Canada's Next Great Prime Minister - Steven Jones

[nickjamessmith]

Steve, your question to the At Issue panel this evening was fantastic. I hope you make it onto the Next Great Prime Minister Show !!

[stejones]

Thanks for the support!

[Febrile1]

Steven - can you get rid of `Fiat Money'? Otherwise we are stuck by the Free Trade Agreement's "National Treatment" clause - it puts everything you speak about into the hands of Foriegn Investors - everything! Look it UP!

[stejones]

I'd prefer to turn things around so that Canadians are investing in other countries. Are you suggesting that we back our currency with gold?

[Febrile1]

Yes and/or Silver.

[stejones]

What is the carbon footprint required to mine that much gold or silver and then refine it and then build a large building to store it in?

[Febrile1]

From my perspective the question is: What is the cost and damage from Investmant Banks `creating' inflation, recession and depression as a accrual of capital engine?

[stejones]

I'm just concerned that although the idea has some positive aspects, it wouldn't be practical and would also have some negative effects.

[stejones]

Hi Samuel,

The oil sands are an important issue.

The short answer is that I would not stop them, but I would immediately halt new projects. I would also take steps to make them more efficient and clean.

Cheers,

Steve

[MorelT]

2) How many MW of electricity is $300 million going to create? Why not redirect subsidies from coal, oil, and nuclear to renewables? 3) Can you expand on your ideas for transportation? 4) What types of energy do you plan on developing in the north? How much energy do the citizens of the north use? How much will it cost? And if you take the funding from current budget allocations that are meant to protect our sourvernty, will that now limit our presences on the ground, air, and sea?

[MorelT]

I always love to see people supporting clean energy, however i have a few concerns with your idea. 1)How much clean energy will really be developed by 15% of our international aid? Couldn't that 15% be better used to provide clean drinking water to the thousands who die from the lack of it each day? Also instead of developing clean energy in developing nations why not set an example by first doing so in our own nation, with eliminating coal.

[MorelT]

2) How many MW of electricity is 300 million going to create? Why not redirect subsidies from coal, oil and nuclear to renewables? 3)Can you expand on your idea for transportation? 4) What types of clean energy do you plan on developing in the north? How much energy do the citizens of the north use? How much will it cost? And If you take the funding from current budget allocations that are meant to protect of souvernty won't that limit our presence on the ground, air and sea?

[stejones]

2) Not many MW but the focus won't be entirely on replacing coal, but on making it cleaner and $300M can have a large impact in that way.

3) The future of transportation requires electricity - as of now we won't be able to provide that electricity and so we will be stuck to gas burning cars long after plug-in hybrids etc. are commonplace.

[stejones]

4) Wind, Geothermal, and Nuclear (yes, I consider that clean energy...) I think it will enable our presence, not limit it.

Cheers,

Steve

[MorelT]

Im pleased to here the support for clean energy is growing. A few concerns with your idea however. 1) Many people in developing nations need necessesities such as clean water and food over development of clean energy, how much clean energy will 15% of our current commitment really establish? Instead of focusing on developing renewables in developing nations, why not set an example for them by first accomplishing the phasing out of coal in Canada.

[stejones]

Thanks for the questions.

1) It is a lot easier to set a country off in the right direction than to try to change countries that has been heading in the wrong direction since the discovery of oil. Energy enables water purification, pumping for farms etc.. and will provide the necessities. Phasing out coal is also part of the plan but that is a different part of the plan.

[GomerProductions]

I vote for Steve Jones

[OzoneMan007]

Makes sense to me!

[stejones]

You are right that we need to look at a number of diverse sources and not just Hydro. China actually produces the most Hydro power in the world, not Canada. We have taken advantage of many (but not all) of the sites for large hydro projects in Canada but are only beginning to start utilizing microhydro.

[Knave1988]

how is this YOUR great idea?

[stejones]

The reason that clean energy projects are not implemented as often as they should be is that the full range of benefits from clean energy are not considered. A holistic approach is rarely taken and that means that a lot of the projects that go ahead don't make a huge amount of sense in the bigger picture. You are well aware of this because your proposal has a key similarity - let's consider something else in addition to the environment when making clean energy decisions.

[stejones]

I think your proposal is great. It focuses on the use of clean energy to help with economic issues. I decided to focus on four other ancillary benefits - health care, sovereignty, transportation and international aid. I hope that I am not the only person in the world with this idea or it probably isn't very good - maybe a better way to put it would be that this is my priority for Canada.

[octescu]

if we burn all of canadas forests we will have sustaianble energy for the next 1 biillion years and thats 5/25 better than anythin gi can imagine... bigger than 1/5 abd bi no problrms with libya ?

[stejones]

I'm not quite sure where you are going with this. Can you explain? We do have a lot of biomass resources that are currently underutilized.

[farmington21]

good idea, but why are you the one to implement it?

[farmington21]

good idea, but why are the person to implement this?

[stejones]

Thanks for the question. I didn't talk a lot about my experience in the video but I will post a video response to explain that.

[stejones]

Hi All,

YouTube and comments don't mix well. Go to the bottom of the page and click on "View all 5 comments" to see the comments in a more coherent format.

Cheers,

Steve

[mikeforpm08]

Hi Steve,

I've got some questions for you. You say you want to develop our supply system with clean resources, but which ones? BC is tapped out for Hydro Power, Citizens don't like windfarms, are scared of Nuclear Power, and solar panels are currently too big, bulky, and expensive.

I'm also wondering if you think diverting funding away from "specific-transportation technologies" will actually hamper Canada's research and development of new technologies.

Look forward to hearing from you.

[stejones]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for the questions.

BC is not actually tapped out for Hydro Power. There is a current proposal for a large project on the Peace River (Site C Dam) that could certainly use a boost. We are only beginning to explore microhydro sites and there are a number of active projects in this area right now.

[stejones]

Very few people like wind farms in their back yard but fortunately we have an extremely low population density. There are very large wind farm sites that would be seen by very few people. With our huge coast lines and large prairies we have a huge amount of potential wind farm sites.

[stejones]

A lot of people don't like nuclear power plants but they also don't realize that there are almost 450 of them in the world and seven of those are in Canada. I think that society is becoming much more aware of the risks from traditional sources of power and more accepting of nuclear power that is proving to be more reliable every day. Coal power plants actually emit more radiation than properly regulated nuclear power plants! Canada also has some of the largest Uranium deposits in the world.

[stejones]

Solar has come a long way and proved itself to be viable in many parts of the world. Recent advances including triple junction cells and thin films will further improve the price : performance ratio.

Let's also remember geothermal. As a Pacific Rim country Canada has a lot of geothermal potential and we are using almost none of it.

[stejones]

Our large coast lines are also perfect for tidal and wave power, both of which are rapidly developing areas of technology.  Although Canadian companies developing this technology often find they need to go test it in other countries that are more innovative.

Biomass is an area that is still underutilized. It is amazing that beehive burners are still used in many areas in Canada for burning waste wood.

[stejones]

Finally, remember that even fossil fuels can be burned in a way that is clean. It is possible to capture all of the emissions, even the CO2 and to manage them and prevent them for getting into the atmosphere.

[stejones]

Regarding diverting funding away from transportation specific technologies, please see one of my other responses for more details. I would not divert money away from grants at the research level but instead away from subsidies. These short sighted subsidies interfere with the market and don't solve the real problems.

Cheers,

Steve

[egrae]

(3)

Another very important point you mention is northern sovereignty. Electricity infrastructure could indeed help, but what current programs will you be cutting to divert funds into energy production?

[stejones]

Thank again for another great question.

The government has made northern sovereignty a priority and made large increases to the defense budget to achieve that goal. It hasn't indicated exactly how all that money would be allocated in the future. The funding for this program would come out of this budget. All that is needed is a presence -- it doesn't need to be a military presence at all of the locations.

[stejones]

I am proposing that an efficient use of those funds will be to provide people with grants so that they can install clean energy systems which will then allow them to better occupy this area of our country. The electrical infrastructure that works so well in the rest of our country is not applicable up there. There is no grid to plug into and so you need to set up local generating and distribution systems. You then need to go through huge efforts to get fuel to the local generating systems.

[stejones]

The argument is that this is one of the areas where using clean energy will actually be cheaper than traditional forms because of the specific challenges. Additionally, providing that clean energy will encourage growth and that will be a highly efficient use of this new money.

[egrae]

I completely agree with your opinions that using clean energy in the north is a good idea. However, I can't agree that the Russians will see us using that clean energy and decide that they have less right to claim the territory than we do. I don't see how this will help our arctic sovereignty at all.

[stejones]

It's about establishing presence. Using clean energy will enable us to establish a larger presence.

It is also about responsible management of the area. If it is going to be used for commercial shipping we need light houses, weather stations, search and rescue stations etc. If we don't offer those services it is going to be hard to convince the international community that it is in their best interest to give us control.

[stejones]

I'm not claiming that clean energy will solve all the sovereignty problems. It is just one of the many areas where the argument for clean energy is greatly strengthened when you look at the entire picture and realize the additional problems that it can solve.

Cheers,

Steve

[mikeforpm08]

I'm intrigued by your notion that clean energy will encourage a Canadian "presence" to form up North. There are not to many Canadians that actually want to live in argueably the most inhospitable climate in the world, clean energy or not. One of the reasons I thought the current government was pushing for a military presence was because, well, the military can assign induviduals to provide that presence.

[stejones]

You are right that there are many challenges to achieving a wider presence in the North. A lot of people live up North and enjoy it. Living with Diesel generators and a limited supply of electricity is not very pleasant though. It also limits the areas where a presence can form to areas where you can easily deliver diesel.

[egrae]

(2)

You mention that you would seek more funding for sustainable energy production by eliminating the subsidies for what I assume is our oil industry. How would you offset the massive economic problems caused to this already established and booming industry within Canada?

[stejones]

Thanks, this is another great question.

First, I need to clarify. I was not proposing doing anything with the oil industry financial incentives as a part of this program. The Integrated Sustainable Energy Management Plan is a rapid program and changes to the financial structure of the oil industry would need to be done very slowly to avoid major economic upsets.

continued..

[stejones]

This aspect of the plan is a specific initiative to help the transportation sector. Transportation technologies using electricity as the primary energy source are already here and in the coming years there will be a huge boom.

Currently, consumers are eligible to receive a rebate when they purchase certain environmentally friendly vehicles. It is that rebate that I would eliminate and instead direct towards building more clean electrical supply capacity.

contd..

[stejones]

Clean energy projects generally take longer than natural gas plants to construct. We are already in a situation in this country where we burn fossil fuels when we need to create additional electricity. That means that every time someone plugs in an electric vehicle, creates hydrogen with electricity for a fuel cell vehicle or uses a plug in hybrid vehicle (just around the corner -- they will hopefully be introduced in 2008), the source of the electricity is fossil fuels.

contd..

[stejones]

It does not matter that a large proportion of the base load is supplied by Hydro when calculating the marginal impact of each additional electric car.

This is bad for two reasons.

1) Fossil fuel prices are increasing and so the price of electricity will increase.

[stejones]

2) The environmental benefits are greatly minimized. Instead of burning fuel in your car you are burning fuel in a power station hundreds of km away and then transforming it, transmitting it, and transforming it again. It ends up being a little better for the environment but a far cry from what is possible when electricity is produced using clean sources.

The ultimate driver for consumers to use electricity as the energy source for their vehicles will be cost at the pump/charging station.

[stejones]

If it is cheaper to buy electricity than it is to buy gas then people will decide to buy electric vehicles instead of gas ones.

Do we plan to run the rebate programs forever? If we don't make investments in clean energy then the cost of electricity will increase and we will have to make the rebates larger and larger to make it worth while for people to switch. If we do make the investment now then people will choose to make the switch and we won't be stuck in an endless rebate program.

[stejones]

Besides... $1500 rebates allow car companies to artificially increase their prices over what they should be. Why are car prices more expensive than in the states right now? Maybe part of the reason is because the government is offering the discounts.

Cheers,

Steve

[egrae]

Misunderstood you on that one. Thanks for the clarification.

[egrae]

Hi Steve,

I think you're on a great track with your ideas for Canada, and I have a few questions regarding the specifics of your initiative.

On the subject of health care, you mention spending $300,000,000 on reducing the ill effects of our current methods of energy production. How will this money be spent?

[stejones]

Thanks for the question.

The $300 million in this specific initiative would be spent on converting dirty power plants into clean ones. Although it is important for us to build new power plants using sustainable technologies, the increasing demand means that we can't just close down our entire existing infrastructure. Canada does have strict emission standards but there is still a lot of room for improvement with existing technologies if the investment is made.

Continued...

[stejones]

The focus in this initiative would be the installation of technologies such as wet scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators on thermal power plants that operate near urban areas. This would include biomass plants operating in rural towns. There is the possibility of combining some of these projects with carbon sequestration but that would not come from the $300 million.

Cheers,

Steve