Alberta Joins Solar/Wind Bust (uneconomic energy hits political risk)

From MasterResource

By Robert Bradley Jr.

“Why not state your real concern in plain English. ‘The profitability of my company and others in the renewable energy business is being negatively impacted by the refusal of the citizens of Alberta (aka ‘the government’) to financially subsidize transmission.”

David Vonesch of the Canadian Renewable Energy Association, posted on social media:

A $408M write-down of ATCO’s wind and solar projects and development pipeline! Alarm bells are ringing loudly now but is anyone listening?

While the solar and wind industry has seen our concerns largely fall on deaf ears within government and at the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO), this should be a major wake up call for ALL Albertans that want to see investment of ANY kind in this province. Material, punitive and retroactive – Alberta is writing the book on how to kill investment: “provincially legislated changes … have materially and retroactively altered the economic conditions under which these renewable assets were developed and financed,” the ATCO company said.

The back story is provided by Jason Markusoff, “ATCO Blames Alberta Power Policies as it Devalues Wind and Solar Projects by $408M.” (CBC News: March 14, 2026)

  • On Oct. 5, 2022, ATCO announced a $730-million acquisition of renewable projects in Ontario and Alberta, including the 202-megawatt Forty Mile wind farm in southeast Alberta. It was a major foray by a massive Alberta conglomerate into the province’s then-burgeoning wind and solar power market….
  • [Now] One of Alberta’s biggest and most venerable companies is declaring a $408-million hit to the value of its wind and solar projects in the province…. ATCO Ltd.’s power subsidiary Canadian Utilities reported the devaluation of its roughly $1 billion in Alberta renewable energy assets in a recent financial disclosure.
  • It says that policy changes to the transmission network have forced the company to heavily curtail the output of its major wind turbine project in southeast Alberta — and adds that a looming overhaul of transmission rules stands to harm that and other renewable projects even more.
  • The [Danielle] Smith government [United Conservative Party] has prided itself on creating an investor-friendly climate in Alberta, and slashing regulation that it derides as “red tape.” But it has faced repeated criticism from the renewable sector for doing the opposite…. Premier Danielle Smith and her government have criticized them as intermittent and less reliable than other generation types like natural gas.
  • Canadian Utilities’ report signals that the province’s electricity policies are not only impairing the renewable sector’s potential growth, but also projects already built in Alberta…. Earlier this week, Pembina issued a report on the beleaguered state of Alberta’s wind and solar sector. It noted a 93 per cent drop in newly installed wind, solar and storage capacity between 2022 and 2025.
  • A skeptic when it comes to the merits of renewable power, her government has imposed a range of new limits to renewable project development, including a seven-month moratorium on new approvals in 2023. Reforms to the broader electrical system, made in the name of reliability have been widely criticized by companies and groups involved in wind and solar.
  • The lack of new power transmission lines from the wind- and solar-heavy southeast part of Alberta has forced the system regulators to curtail some companies’ generation. The ATCO company’s Forty Mile project has been one of the hardest hit. Twenty-five per cent of its total potential power generation was curtailed last year, according to a report by the provincial Market Surveillance Administrator.
  • All told, provincially legislated changes “have materially and retroactively altered the economic conditions under which these renewable assets were developed and financed,” the ATCO company said in the document.

Reactions to Post

Comments to the post were largely negative. “Political risk for politically correct, economically incorrect energy should be a reason to avoid the technology in the first place,” I posted.

A more forceful comment came from Peter Paauw:

Wind and solar power deserve to be killed off; they are leeches on the electricity system. They are completely unreliable: no wind means no electricity, and no sun (which is guaranteed every single night) means no electricity either. When you add the constant need for backup generation plus the massive overinvestment required in the transmission network, solar and wind become utterly useless to society.
The sooner we rip off the Band-Aid and focus on proper, reliable electricity, nuclear if you want to go carbon-free, the sooner we stop the exploding electricity bills.

Another comment was directed at Vonesch:

Why not state your real concern in plain English. “The profitability of my company and others in the renewable energy business is being negatively impacted by the refusal of the citizens of Alberta (aka “the government”) to financially subsidize transmission.”

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 21 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
60 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 27, 2026 6:16 am

Wind and Solar “Renewables” aren’t effective power sources:  they are only ever intermittent fuel-savers.
Anyone who thinks that is a good idea to replace power generators working consistently at ~90% productivity 24/7/365 with technologies that are unreliable and intermittent must be in error or malign.  The measured, Weather-Dependent “Renewables productivity” is less than ~18%.  
The low productivity of Weather-Dependent “Renewables” means that installations must be about 5-6 times bigger to contribute the same power to the Grid.  Were their installation costs were equivalent, (they are not), the cost of their power is more than conventional gas, coal and even nuclear technologies.
They are dependent on massive subsidies and are very destructive of the environment and wildlife.  
Burning fossil fuels produces Carbon Dioxide CO2, but its warming effectiveness is radically diminished at higher concentrations.  

Any future Man-made CO2 can now only make a minor contribution to Global temperature.  Were CO2 important, Gas-firing has half the CO2 emissions of Coal and about a quarter of imported biomass.  

https://edmhdotme.wpcomstaging.com/minimal-future-warming-from-co2-ch4-n2o/

CO2 is essential Plant Food, its rise in the atmosphere has resulted in a massive increase in crop productivity worldwide.  So, rising CO2 levels reduces the need for agricultural land.  
Having damaged its industrial base, the UK only produces ~0.8% of Global CO2 emissions.  It is irrelevant compared to CO2 output from the Developing world.

Reply to  emhmailmaccom
March 27, 2026 9:03 am

intermittent fuel-savers

I like that

MarkW
Reply to  Redge
March 27, 2026 10:54 am

Intermittent is true, fuel-savers, less so.
The problem is that fossil fuel plants need to be kept in warm standby so that they can take over when wind and solar fail. This means that while they aren’t burning as much fuel as they would have, had they been producing power. They are still burning fuel.

KevinM
Reply to  emhmailmaccom
March 27, 2026 12:26 pm

The low productivity of Weather-Dependent “Renewables” means that installations must be about 5-6 times bigger to contribute the same power to the Grid.

Needs qualification: Bigger capacity or bigger real estate?
The sentence is unfixable in general because it says there could be such thing as “contribute the same power to the Grid“. I agree with the comment thesis, just this one sentence is troubled.

MarkW
Reply to  KevinM
March 27, 2026 1:45 pm

Another point is that having more wind mills in the same general area doesn’t do much good when the doldrums hit and wind power goes away for entire regions.
The only solution is to cover the whole planet with turbines and solar panels and then wire the whole world together so that power can be passed from the few places that are making it to the many places that need it.

As for nature? There’s always zoos and museums.

GeorgeInSanDiego
Reply to  MarkW
March 27, 2026 8:41 pm

And they charged the people
A dollar and a half just to see ’em

Sweet Old Bob
March 27, 2026 6:18 am

Poor whining loosers!

Let them eat cake !

😉

Jono1066
Reply to  Sweet Old Bob
March 27, 2026 12:01 pm

Noooo !
only some cake ? certainly not yellow cake. we need that for nuclear

mleskovarsocalrrcom
March 27, 2026 6:19 am

More feeling the pinch of unreliable and costly renewables. Unfortunately Canada is so far up the Globalist butt no one is listening.

Bruce Cobb
March 27, 2026 6:32 am

So what ATCO is saying is:
“Wa-wa–waaaaaaaaaa!

Mr.
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
March 27, 2026 7:01 am

which is socialist language for
“gimme more of that other people’s money!”

March 27, 2026 6:37 am

Alberta has a long history with wind farms and solar fields. The original Pincher creek farms were decommissioned a decade ago because they were 20 years old and maintenance costs resulted in loss of power revenue being less costly than repairing them. For a decade 3/4 of the wind projects in Canada were in Alberta. There are wind farms 1/2 a hour drive from anywhere in the province. Locals complain about eyesores and now object to the developments on principle…the cost of electricity doubled mostly tricky-style with rider fees, administration fees, distribution fee surcharges, whatever names the profiteers can conjure…the system was privatized in such a way that wind farms got paid while real generators had to bid themselves to the bottom. Alberta’s energy engineers know when to say no, and the wind farm business knows when to farm subsidies elsewhere, except for apparently David Vonesh.

Reply to  DMacKenzie
March 27, 2026 11:35 am

“The original Pincher creek farms were decommissioned a decade ago…”

Were they removed and the site restored?

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
March 28, 2026 7:56 am

Yes, they were too close to the beautiful tourist areas of Waterton Lakes Park on the Canadian side and Glacier Park on the U.S. side to leave as eyesores.

heme212
March 27, 2026 6:37 am

solar should only, ever have been small scale rooftop installs.

Petey Bird
Reply to  heme212
March 27, 2026 7:42 am

Well, yes, but rooftop operators should pay the full cost of disposing of their surplus energy.

Reply to  Petey Bird
March 27, 2026 9:45 am

It just doesn’t cost much to short it to ground…

MarkW
Reply to  Petey Bird
March 27, 2026 10:57 am

They should also pay full cost for installation and disposal, not to mention they should only get wholesale for the power they generate, not retail.

heme212
Reply to  MarkW
March 27, 2026 6:10 pm

lol. if i displace half my consumption, you can’t stop me from getting a retail price.

hiskorr
Reply to  heme212
March 27, 2026 6:40 pm

Well, yes they can! While your KWH consumption may be cut in half, your fixed-cost expense to the provider (transmission, maintenance, overhead) may earn you a higher cost/KWH rate!

heme212
Reply to  Petey Bird
March 27, 2026 5:51 pm

i have plenty of dump loads, but if i scale my install correctly, i’ll never need them

Robbradleyjr
Reply to  heme212
March 28, 2026 12:51 pm
sidabma
March 27, 2026 6:40 am

That last paragraph Said it all “ without subsidies” this industry can’t survive. Alberta is smarter than a lot of America – they are cutting off the snakes head before it strikes again and takes billions more.

Reply to  sidabma
March 27, 2026 7:17 am

Wind and solar unable to survive without massive subsidies. MyUserNameReloaded hardest hit.

Reply to  Fraizer
March 27, 2026 7:41 am

Nah, I’m fine – have you seen how nations now scramble to build more renewables and move to EVs? Thanks trump 😛

meocsuxzngrg1
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 9:13 am

“Nah, I’m fine”

everything-is-fine-memes
Reply to  Mr.
March 27, 2026 10:26 am

A random canadian politian held a speech. Now that will show the world. I can hear all the solar panels in Pakistan explode. The Hornsea wind turbines drowned themselves. Skellefteå just vanisehd from the map.

And Einstein clapped.

Bryan A
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 10:16 am

China can keep the Green Energy CRAP!

Mr.
Reply to  Bryan A
March 27, 2026 1:38 pm

China makes and installs wind & solar as their showrooms for naive westerners with taxpayers’ money to blow.

If it wasn’t such an earner for them, they’d probably stick to making packet noodles.

Leon de Boer
Reply to  Bryan A
March 28, 2026 7:51 am

China doesn’t believe in the renewable garbage either

They have the largest strategic Oil Reserve of any nation
https://discoveryalert.com.au/china-oil-stockpiling-strategic-reserve-framework-2025/

It built into the next 5 year plan
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/china-targets-steady-oil-output-more-gas-stockpiling-five-year-plan-2026-03-05/
You can also read about there natural gas plan to 2030 and beyond

If they really believed the green dream they would have the smallest and be phasing out FF.

MarkW
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 10:58 am

No sane person wants to beat anyone in green energy tech. It’s a complete waste of money.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 11:37 am

“nations now scramble to build more renewables and move to industrial collapse and poverty”

Fixed it.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 12:41 pm

Renewable investment drop of 68% in Australia.

The niche is full, uneconomic to add any more renewables because prices are near zero when they can produce.

EV slump in Australia and USA.. virtue-signalling niche is nearly full.

And USA should all be thanking Trump for getting rid of much of the parasitic wind and solar that has all but destroyed the electricity systems of UK, Germany etc.

strativarius
March 27, 2026 7:06 am

Solar/Wind Bust (uneconomic energy hits political risk)

They should have spoken with the mad Friar for sage counsel and advice….

Tip: Lidl is a German owned low cost supermarket giant

Lidl to sell £400 plug-in solar panels – here’s everything you need to know
The government is bringing cheap, DIY solar power to the high street in a bid to slash household energy bills The Independent

The average punter in Lidl might find £400 a bit of a stretch even if they do believe in the climate thing.

Rather than drill and/or frack this is the Miliband answer; Chinese solar panels in the middle aisle. Why do they insist on sucking up to China? I think we know.

Reply to  strativarius
March 27, 2026 7:35 am

Factcheck: Nine false or misleading myths about North Sea oil and gas


https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-nine-false-or-misleading-myths-about-north-sea-oil-and-gas/

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 9:08 am

LMAO

How clueless can one person be?

MarkW
Reply to  Redge
March 27, 2026 11:03 am

When being clueless is one’s job, there’s no limit to the depths they can plumb.

Reply to  Redge
March 27, 2026 12:50 pm

We all have to realise that…

Carbonbriefs is the number one site for climate propaganda and misinformation.

If a person is totally ignorant, clueless and gullible, they can fall for their gibberish.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 9:43 am

Have a word with the Norwegians and ask them how they managed to build their huge Sovereign Wealth Fund.

Reply to  Dave Andrews
March 27, 2026 10:29 am

The only ones who did it right – and didn’t get invaded by the US for it. Most oil ressources in other countries made only a few rich.

But we have 2026 now, so ask Norwegians about their EVs and heat pumps.

MarkW
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 11:04 am

More myths from the master of unreality.
Fossil fuels made everyone rich. Both directly and indirectly.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 12:46 pm

so ask Norwegians about their EVs and heat pumps.”

All funded by North Sea Oil. 🙂

Mr.
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 1:44 pm

Norway is the Saudi Arabia of Europe.

Sell their oil & gas to anyone who wants it, live the easy high life off the proceeds, and virtue-signal by buying an electric appliance or conveyance here and there for show.

MarkW
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 11:02 am

More socialists who still believe that reality is determined by press releases from party headquarters.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 27, 2026 11:43 am

from that link:

“Overall, the transition to clean-energy supplies is expected to be far more effective at boosting UK energy security and reducing reliance on imports.”

not counting the import of solar panels and wind mill components every 15-20 years

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
March 27, 2026 11:45 am

And:

“Moreover, the climate-change arguments for limiting fossil-fuel production, which have been made by scientists, the UN secretary general and even the Pope, remain as valid as ever.”

SOME scientists and of course the UN Boss and the Pope, they really know climate science, right?

Petey Bird
Reply to  strativarius
March 27, 2026 7:47 am

I am curious as to how these panels provide any benefit. Do they get paid for the output which is produced when they are likely not consuming energy?

ResourceGuy
March 27, 2026 8:10 am

Not to worry, other Canadians made money off Biden tax credit programs for wind power transmission lines to nowhere. The governors of NM and AZ even applauded the effort for tax credit mining across the desert with bulldozers and crushed habitat.

Mr.
Reply to  ResourceGuy
March 27, 2026 9:24 am

Was that the deal where thousands of centuries-old Joshua Trees were bulldozed to make way for transmissions lines for wind & solar farms that nobody was commissioned to build or operate?

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Mr.
March 27, 2026 3:25 pm

The SunZia line was built to benefit remote wind power on high plateaus in remote parts of NM but the main benefit went to the harvesters of the tax credits.

Rud Istvan
March 27, 2026 8:56 am

Good example of FAFO.

March 27, 2026 9:10 am

“this should be a major wake up call for ALL Albertans that want to see investment of ANY kind in this province.”

yes, it means that investors need to understand the income streams of the entities they invest in. If your business requires subsidies it’s not profitable.Don’t invest in non-profitable businesses.

See how easy that was?

youcantfixstupid
March 27, 2026 10:06 am

Even more direct “We’re really mad that you aren’t going to give us our money for providing 0 benefit. Yeah we know we’re a scam but you fell for it so keep paying!”

ResourceGuy
March 27, 2026 2:00 pm

Maybe Canadian dear leaders can also explain this discovery….

story tip

Scientists found a rhino in the Arctic and it changes everything | ScienceDaily

Edward Katz
March 27, 2026 2:06 pm

It’s good to see Alberta has recognized the limitations of renewables and is curtailing its commitment to them. Contrast this Quebec , which has been overly-zealous to embrace them, not because they are superior energy sources but because the rest of Canada and the US is still adopting them only cautiously because they’re aware of their limitations. Meanwhile Quebec doesn’t hesitate to show its hypocrisy by importing overseas oil from countries with much looser environmental standards than any North American jurisdictions.

Tony Tea
March 27, 2026 3:04 pm

What a whiney leech.

observa
March 27, 2026 6:48 pm

Hippiedom101- The rain that falls from the sky is free from Gaia so why aren’t my water bills?

First Home Buyer- You want what for a compulsory piddling rainwater tank to save a bit of water off the roof!-
Rainwater tank plumbing guide

March 28, 2026 1:44 pm

Finally, after 40 years of moronic policy, the loses are so large as to initiate a real energy transition.