the get, hardly gets any attention and, and doesn't get much support. And, but nuclear on the other hand gets all sorts of, even though it's double the cost. And I think this, uh, illustrates one of the problems we're having in this country. We, we, we ignore our innovators and stick with the incumbents, uh, at all costs. Uh, anyway, just your, your reaction. [00:08:08] Speaker 2: Yeah, I think we're, uh, definitely seeing that for sure. I think, you know, conventional forms of energy always have an advantage in, in our government, uh, provincially and federally. Um, one of the issues, uh, that I've seen is that, you know, when, when government are trying to, to get bids for their project, um, there's no like technologically agnostic, um, process that are put out. And so, you know, we've heard from, from battery storage companies that, that they always tend to lose those bids because, you know, they always are favoring or they're restricted to conventional forms of energy. And so that's definitely the case there. And I think, I believe yesterday there was a new research that came out from, from Wood Mackenzie that now shows that a four hour battery storage is actually now less expensive than the open cycle gas turbines in all 43 markets, including North America. And, you know, we're, if we're seeing, we're looking at the, you know, Atlantic region or the maritime provinces, we're seeing a boom of diesel peaker plant proposals that are popping up. Uh, New Brunswick recently did approve one. I believe, um, PI still has their 30, $344 million diesel peaker plant proposal on the line. Um, and you know, we, we, there are data that's, that's, that's been submitted that, you know, a battery storage system at the, of four hours can. Be less expensive and can compete against the diesel peaker plant proposal, but. It's, it's still kind of pending. We're still waiting for the results, but yeah, we're definitely seeing a lot of competition between those two narratives and. Yeah. Unwillingness to perhaps hear some of the, the newer innovative technologies that you were talking about. [00:09:42] Speaker 1: Yeah. And the irony here is that the Americans, you know, cause Donald Trump is so anti clean energy of any sort. Wind solar batteries doesn't matter. He hates it all and has cut back federal support, but that doesn't mean the industry and the states are cutting back. In fact, the, uh, we've I've seen reports recently where the, the batteries are, are idling peaker plants because they're so plentiful and so cheap. So let's talk about some of that. Uh, the there's 110 projects that have been identified in the yes agenda and, and you used a Dunsky research out of Montreal, which is a highly respected consulting firm. What are, give me a flavor of some of the other projects that were identified. [00:10:28] Speaker 2: Yeah, we've definitely seen, um, some very exciting, exciting projects. Um, we're seeing, um, Alberta, Ontario and Quebec geographically has, makes up about a quarter of the list. And, you know, the, the other provinces are, are less than 10 or around 10. Um, some of the very interesting projects, as you said, is the, the geothermal facility, which that one is very exciting. Uh, to do car, which is a hundred percent first nations own. Um, and again, they're using, they're not only turning a legacy gas field, but they're also using the excess heat for economic spinoffs. We have, you know, the Nova East wind offshore project. Perhaps a lot of people may not know this, but you know, despite Canada having local ports and suppliers that build and service offshore wind components for the U S uh, like he talked about and global projects. Uh, we don't have them ourselves. Uh, Canada has no operating offshore wind farms yet. So this would be a country's first, um, it's a proposed 300, 400 megawatt, uh, floating project. Off, off, uh, Goldboro. I think wind west is a big one. I think we're all really excited about that. Although it really depends on a, on a major transmission expansion, but you know, it's a record breaking 60 gigawatt of wind potential in the province. Uh, so folks are really excited to see, um, those kinds of projects where we also looked at not just individual projects, but also, um, agreements that are being done provincially. So, you know, the Quebec government had put out their first solar only tender, which is exciting. They're trying to diversify their energy portfolio. Um, they're also doing something really exciting in Quebec where, um, they're, they're pushing for large scale wind projects, but they're moving forward with a more of a deliberate province-wide strategy. So it's not a series of, of one-off projects, but they're, they've recently signed, um, five large scare, large scale territorial partnerships upfront. So that would kind of support the, the building faster narrative, but also ensure that, that communities and first nations are, are included in the consultation process from the start. We're also seeing some projects in Alberta, which is, you know, always a little bit controversial because of the moratorium, um, not controversial, but you know, they, they really struggled. I think from this project, we started in March, um, five or six were already canceled by the time we ended, uh, our research. So we had to take them out of the list, but there's a project in Medicine Hat, Alberta, which is, you know, well known as a gas city. That's, that's doing their second try at solar and trying to push forward that kind of energy. So that's definitely an interesting, you know, um, gas to energy transition kind of story. And then we're seeing all of these inter-type projects that are happening across the country, the Yukon BC grid connect, the Kivalik hydro fiber link. You know, Yukon has never been connected to the North American grid. This would be the first time, um, none of it has never been connected to any external sources. They have 25 communities depending on 25, um, you know, diesel generated grids. Um, and so that project itself is estimated to displace about 138 million, um, liters of diesel, which is about 55 Olympic pool size. So that's really exciting. It will bring, you know, tele-health care and broadband for the first time in the North. Uh, so lots of really, you know, there's a lots of waves of firsts that are happening. You know, the first large scale on reserve wind energy project, the largest solar farm in Saskatchewan. So yeah, lots to look out for, um, in our report. [00:13:58] Speaker 1: I want to give you some stats that we, I often use my audience, uh, you can go get a cup, cup of coffee if you want, and now would be the time. But, um, we talk about the electrification rate of economies. And what that means is the percentage of energy, the final end use consumption of energy, like in your house or your car or whatever, that's provided by electricity. And, uh, the alternative of course is oil and gas and, uh, we have, uh, like China's around 30%, Japan and South Korea, 33%. The, uh, uh, European, uh, EU is like 27%. The United States is at 24%. Canada is the lowest in the G7 at 18%. And there are some real laggers. Alberta is only 7%. Uh, BC where, you know, where I live a hundred, almost 5%. Hydro, like a clean, uh, power grid. 17%. 17%. Ontario only 21% or 18%, depending on how you do the math. Quebec brings up the average for everybody. Cause it's at 40, 42%. My point here is that we've, they've had the federal government talking about doubling the power grid by 2050. So going from 600 terawatt hours a year to 1200 terawatt hours a year, electricity. But all of the big projects that are being contemplated, big industry, oil, gas pipelines, LNG data centers, mines, uh, the supply chains, advanced manufacturing. We'll suck up all of the new electricity, leaving us at around 18 to 20% in 2050. We will be the, still the least electrified economy of the advanced economies in the world. That's the kind of, that's one of the reasons why I would argue Canada needs to embrace the approach that you advocate. The S agenda is because we need to start innovating down in our communities, down at the provincial level. We need to, and, and we, as well as at the, at the Canadian level, cause we don't realize how far behind we are. [00:16:11] Speaker 2: Yeah, you're, you're absolutely right. You know, uh, Ottawa said it wants clean, affordable and reliable energy. And of course we welcome the doubling the, the electricity grid by 2050. Um, but, but you know, now Ottawa has to commit its limited policy and dollars to deliver it. There's no endless amounts of money here. Uh, so it has to be a choice, right? It has to be a choice. We can't, we can't, you know, we can't be a global oil and gas superpower and also be a global, you know, clean energy superpower. Um, and then, you know, most Canadians would prefer to be, uh, you know, clean energy superpowers. Myself included. Um, there's also a new report by the new economy Canada that recently came out and they're stating that doubling the electricity supply could add 3 trillion to the economy. 1.6 jobs by 2050, which is a five to one return on investment. Um, and as you said, again, you know, we're really seeing the, the, the Canada's behind, like, just, just, as I said, you know, we're, we're trialing so far ahead from our G7 countries for wind and wind. Solar. Again, wind is such a. Big push in, in Canada. And it's unfortunate to see that we're not making up, you know, we're, we're less than half compared to all of the other G7 countries. So I absolutely agree with you there. [00:17:29] Speaker 1: Let's talk about a practical example here. So, um, uh, yesterday was yesterday or the day before it doesn't matter. The prime minister, Mark Carney announced the big heat pump program. So $2 billion over eight years. And the point he made was that every year, 1 million Canadian homes replace their heating systems or their gas furnaces for the most part. And, and so there's an opportunity to replace them with heat pumps. And, and so the government is going to provide subsidies from two to $10,000 to do that. Here's the problem that over those eight years, that means that 8 million heating systems will be replaced in Canadian homes. The, the government's program only covers 10% of them, 10%. That is a serious, serious lack of ambition. Why are we not getting up to a much, much higher percentage? You know, like for example, in Atlanta, Canada, their rate of heat pump adoption is up in the 40, 42, 44%, depending on, on the province. Many other European countries are up in the, uh, you know, far higher than, uh, than we are on when it comes to, to, to heat pump. So if we really want to lower, uh, the, uh, homeowners heating bills, they get them to electrify, uh, then why, why are we only shooting for, you know, over eight years to change over 10% of the, not of the existing buildings, just of those buildings that actually adopt. New oil and gas, uh, uh, uh, systems. And that I think illustrates that principle, that lack of ambition is permeates everything in Canada and is one of the reasons why we need to change the conversation. Uh, like you're doing with the yes agenda in order to put pressure on our policymakers to up their ambition. [00:19:29] Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely. I, I, I, you know, didn't have a chance to read yesterday's announcement, but I know that, you know, people are excited about it. But as you said, if the math isn't adding up, then, then it goes back to my former point of, we, we have to make these choices. The government has to make these choices. Um, and, you know, demand side management is a really important part of this conversation we're having. Um, it's part of the answer and, and fighting climate change and fighting for a future is, is everything everywhere all at once, not to quote a movie. Um, but you know, it's, it's definitely aligned with our, with our members call, um, to double electricity efficiency. But again, we, we have to be more ambitious if, if we really want to, um, yeah, if we really want to catch up to the rest of the world when it comes to, to clean energy. [00:20:15] Speaker 1: Agreed. Amy, thank you very much. It was lovely having you and really appreciate this. Thank you. [00:20:20] Speaker 2: Thank you for having me. Thank you for having me.