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. It's these opportunities that dominate the investments in the emissions reductions from the Inflation Reduction Act.
Canada has one of the cleanest electricity grids in the world. The U.S. right now is about three times as emissions-intensive as Canada. This means that the U.S. is consistently able to reduce emissions by shifting from coal to gas and from gas to renewables, and it has much more opportunity for large investments than we do.
I think one of the cautions I would give to your committee is that we should also not forget that the U.S. provides a better market and, in most cases, better solar resources than Canada. Most of the investments that we're seeing and tracking in the U.S. under the IRA are tied to solar and storage.
Why is the U.S. better for solar? It's in part because its peak energy demands and peak electricity demands tend to occur in the mid-summer with air conditioning load. This correlates really well with solar and short-term storage, unlike demands in Canada, which, as we know, tend to occur in the wintertime.
Low-cost solar is revolutionizing the global energy landscape, but as I write in my new, forthcoming book, the challenge for solar isn't sunsets. It's not lack of subsidies. It's winter. We need to think about how different technologies work in our energy system and not simply try to replicate what's happening in the U.S.
Let me turn briefly to oil and gas, which is the other focus. Canada's oil sands are about 12% of our national emissions, and roughly double that for the entire oil and gas sector. Just the oil sands alone are 60% more than our national electricity. While the U.S. is driving all of its investment in electricity, we, from an emissions perspective, rightly turn and say, “What about oil and gas?”
While the U.S. produces substantially more oil and natural gas than we do, its oil and gas production and processing emissions are a much smaller share of its national total, so the IRA doesn't need to affect that sector as much as our emissions policies would to generate the same level of emissions reductions. The key question for technology deployment in the oil sector in particular is.... I guess there are two. Will Canadian governments be willing to provide enough subsidies or to impose regulations that make that technology attractive or necessary for oil and gas companies, and will shareholders support those investments?
It's not so much about whether costs will have to be incurred to drive down our emissions, but rather about who should bear those costs and the extent to which industry will come to see abatement as existential rather than just potential opportunity for capital investment.
We're bombarded a lot with U.S. news, research, commentary and policy solutions. One message that I have for you today—through my broken Internet connection—is to keep your focus on what will work for Canada and what fits best with our challenges. Don't just simply try to replicate what's happening in the U.S.
Thank you.
I'm ready to answer the committee members' questions.