this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
21 points (92.0% liked)

Canada

7186 readers
281 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SamuelRJankis 15 points 2 months ago

The party leader also says it was “crazy” for the former B.C. Liberal party to have banned nuclear power, saying the province needs to have a “conversation” about reconsidering its position, tying high energy costs to lower living standards.

The "ban" on Nuclear refers to the Clean Energy Act from 2010

Section 2 - British Columbia's energy objectives

(o)to achieve British Columbia's energy objectives without the use of nuclear power.

 

https://lims.leg.bc.ca/pdms/file/ldp/39th2nd/votes/progress-of-bills.htm

Bill No. Title Member First Reading Second Reading Com- mittee Report amended Third Reading Royal Assent S.B.C. Chap. No.
17 Clean Energy Act Hon. B. Lekstrom Apr. 28 Jun. 3 Jun. 3 Jun. 3 Jun. 3 Jun. 3 Jun. 3 22

People who voted for it which coincidentally includes the guy complaining about it: https://www.leg.bc.ca/parliamentary-business/overview/39th-parliament/2nd-session/votes-and-proceedings/v100428.htm


As someone who made it about 33m through the 1:50 podcast that essentially how everything goes if you fact check it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

His views on everything appear to be from the 1800s.

[–] SamuelRJankis 1 points 2 months ago

Funny enough a random thing Peterson kept repeating. how progressives think from 1960s that we have finite resources on the planet.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Nuclear Power Stations take forever to get up and running if they ever do, are far more expensive than equivalent energy sources (pg.11), and is a NIMBY half the province probably won't want anywhere near them, with the other half (and rest of the nation) being downwind.

It's more crazy to try and re-litigate this already dead horse simply from an economic and political pov without even opening the can of worms that is safety and disposability of waste etc...

[–] SamuelRJankis 6 points 2 months ago

That is the general nuance that somehow entirely missed even though they spend a good half hour on the topic of how progressives are "anti-human" for somewhat factoring environmental concerns into policies.

Also one of the things the proceeded the nuclear thing was how BC is now electrical importer because of progressive policies.

Not this

A sustained period of drought in the province, particularly in the northeast, left both the Columbia Region and Peace River dams at historic lows and with a resulting reduced capacity for power generation.

“This year has been an extraordinary one and has made Hydro a net importer,” Energy Minister Josie Osborne told Global News.

Or this

On an annual basis, B.C. is typically a net exporter of electricity. B.C. often has a positive trade revenue balance, even in years when it imports more electricity than it exports, because of its ability to buy electricity from the U.S. when prices are lower and sell to the U.S. when prices are higher.

Literally the entire 33 minute portion I could make through was two people talking entirely out of their ass. Sprinkling some out of context facts for credibility.

[–] Nogami 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Build them in Alberta. They already don’t care about the environment.

[–] SamuelRJankis 1 points 2 months ago

They care about the oil/gas industry enough to avoid going nuclear.

https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/opinion-albertas-ban-on-renewables-carried-heavy-price?taid=66b4cfc7377b7b00016f813a

Since the moratorium announcement, 53 projects have been cancelled. This is more than five times higher than the normal project cancellation rate in the last few years. Calculated very conservatively, these projects represent an annual loss of $91 million per year in tax revenues to communities. This is revenue that would have been stable and sustainable. Wind and sun don’t run out, and when equipment wears out it can simply be replaced.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-renewables-pause-moratorium-aeso-foip-1.7196943

The internal documents now show the opposite chain of events: rather than the AESO asking the government for the pause, it was the government that asked the AESO to write a letter in support of the policy.

https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/energy-markets/provincial-territorial-energy-profiles/provincial-territorial-energy-profiles-alberta.html