Energy question for non-Conservative voters. (1 Viewer)

[stevecanuck]

In India, coal-fired power plants account for approximately 73% of electricity generation, while in China it's at 60%.

Albertans have been trying to tell the ROFC that our petroleum resources should allow us to create the win-win policy of exporting LNG to replace the coal, thereby acheiving in a net world-wide reduction of CO2, as well as many billions of dollars of income for Canada.

Is this not believed? Is it not understood? Is it incorrect?

What the hell is keeping us from exploiting these resources and making everyone happy?

 

[ataraxia]

Yeah, the basic idea makes sense—LNG from places like Alberta can help reduce global emissions by replacing coal, especially in countries like India and China. Natural gas burns cleaner, and that could buy us time while we scale up renewables.

But it only works if the LNG really replaces coal and doesn’t just add to the mix, and if we seriously crack down on methane leaks, which can wipe out the climate benefit entirely. That’s where the skepticism comes in—people worry that LNG is being sold as a climate solution, but could actually slow down the shift to clean energy.

The truth is, if Canada truly wants to be a leader, it should focus on exporting solutions—not just gas, but clean tech, expertise, and innovation. LNG can be part of the bridge, but it’s got to be a bridge, not a detour.

 

[Mycroft]

In India, coal-fired power plants account for approximately 73% of electricity generation, while in China it's at 60%.

Albertans have been trying to tell the ROFC that our petroleum resources should allow us to create the win-win policy of exporting LNG to replace the coal, thereby acheiving in a net world-wide reduction of CO2, as well as many billions of dollars of income for Canada.

Is this not believed? Is it not understood? Is it incorrect?

What the hell is keeping us from exploiting these resources and making everyone happy?

Ummm...

Perhaps the Indians and the Chinese don't WANT to convert to LNG?

 

[stevecanuck]

Yeah, the basic idea makes sense—LNG from places like Alberta can help reduce global emissions by replacing coal, especially in countries like India and China. Natural gas burns cleaner, and that could buy us time while we scale up renewables.

But it only works if the LNG really replaces coal and doesn’t just add to the mix, and if we seriously crack down on methane leaks, which can wipe out the climate benefit entirely. That’s where the skepticism comes in—people worry that LNG is being sold as a climate solution, but could actually slow down the shift to clean energy.

The truth is, if Canada truly wants to be a leader, it should focus on exporting solutions—not just gas, but clean tech, expertise, and innovation. LNG can be part of the bridge, but it’s got to be a bridge, not a detour.

I took a basic 'yes' out of that, but with conditions. I'm okay with that.

 

[stevecanuck]

Ummm...

Perhaps the Indians and the Chinese don't WANT to convert to LNG?

The air in those countries can be cut with a knife, and eliminating coal-fired plants would go a long way towards cleaning it up.

 

[Ishm]

Perhaps they have their own coal sources and don't want to spend $100's of billions on imports. Google say China is the worlds largest coal producer, and India is number 2. China though is by a very long way the country moving fastest to install renewable energy. If they were already a fully wealthy economy they would be pulling out coal plants, but they are still transitioning millions of people away from rural subsistence type living so for now they keep adding new coal plants when they can't build renewables fast enough or in the right places. India is also investing heavily in renewables, but it is years behind China on their energy growth needs and will probably be relying more heavily on coal for longer.

 

[Mycroft]

The air in those countries can be cut with a knife, and eliminating coal-fired plants would go a long way towards cleaning it up.

Sure.

But that doesn't mean they want to convert.

 

[BirdinHand]

The air in those countries can be cut with a knife, and eliminating coal-fired plants would go a long way towards cleaning it up.

Both of those countries are moving AWAY from coal and towards more sustainable and less environmentally harmful answers.

It isn’t a process that happens overnight

 

[Loulit01]

In India, coal-fired power plants account for approximately 73% of electricity generation, while in China it's at 60%.

Albertans have been trying to tell the ROFC that our petroleum resources should allow us to create the win-win policy of exporting LNG to replace the coal, thereby acheiving in a net world-wide reduction of CO2, as well as many billions of dollars of income for Canada.

Is this not believed? Is it not understood? Is it incorrect?

What the hell is keeping us from exploiting these resources and making everyone happy?

Money. To afford Canadian LNG, India would have to raise energy prices significantly and the population can't afford it. The per capita yearly income in India was $2,480 in 2023.

 

[stevecanuck]

Good points from everyone.

I know that Japan and Germany came to Canada looking for LNG and Trudeau told them no. Is there a Liberal supporter here who can try to justify that?

 

[CANON]

Good points from everyone.

I know that Japan and Germany came to Canada looking for LNG and Trudeau told them no. Is there a Liberal supporter here who can try to justify that?

I don't believe that is an accurate description of what Trudeau stated.

OTTAWA, Ont. — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says exporting liquified natural gas from Canada’s east coast to Germany could ease Europe’s gas crunch.

The prime minister’s remark in Montreal on Monday raised eyebrows given the lack of export facilities in Atlantic Canada.

Three days ago, he suggested there’s “not a whole lot” Canada can do in the short term to boost energy supplies in Europe. But on Monday at a joint press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Trudeau said, “It’s doable, we have infrastructure around that.” He didn’t offer a timeline when asked for one.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/22/canada-lng-germany-trudeau-00053144

Saying "not a whole lot" Canada can do in the short term is simply a factual statement, there are pipelines and a terminal that would need to be built on the East Coast. Look at what the expected LNG demand is going to be in the not too distant future and you'll see why it may not be financially viable.




As far as Japan, well there are three LNG terminals still being constructed on the West Coast. Here is what the International Energy Agency has stated about natural gas demand:

Natural gas prices In the STEPS, natural gas prices stay somewhat elevated relative to pre-crisis levels until the middle of the decade as global gas markets continue to adjust following the loss of Russian pipeline gas supply to Europe, a loss that is assumed to be permanent. However, a wave of new LNG export capacity from 2025 eases gas market balances, and Asian markets take back the designation of premium market for LNG. As natural gas demand first plateaus and then decreases in the STEPS after 2030, import prices stay around USD 8/MBtu. In the United States, natural gas prices average around USD 4/MBtu due to domestic production of gas.

In the APS, a sharper reduction in European natural gas demand softens prices further. Lower gas demand growth in emerging market and developing economies and fierce competition among LNG suppliers to capture market share means that by 2030, prices for natural gas importers tend towards the range between USD 6.5/MBtu and USD 8/MBtu. In the NZE Scenario, a glut of gas supply forms in the mid-2020s as demand starts to decline rapidly in key markets, and prices in China, Japan and the European Union fall to levels last seen at the height of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. This puts a strain on export projects at the margin, especially for the 40% of export projects that have not yet recovered their invested capital.

https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/42b23c45-78bc-4482-b0f9-eb826ae2da3d/WorldEnergyOutlook2023.pdf

(the quotes are from pages 96 & 97)


That last sentence in bold is the issue. The business case for expanding LNG even further than what has already been started is not likely to be financially viable.