Natural Resources committee  I think we're learning those same lessons here in Alberta. Your colleague mentioned earlier about the AESO study in the spring. The grid operator in Alberta was thinking about what would happen if we had 2,000 megawatts of solar. Six months later, we have 4,000 megawatts in the queue, so we've seen that rapid explosion as well.

Natural Resources committee  I think the biggest opportunity lies in interprovincial power lines. We have great hydro resources. On either side of Saskatchewan and Alberta, we have provinces with great hydro resources. We should have projects under construction right now that integrate those markets more. We probably need other incentives and other suppliers that will come online, but those will respond to the market.

Natural Resources committee  That's exactly the model. I think the more integration you have, you take advantage of those resources. You take advantage of the capacity that's in BC Hydro. You take advantage of the energy that comes from the foothills wind and excellent solar in Alberta, which would work really well together, and then link to the U.S.

Natural Resources committee  That's a good question. I would say that it really depends on the context. If we're talking about a tax in the constitutional sense—so for exemptions for provincial assets, etc.—it's absolutely not a tax. It's a regulatory regime. If by “tax” what you mean is that it imposes additional costs in some way, that's a much broader definition of “tax” than most economists would use.

Natural Resources committee  Thank you. My views on that are basically the same as what I said earlier. I think we missed an opportunity to be prepared for the fact that solar and wind have become some of the cheapest electricity generation resources in the world. Because of that, we're caught in a little bit of a policy problem.

Natural Resources committee  Of course, Mr. Simard. I'll answer in English, just to make sure that I'm clear. I previously headed up a panel in Alberta under then premier Rachel Notley, which recommended the imposition of a carbon pricing system that's very comparable to the system that's in place now nationally.

Natural Resources committee  For sure. I think we do see an impact at the pump. We simply don't see the impact that would be there with a larger carbon price. If we wanted the results of $300-a-tonne carbon price, for example, we would want to impose one. What we have today is a $65-a-tonne carbon price, so we see a marginal increase, whether it's in the price of gasoline at the pump, the value of different emissions reduction opportunities that could be undertaken in the industrial sector or the incentive to not undertake certain activities.

Natural Resources committee  Mr. Friesen might be in better shape to answer that, since I know they have some projects at various stages of development in Alberta, but absolutely. The challenge, though, is that you do have real issues that have presented themselves, in part because our government and our regulators were very bearish on renewables.

Natural Resources committee  The big challenge for us is that what we're putting on the table as a policy is a carbon pricing regime that is dependent on government policy over the long term. As long as that policy is clear to investors, that this policy will be in place for a long period of time, people invest in that.

Natural Resources committee  I think we certainly are if we don't have carbon policies or credible climate change policies. That's always been my push. We want to have policies that, if implemented globally.... If the world took our policies and every country in the world implemented them, we'd meet global goals.

Natural Resources committee  The challenge isn't energy as much as it is capacity. The challenge is whether we have the energy when we need it. Even in a world where we move toward more renewables, that challenge will become exacerbated. The big missing piece of the puzzle right now is interconnections with other provinces, dispatchables or resources we can turn on when we need them.

Natural Resources committee  I sure hope so, Mr. Chair. Please cut me off if it's terrible. How does it sound?

Natural Resources committee  Okay. That's perfect. As I was trying to say before my Internet cut out, I think one of the errors we often make in comparing Canada with the U.S. is that we forget that the U.S. has just so many more opportunities for investments in emissions reductions in its power sector compared with ours.

Natural Resources committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, all. I hope this works. If not, of course, please skip me and move on. Out in Alberta, I guess we don't have great Internet. As I was saying [Technical difficulty—Editor] really important one. It's a policy that has changed the energy landscape in North America.

Natural Resources committee  Okay, I'll stand down.