Energy Commission: What Would Saint Kamala Have Proposed?

An energy commission that omitted certain forms of energy is wrapping up

The Energy Commission’s two weeks of hearings at the National Assembly have ended. The members [who were] present heard a variety of points of view, particularly concerning the role of Hydro-Québec, energy rates and future production. Overall, almost everyone noted that Quebec no longer has enough energy to match its ambitions.

However, there was a major absence in the discussion. We managed to ignore certain energy sources that are considered strategic everywhere else in North America. For example, the possibility of using our natural gas was never discussed.

This seems self-evident. Since the Legault government passed a law to ban all exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons, it seems normal that we no longer talk about it. But this was voted on at a time when we lived in the illusion of a surplus of electricity.

In Quebec nowadays, we are so limited in energy that we have to say no to certain projects submitted by local companies. Northvolt postponed its construction by a year, and other companies are fighting in the public arena to get their hands on blocks of electricity that were reserved for them.

Blindness

Our elected National Assembly members are so stubbornly locked in their own world that they do not even want to take the risk of hearing about natural gas exploitation. Imagine that the Québec Energy Association filed a brief, noting the extent of the natural gas reserves that Quebec is sitting on. I read it.

They state that the responsible exploitation of such resources should be one of the actions taken to ensure Quebec’s energy security. The association filed a written brief, but was not even invited to come and explain it to the parliamentarians. They are practicing mental abstraction.

This stubborn and irrational refusal to open the door to natural gas is, they say, the reflection of a beautiful social consensus established in Quebec. We are greener, we reject all forms of hydrocarbons, even natural gas which, elsewhere, is considered an acceptable compromise in terms of climate change.

Yet Kamala …

It’s funny to see how almost all the defenders of the antiexploitation creed are also enamored of Kamala Harris. At the debate in early September, Harris addressed Americans solemnly to assure them that she would never slow down the exploitation of shale gas.

There are now more than 1 million shale gas wells in the United States. The Democratic presidential candidate is not a climate change denier, but she is integrating shale gas into her energy policy.

She is acting like her Democratic predecessor, former President Barack Obama, who praised the exploitation of shale gas and oil under his leadership. He still congratulates himself on having ensured the energy independence of the United States, thanks to his policy.

If the Quebec premier imitated Obama and Harris, he would be crucified in the public arena … by admirers of Obama and Harris. Our Quebec is not easy.