Alberta Prosperity Project speaker discusses climate policy

By Rob Vogt
Climate activists are pushing for a war economy to deal with what they have deemed a climate emergency.
That is one of the messages delivered by guest speaker Michelle Stirling by video conference to a gathering of 17 people hosted by the Alberta Prosperity Project Claresholm Chapter at the Journeys Centre on April 20.
Calling her presentation “Rationing and war measures: Climate Policy Run Amok”, Stirling said climate activists want a war economy to achieve net-zero emissions.
That is a goal of no net greenhouse gas emissions on human activities.
The idea, she said, is for people to walk, eat less beef, and take other measures to use less fossil fuel energy. These people point to the Second World War where rationing led to a fair and equitable society.
“I strongly object to this,” Stirling said.
She stressed climate activists are trying to apply wartime measures for a non-existent climate emergency.
“I find it to be repulsive,” Stirling said. “It makes a mockery of the people who fought for our freedoms.”
Stirling said Canadians live in a cold place, so they need heat. They also live in a relatively empty place, so they have to drive to get anywhere.
Climate activists target cities to lower the carbon footprint because there are more people there.
However, Stirling pointed to a journalist named Patrick Symmes who went to Cuba where there is rationing. After finally gaining access, he detailed the hardships of trying to exist with rationing.
That transitioned right into 15-minute cities which Stirling said would have less emissions and be easier to monitor through surveillance.
“They’re not benign, not the idea of a walkable neighbourhood,” she said, adding not if people are under surveillance.
That ties in, she continued, to digital identification, which can be used to track where people go and limit what and where they can access.
Stirling also talked about the idea of a climate lockdown where the measures used to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus would be used to address the climate emergency.
The idea has been floated by government to use the Emergencies Act for this purpose. She added this is not a new idea and wondered if the COVID-19 lockdown was a test run for a climate lockdown.
Stirling said the Rio Declaration on environment and development was signed in 1992, and since then carbon dioxide emissions have gone up.
She added everyone thinks with the pandemic, there was a big drop in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but this is not so. The drop in parts per million was smaller than the annual fluctuation in carbon dioxide.
“How many people’s lives were wrecked by a lockdown?” Stirling said. “We should never do a climate lockdown.”
She also addressed the goal of net zero emissions which she said is not possible or desirable.
The technology is not at a point to meet the net-zero goal, and the cost is too high.
This would not be accepted in a democracy, Stirling said, so the next step would be to impose a tyranny or dictatorship.
Instead, all developed countries put economy ahead of emission reductions.
“They don’t care about climate change,” Stirling said. “These emerging nations will outstrip us.”
She noted these emerging nations will use oil, gas, and coal to power their economies, while Canada will reduce use.
“It’s economic suicide,” she said. “They’re just laughing at us.”
Stirling said from 1990 to 2019 the use of natural gas in Canada has been growing. Hydro generation has not grown much, and oil use continues to increase.
Wind and solar energy is trying, but not increasing nearly enough to replace oil and gas.
“It’s impossible,” Stirling said, adding to say Canada could go to net zero over night is ludicrous. Projects need to be planned years in advance.
She turned her attention back to the climate emergency, and said the whole situation is based on mistakes. There is a belief the work done by people before them is correct. In this case, she said, it is not correct.
The previous climate-change model, she said, used numbers that are not realistic including using a population of three million more than existed, four times the oil use, and seven times the coal use.
She noted two green billionaires who are heavily invested in wind and solar energy are involved in this.
Consequently, she continued, this model proliferated through environmental groups.
“It’s implausible,” she said, pointing out China emits in one month what Canada emits in 1.5 years.
Stirling was asked about carbon capture. She responded after 20 years of planning, 0.1 percent of global carbon dioxide has been captured. Moreover, pipelines need to be built from emitters to storage facilities. As much pipeline infrastructure needs to be built as has been built up over the past 20 years.
“It doesn’t matter what we do,” Stirling said. “We will never affect climate change.”
That is because Canada’s emissions are so small.
Stirling added it is hard to believe no one did their due diligence to see if there are enough materials to build all the facilities and equipment to go to net zero.
She pointed to Simon Michaud, who did the research. He found, for example, it would take 189 years to mine all the necessary copper.
These mines don’t exist yet, and massive amounts of fossil fuels would be needed to build these mines.
Stirling concluded with a simple thought on net zero.
“Practically speaking,” she said. “It’s unnecessary.”