ManoWhisper
Home
Shows
About
Search
The Candice Malcolm Show
- May 05, 2022
Trudeau’s blatant anti-Western Canadian bias continues
Episode Stats
Length
30 minutes
Words per Minute
194.8559
Word Count
5,990
Sentence Count
267
Misogynist Sentences
4
Hate Speech Sentences
5
Summary
Summaries are generated with
gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ
.
Transcript
Transcript is generated with
Whisper
(
turbo
).
Misogyny classification is done with
MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny
.
Hate speech classification is done with
facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target
.
00:00:00.000
Quebec has become the first jurisdiction in the world to ban oil and gas exploration and
00:00:04.680
development. Meanwhile, the Trudeau government has approved a massive oil project in eastern
00:00:08.820
Canada, while at the same time they continue to block energy projects in western Canada.
00:00:13.560
What is with this blatant anti-western Canada bias? I'm Candice Malcolm and this is The Candice
00:00:17.840
Malcolm Show.
00:00:30.000
Hi everyone, thank you so much for tuning in today. So today I want to have a broader
00:00:33.600
discussion on the oil and gas industry, the energy industry in Canada. And to do so, I
00:00:38.480
am joined by my friend Michael Binion. Binion is a seasoned entrepreneur with a history of
00:00:42.980
starting financing and managing companies primarily in the oil and gas sector. He's the president
00:00:48.000
and founding shareholder of Questair Energy, a public oil and gas company that has production
00:00:52.800
operating in Quebec. He's also the executive director of the Modern Miracle Network, whose
00:00:57.680
mission is to encourage Canadians to have a reasoned conversation about energy issues
00:01:02.240
and that is sorely needed in this country. So Michael, thank you so much for joining us.
00:01:06.360
Oh, it's great to be here and it's great to see you again, Candice.
00:01:09.560
So in mid-April, the Quebec government announced that citizens, this is a story from CTV, citizens
00:01:15.500
officially win a fight to ban oil and gas development in Quebec. Quebec to become the first jurisdiction
00:01:20.500
in the world to explicitly ban oil and gas development in its territory after decades of campaigning
00:01:25.660
by environmental organizations and citizen groups. The newly adopted law will end petroleum
00:01:30.720
exploration and production, as well as public financing of those activities in Quebec. So
00:01:35.940
this is pretty drastic, Michael. What does this mean for our country? What does it mean for
00:01:40.740
you and your operations with Questair? And what can we take from this new law that's been imposed?
00:01:46.960
Yeah, well, I mean, there's a lot to unpack in that question. So, you know, first of all,
00:01:52.700
I think that, you know, we should be concerned as Ukraine makes us reconsider Canada's role in the
00:02:01.240
world. And I don't think that's true for people like yourself and others. I don't think any of us
00:02:06.760
didn't think that we shouldn't have been reconsidering far before now. But it's certainly,
00:02:11.240
I think, making people in the federal government reconsider our role in the world. I think it's
00:02:14.400
making a lot of Canadians think maybe our role in the world should change. And so as most of us start
00:02:20.800
realize that we really need to be thinking about being a place the world can count on as a supplier
00:02:28.100
of last resort, in effect, for resources. When rogue states or kleptocratic states are letting us down,
00:02:38.220
the world knows they can count on Canada, right? And it's discouraging for me that even with that
00:02:44.680
context that Quebec decided to continue on and go the opposite direction. And really basically tell
00:02:51.180
Germany and Europe that, you know, your solution for having built too many windmills is you should
00:02:57.300
build more windmills and we're not going to do anything to help you. So I find that just discouraging
00:03:02.140
as a Canadian that Quebec moved that way. You know, I also think that it's discouraging as well from
00:03:13.740
the point of view of that it went against a big move that's happening in the oil and gas industry
00:03:19.520
right now on technology. And I think contrary or very unexpectedly, oil and gas is racing to low and
00:03:30.140
zero emissions and has a really good chance. And I'm, and I'm, I've called it that we will, in fact,
00:03:36.440
get to zero or near zero or net zero, whatever you want to call it, we'll get there before wind and
00:03:41.080
solar. And so it's also discouraging that as Canada is emerging as this technological leader in low
00:03:46.100
emissions, oil and gas energy, like potentially lower emissions than wind and solar, even that we have,
00:03:51.960
we have a province that says, not only are we going to ban you from doing your zero emissions project,
00:03:57.880
we won't even let you pilot it to prove if it works.
00:04:01.880
It's really unbelievable. I mean, when you think about the significant reserves that exist in Quebec,
00:04:07.700
somewhere between 250 billion and 1000 billion, I guess, a trillion cubic meters, according to the
00:04:14.440
Financial Post, I mean, they're sitting on what could potentially be a huge boon to our economy, to their
00:04:20.280
own resource economy, talking about allowing people who live up north more economic opportunities,
00:04:25.400
more First Nations jobs. And to your point, I mean, you wrote that the Quebec bill will do nothing to
00:04:31.540
lower emissions. It's hard to wrap your head around why people in Quebec are so stubbornly opposed to
00:04:39.880
petroleum or carbon, you know, products. I mean, you spend a lot of time in Quebec, I know you speak
00:04:48.360
French, and you talk to a lot of people in Quebec, I know the sentiment exists across the whole country,
00:04:53.300
particularly on the political left, that they just don't want and they don't want oil period.
00:04:59.260
How can we how can we move beyond that conversation and start talking more about some things you just
00:05:04.280
mentioned? And maybe you can elaborate a little bit on the new technologies that are allowing oil and gas
00:05:09.260
exploration development to get closer to carbon zero.
00:05:12.440
Yeah, well, first of all, I should start that, you know, the quote that you made from that CTD article,
00:05:16.540
I felt was, or I think it was, it was, I'm not sure if it was CTD or RDI, but they talked about it,
00:05:22.400
that citizens have won this thing. That's just pure propaganda, right? Like, I don't have an issue
00:05:27.460
with the people of Quebec. The people of Quebec are 75% in favor of my project. Less, less than 15% of
00:05:35.100
Quebecers are against it, with, you know, another 10 to 15 undecided. So this is not, this is an issue of
00:05:41.420
political elites, and, and I would say also entrenched interests, who don't want competition
00:05:48.280
from lower emissions, cheaper energy, that this is entrenched interests and political elites that
00:05:53.760
are, that are, that are, you know, virtue signaling that we're, you know, we're the first place in the
00:05:58.220
world to ban oil and gas over, and, and, but over, over against their own people, right? So I think
00:06:06.320
that's one thing I want to say that I don't think that the people of Quebec are, have, have some
00:06:10.840
cultural difference, that they don't also like jobs, they don't also like to do better, that they
00:06:15.440
don't also want to help Ukraine and Germany, for example, right? So I think that's one thing I would
00:06:20.300
just say that, and that polling has been repeated over and over and over, like for years, and also
00:06:25.620
in the last year, as the government was contemplating this ban, Main Street did a poll, Leger's done
00:06:30.760
two polls. I think Agnes, Angus Reid did a poll, I'm pretty sure it was Angus Reid, and it was
00:06:37.140
different pollsters over a period of time have consistently shown that a majority of Quebecers
00:06:42.480
are in favor of developing their own resources and their own natural gas. So I'll, anyways, that's,
00:06:47.480
that's a key point. The other thing, just as you said about the size of it, just to confirm that, like
00:06:52.220
the Quebec, the Quebec discovery, the natural gas discovery that we have there, we could replace
00:06:58.680
50% of Russian exports to Germany. We could, it could be 10% of North American LNG exports.
00:07:06.800
It is, it would make Quebec self-sufficient in gas. It's a massive game-changer type of,
00:07:13.800
and of course, because it's so big, it does have disruptive elements. That's why I say, I think
00:07:18.720
there are, there certainly are, you know, people, entrenched interests in Quebec that are, you know,
00:07:23.320
not, not everybody will be affected positively. So that gets to sort of some of your thinking of,
00:07:28.380
like, why are Quebecers against this? I don't think that the average person on the street,
00:07:32.820
the average person on the street is. I don't know, can I just, maybe I'll just go, because I think
00:07:38.500
that your real question was about the technology, right? So if I can just head into that.
00:07:42.560
Yeah, let's, let's talk about the tech and what makes it so clean and what's changed.
00:07:46.700
Yeah, so I started looking at this a while ago, and partly it's because in Quebec, we, you know,
00:07:51.960
we got a ban or it was a temporary moratorium on fracking. And, you know, it's to do with,
00:07:58.740
it was basically to do environmental studies. So we went through 134 independent studies. It was
00:08:04.100
as an overall comprehensive study. It took three years in Quebec, mostly came and said that industry
00:08:10.360
was telling the truth all along. And I was, I was really encouraged to hear that independent
00:08:15.980
francophone PhDs, professors, researchers, basically were true scientists, they just went
00:08:23.420
and got the data and they wrote the reports and told the truth. And of course, these are the types
00:08:27.700
of studies that tend not to get reported in the news. And these are the types of professors and
00:08:32.020
researchers who don't tend to want to be in the news, they don't have an agenda, they're just
00:08:35.900
interested in science, right? So those studies exist, they've been there for a few years.
00:08:39.500
And, and, but what we did understand was, you know, maybe due to misinformation or not
00:08:46.020
misinformation, but that there was a demand in the population to say, we want to see lower impacts,
00:08:50.060
we are worried, because we've been told the word, we're worried about emissions. And, and, you know,
00:08:55.920
quite frankly, so am I. So that's not, we're worried about noise, I get that we're worried about
00:09:00.340
our water being contaminated, we're worried. So, so I said, well, okay, that's fair. What, what if we could
00:09:08.060
bring those all to zero, like, is it, so it was sort of this idea, instead of, this is the way we
00:09:12.780
do it now, this is business as usual, how do I improve on what we do now? I said, let's start at
00:09:18.160
this aspirational, theoretical, impossible to achieve goal, develop a project with zero impacts.
00:09:25.260
Well, the interesting thing about that is that it caused me to just really relook at the way we do
00:09:29.400
things in our industry. And in doing that, we did come up with, let's produce all the gas,
00:09:35.120
but let's use the local hydroelectricity. That cut 80% of our emissions. And then we said, well,
00:09:42.320
what about if we just install modern SCADA, modern, you know, AI is having an impact on, on us being
00:09:48.740
able to stop methane leaks and things like that. Modern, modern, better machined valves, all this,
00:09:54.100
you know, that, that cuts another 15% out. And then the last 5% of our emissions are, you know,
00:10:01.420
mostly what people could refer to as fugitive emissions and so on and so forth. So we can get
00:10:05.880
almost all of those with vapor cap, vapor capture systems, right? So that, so that was the first
00:10:11.800
thing we did. And, and then that was three years ago. And we proposed that and the environmentalist
00:10:16.720
immediately said to us, like immediately, oh, no, no, production's not the problem. It's the consumption
00:10:22.280
of your product. That's a problem. And I said, well, thanks for letting me know that. Because for the
00:10:26.080
last 10 years, you've been telling me that I was the problem, right? The minute I go to zero emissions,
00:10:30.140
you tell me I was never the problem. So, okay, thanks for that. So for the last three years,
00:10:34.580
I've been looking at the consumption, how do we make consumption of natural gas, zero emissions,
00:10:38.500
which of course, everybody says, well, that's impossible, right? Well, I thought producing it
00:10:42.660
was zero was impossible, but it wasn't. And we did things differently. The, the consumption side,
00:10:49.760
what, what we've now discovered through different technologies, and I was in high tech before I was
00:10:53.940
in oil and gas. So it's an area of interest for me. There are now, I've now come up, found dozens
00:10:59.500
of technologies, dozens, where you can take CO2, capture it from a flu stack or an industrial
00:11:07.020
process or from, you know, a power plant or wherever. And you can take that CO2 and, and
00:11:14.400
convert it using just organic chemistry, all well understood organic chemistry, by the way,
00:11:18.360
nobody's just, you know, nobody's inventing a cure for cancer here, right? It's just organic
00:11:23.400
chemistry. You can take that CO2, combine it with, you know, H2O and other compounds. There's dozens
00:11:30.920
and dozens of products you can make out of that. And a lot of them are expensive. You know, like,
00:11:35.620
I think some of them will be like, you know, you'd need $500 a tonne for the CO2 to make it pay.
00:11:40.000
But there are cement additives that you can make from CO2. So this is like basically in a,
00:11:45.260
in a plant, right? Put this, bring the CO2 into a plant, out of, out of the plant comes cement
00:11:50.100
additives. And those technologies are borderline economic with a zero price on carbon. There's,
00:11:57.700
there's others that I think with lower prices, you know, they would, they would need some sort of
00:12:02.020
price to be economic. And, but, but that got me excited, right? I said, if there's going to be a
00:12:10.600
$100 price or, and Trude is now talking about $200, $250 total price on carbon, so many of these
00:12:16.040
technologies are, are economic. And, and then the idea of capturing it and just storing it on our
00:12:20.820
ground is economic. So I looked at it and said, well, if we do what we did, like all the, let's
00:12:27.240
think about the three Rs, right? If we apply all the things I was talking to you about efficiencies
00:12:31.600
that could make our productions, that's called the reduce, the reduce element. That's just new
00:12:36.360
technologies and efficiencies. The recycle or reuse. So take that, capture that CO2, recycle it, reuse it,
00:12:44.820
turn it into a feedstock for products, industrial products, consumer products, and then three,
00:12:50.500
return it, our return, the third R being return it under the ground. So our project in Quebec,
00:12:55.520
for example, was an industrial hub. So we were 10 kilometers from industrial hub. What we had to do
00:13:02.100
was to put an extra CO2 line into the pipeline. So we put the gas line, a water line, and now we're
00:13:07.780
going to also put a CO2 line. We, we needed to do some extra compression, um, to be able to move that
00:13:15.240
CO2 and to store it underground. And we, we were going to sell the gas that we produced with near
00:13:21.460
zero emissions to the industrial hub, industrial users there, um, have them capture and return us
00:13:28.420
the CO2 through that CO2 return line, and then have some of that CO2 that's captured, used right
00:13:34.560
there in that industrial park to make things like cement additives. And so we were going to create,
00:13:39.560
which to my knowledge, if we had done it, um, would have been the world's first zero emissions
00:13:45.100
production and, and consumption of natural gas. We gave all that materials to the government and,
00:13:52.060
and they have, you know, they elected instead to go with the, we want to be the first in the world
00:13:57.160
to ban oil and gas. Well, why would you ban it if it's zero emissions? Like it's, it would be lower
00:14:01.000
impact than wind and solar. Why would you ban it? Well, I mean, you kind of answered the question
00:14:05.980
there with the moving goalposts, right? You, you, you found a way to, uh, extract it as zero emissions
00:14:11.540
and then they changed the, they changed the plans and no, no, no, now you have to do it, uh, consumption.
00:14:17.280
So, uh, that, that's part of the problem I suppose with working with, uh, environmental activists is
00:14:22.580
that they don't actually want to find a solution. They just want their way it seems.
00:14:27.160
I have a question because from my understanding of Canadian federalism, uh, natural resources are
00:14:34.480
federal jurisdiction, not provincial. And I, I, I wanted to ask you about how, how legally they
00:14:39.760
can, they can do something like this, uh, whether a conservative government could do anything if a
00:14:44.300
conservative government were elected federally, if they could do anything to override this.
00:14:48.200
Oh yeah. Right. Cause that's where you said federal, but you meant it's provincial, right?
00:14:51.180
Resources are provincial resources is what you meant to say, right?
00:14:53.940
Provincial.
00:14:54.340
Yeah. So, yeah. So I mean, what can the federal government do there? Well, I, I think, I think
00:14:58.700
the only thing the federal government can really do is to, is, is to do what they do in other
00:15:03.080
areas like health is to encourage, um, encourage, uh, cooperation with a national health strategy
00:15:12.480
or a national health policy. They can encourage that through their, through funding. Right.
00:15:16.320
And I think they could also encourage, um, cooperation with a national energy policy in a, in a similar
00:15:23.580
way, but, but at the end of the day, uh, health is run by the provinces and at the end of the
00:15:29.000
day, resources are run by the provinces. So, you know, they obviously have the final decision,
00:15:32.740
but there is, but the federal government certainly has strong, um, core, uh, powers of, uh, persuasion
00:15:38.880
to, uh, help, have people say, well, manage and run your own resources how you want, but please try
00:15:45.300
to cooperate with this national policy of that Canada's role in the world is to, is to be the
00:15:52.180
provider of last resort, to be that one place in the world, the world that, that people can count on
00:15:57.160
in when there's an emergency, like there is, or a crisis like there is today.
00:16:01.640
Well, I, I, I wanted to ask you about the equalization formula because Western provinces,
00:16:06.060
as you know, distribute billions of dollars towards Quebec every year. Fairness Alberta,
00:16:10.200
uh, estimates that Quebec receives approximately 13 billion, uh, per year. Um, you know, evidently the
00:16:16.680
provinces that contribute to the equalization fund or that they give more to the federal government
00:16:21.100
than they get back are all energy producing oil and gas producing provinces. Whereas we talked about
00:16:26.060
Quebec sits on a reserve, uh, that isn't. So I'm wondering, uh, what, what your thoughts are on
00:16:30.680
incorporating, um, untapped energy reserves into the equalization formula. Yeah, that's, that's
00:16:36.520
always been a thing. I mean, Pauline Merrois, when she was premier, um, said explicitly, why would we
00:16:41.560
develop our, uh, resources? It just reduces our equalization. Um, and what, what, what, the way she
00:16:48.060
put it, of course, because she was actually pro oil actually, but the way she put it, well, we should
00:16:52.040
separate first and then we should develop it so that we don't end up, we don't
00:16:55.940
end up having our oil and gas, um, go back to the rest of the country. So in the formula, you know,
00:17:01.840
it's a point you've made, I've written papers on this, or I guess op-eds to be more fair, um, that the
00:17:07.560
50% of the resource revenue in effect would be clawed back through the equalization formula. So Quebec
00:17:14.320
would only keep 50% of their resource revenues. Um, you know, when the Legault government was, uh, running or
00:17:20.720
elected their, their, their, uh, one of their campaign platforms was, uh, points was to get
00:17:27.320
Quebec off equalization. Um, you know, I, I think those are popular things to say and think, but
00:17:32.620
pragmatically, I think, you know, I think we've, we've seen the equalization just continues to go
00:17:37.140
up for Quebec. And of course, developing these resources for sure would make the, you know,
00:17:43.240
even in full development, I think we looked at it, it might get, it would get Quebec off a material
00:17:48.520
amount of equalization, not all of it, but it would be very material. But in effect, you know,
00:17:53.740
not all that money goes to Quebec. Some of that money would come to Canada, right?
00:17:57.520
Interesting. Uh, I want to change gears a little bit. We're talking about the feds and,
00:18:01.200
you know, generally speaking, I think a lot of Western Canadians look at Justin Trudeau and think
00:18:05.440
of his government as being anti-energy, anti-development, uh, blocking pipelines, banning,
00:18:09.760
uh, tanker ships off the West coast, making it more, more, more difficult. Um, I know that there was
00:18:14.140
that, I think it was bill 69, um, that, that required, you know, gender analysis when it came
00:18:18.920
to development projects. And it didn't seem like this government was ever going to approve an oil
00:18:22.800
and gas project, but lo and behold, uh, we saw that, that, that the Trudeau government approved
00:18:26.820
the Beta Nord, uh, project out in Newfoundland and Labrador off the coast. It'll include some
00:18:30.840
offshore drilling, uh, approximately 300 million barrels of oil. It's expected to create thousands
00:18:36.100
of jobs for Canadian and generate approximately $3.5 billion in government revenue. Uh, so I want,
00:18:42.240
I want to hear your thoughts on this project that it seems like it's good news, uh, that
00:18:45.420
the Trudeau government is moving forth with this program. Um, but what do you say to people
00:18:50.680
who still feel frustrated, uh, the, the feeling that projects are being strangled in Western
00:18:55.020
Canada at the same time?
00:18:57.180
Yeah. So a couple of things, first of all, uh, the government did, uh, did ultimately approve
00:19:02.300
and in fact, even financed, you know, after they chased Kinder Morgan out of the country,
00:19:06.700
um, with their, with their constant changes to the rules, uh, they then stepped up and
00:19:12.540
actually even approved. And then of course got forced to finance it. And, and a lot of
00:19:16.520
those, they will, I mean, every time I have people say, well, Oh, look at this, the federal
00:19:20.060
government's, uh, is actually even paying for your pipeline. Why are you guys complaining?
00:19:23.600
I'm like, you don't get it. None of us wanted that, right? No, nobody wanted the government
00:19:27.760
to make the rules so bad that no private sector company could ever build a pipeline. And so that
00:19:33.600
the government then had to pay for it out of our tax dollars. Like that's absolutely like,
00:19:37.660
it just infuriates me to hear people say that because nobody out here wanted the government
00:19:41.220
to pay for it. We just wanted them to go to be, to be fair and have it approved. Um, so
00:19:47.260
the, but they did approve that person. I think one of the big, one of the worst things that
00:19:50.640
the government did on the, basically the first week of being elected was canceled gateway pipeline.
00:19:55.600
This is, um, this is an unbelievably, you want to talk about Canada stepping up in the world
00:20:01.140
and, you know, being that country that, you know, like I, I, my feeling right now is it's
00:20:06.000
an opportunity for Canada to go up a weight class. We've, we've, we've, we've been our
00:20:09.780
entire existence to junior partner to Britain or to United States or to United Nations and
00:20:15.960
peacekeeping. We've been a junior partner punching above our weight. We've been so proud
00:20:19.400
of that. Um, more recently, I just see us being a junior partner punching below our weight.
00:20:23.980
Like we're just not, we're, we're floundering as a country, but we have this opportunity
00:20:27.700
now, I think to go up a full weight class, like we could be, we could be senior partners,
00:20:32.220
uh, face to face with America, Europe, Asia, saying we're the place that you can count on.
00:20:38.480
And we expect to be treated with that kind of respect. And by the way, it will pay for
00:20:42.600
you to give us that kind of respect because we are the ones that will keep you going when
00:20:46.140
there's a war. Right. Um, so, but gateway is the port of Prince Rupert, a full day closer
00:20:52.460
to Asia than Vancouver. Um, not, not super busy, populated, beautiful city like Vancouver.
00:20:58.340
I mean, this is a relatively underpopulated place. Uh, we, we should have our national
00:21:04.220
defense there for the Arctic. It's the closest port to the Arctic. We should have a map, you
00:21:09.080
know, massive port there for that, uh, major ports there for bringing goods in from Asia,
00:21:14.080
but also sending resources out highways, power lines, everything. It's just, it's a, it's
00:21:19.040
a, it's a very, um, visionary project. The Prince Rupert is a, is a, is a natural wonder
00:21:25.760
for Canada. Actually, if you spend some time looking at that Kitimat, Prince Rupert area,
00:21:30.740
but the other thing that was terrible about canceling that project is that there was close
00:21:34.720
to 40 first nations that had signed on to something so like 30 had signed 40 in the middle of negotiations
00:21:41.180
for benefits agreements. These are abjectly poor, uh, people in the north of British Columbia
00:21:47.320
and Alberta, and they had a chance to be lifted out of poverty. And instead we condemn them
00:21:52.900
to another generation of poverty. It's just, to me, it's, and, and by the way, it was done
00:21:56.900
without so much as a phone call. Like you talk about first nations should be consulted. Well,
00:22:01.620
when you take away somebody's future, how do you not at least call them at a very minimal
00:22:07.720
level of consultation? I mean, I've met so many chiefs up there who were just so dejected
00:22:12.660
and discouraged and, and, and felt absolutely powerless that their government wouldn't even
00:22:18.320
call them to say, look, we're sorry, nothing. It was just horrible. And, and, and there are
00:22:23.480
first nations kids not even born and we already know what their life's going to be like. It's
00:22:27.600
horrible. I think this has been one to your point about a government that's been anti-resource.
00:22:32.180
They've been really anti first nations too, on, in, in, in terms of ending on reserve poverty.
00:22:37.100
So I got a little bit off topic of your question, the discrimination there. I do think that there
00:22:43.300
has been a strong discrimination against resources. Generally, we saw that with Pierre Trudeau too.
00:22:48.100
There's this idea and it's been popularized since Pierre Trudeau in the 1950s, sixties that,
00:22:55.840
you know, we really should stop hewing wood and drawing water as to make our living like for our,
00:23:01.380
for our America, you know, for America, for Americans and other people. And we should join the
00:23:05.320
modern economy in the, in the sixties, it was manufacturing. What that led to was a branch
00:23:10.860
plant economy, but at least branch plant economies come with real jobs, you know, union jobs, right?
00:23:15.940
The current idea is that Canada is going to get away from primary production, hewing wood,
00:23:22.080
drawing water, and we're going to become a high tech country. But I tell you, being a branch plant
00:23:28.160
economy, when, you know, to, to the Googles and alphabets and, or I guess that's the same place,
00:23:33.540
apples and, and Amazons of the world, like they, we won't even create the union jobs this time.
00:23:40.660
We'll become a branch plant economy. So, you know, somebody will create a tech company,
00:23:45.360
three people will get rich, a bunch of employees will work for a couple of years and then get fired,
00:23:49.320
right? As soon as Amazon takes them out or whatever. So this is, this is a really dangerous
00:23:55.080
industrial policy. It's a seductive idea. We're going to do technology, right? Between that,
00:24:00.000
by the way, we were going to do services. The end of the world, at the end of the day, though,
00:24:04.820
if you look at it, what, what should a country do in a competitive world is we should do what we're
00:24:11.140
best at. You know, we should let other people do what they're best at. I mean, Canada should not
00:24:15.940
become, try to become a world leader in precision machine parts. We should not try to become a world
00:24:20.560
leader in mass manufacturing of t-shirts. We should not, I don't think we should try to become a
00:24:24.940
world leader in, in, in mass manufacturing at all, right? The, the, what we're the world's best at
00:24:31.640
is primary resources. And what's wrong with drawing water and hewing wood if you're the world's best
00:24:36.740
at it? What's wrong with that? There's nothing wrong with that. And, and by the way, the technology
00:24:41.500
involved to do that in today's world, it is one of the most, as I said, I started in tech. I work in
00:24:46.520
oil and gas now. It is higher. It is, I deal with more technology. It's a higher tech industry
00:24:51.680
than the high tech industry is, if you can believe that. Like when I was doing high tech
00:24:56.000
startups, it was one, I was dealing with one technology or one in, in oil and gas, I'm
00:25:01.180
dealing with hundreds of technologies and they're all amazing. And by the way, you don't get to
00:25:04.900
zero, you can't get to these zero emissions ideas without that new technology. That's this new carbon
00:25:09.920
tech is going to be incredible. That ramble around a little bit. But I, I, I, I think that the
00:25:17.180
government has been anti-resource. I do think Ukraine is causing to rethink things. We are
00:25:23.500
seeing some positive signs, but, but there's been some horrible mistakes made in the early
00:25:28.000
part of their term. I think there's some, there's really some serious glimmers of hope
00:25:32.240
in their most recent pronouncements that they're getting it, that they're getting Canada should
00:25:36.240
be the best. We should do it. We're the best in the world. If only because the rest of the
00:25:40.160
world needs us to do it. Right. And, and if anything, I think that the lesson the world needs
00:25:45.680
to learn from Germany and their failed green energy policies is it's created a huge dependency
00:25:51.680
on Russian gas. And, and, and that's part of the fueling of this conflict. And it's so obvious that
00:25:56.960
you can draw a straight connection between, you know, Putin's tanks and Germany's green energy
00:26:02.860
policies. So it's, it's really, I guess, good that, that the Trudeau government is, is really
00:26:07.380
that I have final question for you, Michael, you wrote an op-ed here at True North, where you,
00:26:12.020
you talked about how Canada takes a very myopic approach to energy. And we sort of see it as
00:26:16.400
two very black and white options, either business as usual, kind of neglect the environment and just
00:26:22.760
do what we can to make money, or on the alternative, completely banning oil and gas, which just seems
00:26:27.520
like that's the route that folks in government in Quebec and many environmentalists want to take.
00:26:33.120
You instead suggest and discuss what you call the third option. I was wondering if you could just
00:26:37.620
elaborate on what that looks like, and, and how you can see Canada sort of balancing these two
00:26:43.060
sort of traditional opposing ideals.
00:26:46.000
Yeah, well, I'm really hoping that this, that one, you know, out of, out of a crisis, sometimes,
00:26:51.280
you know, silver linings or good things emerge. I'm hoping that what it might emerge is what I
00:26:56.720
think is a 21st century approach to energy and environment. And I think where we're locked into
00:27:01.700
is a 1900s or 20th century idea. I think in the late 1900s, there was this idea that continuous
00:27:08.820
growth could not be sustained. And that, and so therefore, we had to make a choice between
00:27:15.340
business as usual, which we knew was going to make, you know, like, make make the environment
00:27:21.460
for some people think, to a serious crisis that we wouldn't even be able to live in it, but, but
00:27:27.220
definitely hurt the environment. Or our other option was to, was to go along the, well, let's
00:27:31.760
ban oil and gas. And it's just going to mean you have to learn to live with less. And that, you
00:27:35.920
know, like, like some of the weffers say, you know, you're, you're not going to own anything
00:27:38.980
and you're going to be happy about it. So, but that, but that to me is, it was a, was a 19,
00:27:44.380
1900, late 1900s, 20th century approach. And we've just locked ourselves into that business
00:27:49.660
as usual, or, and, and, and, and you, by the way, using the technology of the end of
00:27:54.080
the 20th century, that probably was, there's probably truth to that. It's just, it's the
00:27:59.480
technology. And as I was describing earlier, the technology has advanced, has advanced and
00:28:03.600
is advancing very quickly. Here's another thing that people make, you know, get stuck into
00:28:08.680
that sort of 20th century idea. They also sort of seem to have this idea that oil and gas
00:28:12.700
technology is static, and it's only wind and solar who whose technology is advancing. But the,
00:28:18.920
but it's the opposite. There's, there's enormous amounts more money being invested in research
00:28:24.460
and development in oil and gas, and there isn't wind and solar, the industry is way bigger.
00:28:27.980
The number, you know, number of patents, number of everything, it's a lot more. So that that's
00:28:33.560
another false idea that oil and gas technology is static. So we have this sort of thing about
00:28:37.700
let's compare what wind and solar will be with 2050 technology to what oil and gas was with 1999
00:28:44.240
technology. And oh, I guess, isn't it the, isn't the answer obvious. So the, so what I guess
00:28:49.780
I'm really saying on this third option is that application of new carbon tech, which is that
00:28:55.200
what I went through the idea of being able to reduce through efficiencies cycle or return
00:29:02.160
under the ground, our carbon emissions, that we can do that. You know, looking at the example
00:29:08.100
of Europe, at least, at least, you know, with what we know today, we can do that cheaper
00:29:13.160
than trying to roll out wind with today's technology and today's batteries, it would be cheaper for
00:29:18.660
us to, so I'm calling that, that's not, that's not do a transition from one energy to another.
00:29:23.780
Let's keep all of our energies, including wind and solar, but let's transform oil and gas
00:29:29.660
into zero emissions energy or low emissions energy. And that, and an energy transformation
00:29:34.420
is a third option on climate, as opposed to the, you know, what I, what I, I mean,
00:29:39.560
the other thing I say, like I just said that the environmentalists of the last century, they,
00:29:43.740
thank you. You did a great job. You, you, you did the alarm bell. There's going to be 10 billion
00:29:48.700
people. It's going to create environmental challenges. Thank you for waking us up to that,
00:29:52.560
but you haven't had a new idea in 50 years besides ban and block. So retire and let a new generation
00:29:59.700
of environmentalists who are solutions oriented, technology oriented, let them take over and let's
00:30:05.500
solve the problem from the, with private market solutions. Oh, that sounds great. I, I, I like to
00:30:11.080
hear that there is a new generation of, of environmental thinkers that aren't as doom and gloom as the one
00:30:16.240
that get marched out in front of the media. People like Greta Thunberg, who just basically, you know,
00:30:22.040
her job is to complain and to look angry and, and not really be productive in the conversation anyway.
00:30:26.960
So it's good to hear that there are people out there making reasonable cases and that the technology
00:30:32.300
is really speaking for itself. So Michael Binion, I appreciate your time. Thank you so much for
00:30:37.080
joining us on the podcast. It's always great to hear from you. Yeah, it was fun. Thank you.
00:30:41.320
All right. Thank you so much. I'm Candice Malcolm, and this is the Candice Malcolm Show.
Link copied!