Positive Energy

The concepts of regulatory independence and effectiveness are under tremendous pressure. In recent decades, energy-decision makers have had to grapple with a rapidly expanding slate of economic, environmental and social issues. Looking ahead thirty years, Canada is committed to achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Successfully charting this future will depend in considerable measure on whether public energy decision systems – including regulators – are up to the job. Positive Energy Executive-in-Residence Mike Cleland and Positive Energy Chair Dr. Monica Gattinger are the co-authors of a brand-new report entitled Energy Project Decision Systems for Net Zero: Designing for Functionality, Adaptability and Legitimacy. They join the podcast to discuss what needs to change within Canada’s regulatory ecosystem to make net-zero by 2050 a reality. For more on Positive Energy, please visit our website: https://www.uottawa.ca/positive-energy/

Over the last forty years, proposals for Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) projects have appeared around the globe, with mixed success. Most never obtain adequate funding or permits, but some proceed to a final investment decision and then commissioning. In Canada there are very few academic or public policy studies on LNG investment or which factors influence final investment decisions. Andrew Pickford's latest research for Positive Energy aims to fill that gap by addressing part of the larger question of “who decides and how?” when it comes to energy projects. He joins the podcast to discuss his new study, which compares the experiences of British Columbia and Western Australia in achieving positive final investment decisions in the LNG sector. Pickford discusses the implications for the future of LNG, renewable megaprojects, and the pathway to net-zero emissions. Please visit our website for more on the University of Ottawa Positive Energy program.

Energy regulators have been vital to public policy for over a century, both as hubs of technical expertise and as deliberative bodies capable of looking beyond electoral cycles. Under this paradigm, Canadian regulators have emerged as reputable decision-makers and enforcers of the public interest. The concept of “regulatory independence” is central to this arrangement: independent, arm’s-length, trusted. But the dynamics inside and outside of the sector are changing. New environmental imperatives, greater calls for public participation, broader consideration of Indigenous rights, and greater political fragmentation and polarization are all reshaping the roles and responsibilities of regulators and testing the concept of independence in new ways. How did we get here? Positive Energy Research Associate Ian T.D. Thomson joins the podcast to share his findings on the concept of regulatory independence based on historical case studies of five Canadian energy regulators and what his research means for Canada's energy future in an age of climate change.

Canada’s energy regulators are operating in increasingly dynamic contexts that do not lend themselves to a stable and predictable regulatory environment. Institutional and regulatory innovation will be vital to catch up and keep up with the pace of change and multiple competing imperatives. Where have we seen successful innovations in energy regulatory systems? How can we scale them up across Canada? Our guest is Dr. Patricia Larkin, a Senior Research Associate with Positive Energy. Her latest study explores these questions and is now available on the Positive Energy website.

How has COVID-19 affected Canadians' attitudes towards climate action? The sense of urgency appears to be trending up. Nik Nanos returns to the podcast to discuss results from the latest Positive Energy/Nanos quarterly tracking survey, including the appetite for climate ambition and levels of public trust in different information sources. Full survey results are available here

Energy and environmental policy cover both provincial and federal jurisdiction, which makes it fertile ground for conflict. In particular, the onset of climate change has intensified disagreements around energy and environmental policy between the provinces and the federal government. Dr. Duane Bratt joins us to discuss the history of energy federalism, the complexities that can arise, and charting a productive path forward.

What are the respective roles and responsibilities between policymakers, regulators, the courts, municipalities and Indigenous governments when it comes to energy and climate decision-making? Clearly articulating and strengthening these relationships is one of the most pivotal but understudied factors shaping our collective energy and climate future. Dr. Monica Gattinger returns to the podcast to discuss this crucial question, which forms the basis for a new stream of research at Positive Energy. For more information about Positive Energy, please visit our website.

Positive Energy research affiliate Andrew Pickford joins Ian T.D. Thomson to discuss Australian experiences of energy issues, federalism and policy debates. He examines similarities and differences between Australia and Canada and how these qualities influence our respective debates, particularly as they relate to the outlook for liquified natural gas. Andrew Pickford is a Strategic Analyst working between Australia and North America in the areas of strategy, economic analysis and energy with a range of private and public organizations. He is a Senior Fellow at both the International Strategic Studies Association and the University of Alberta's China Institute, and an Adjunct Research Fellow at the University of Western Australia, where he is completing his Ph.D. For more information about Positive Energy, please visit our website.

Ian T. D. Thomson talks with Dr. Marisa Beck, Research Director at the University of Ottawa's Institute for Science, Society and Policy and Positive Energy. The discussion spotlights her latest report for Positive Energy, “What is ‘Transition’? The Two Realities of Energy and Environmental Leaders in Canada”. The paper examines how energy and environmental leaders use and interpret the term “transition”, and observes that differences in their views over how to address climate change constitute two separate “realities”. For more information on the report, please visit the Positive Energy website.

Ian T. D. Thomson talks with Positive Energy Faculty Affiliates Professor Stephen Bird of Clarkson University and Professor Erick Lachapelle of the Université de Montréal. Their latest survey report, co-authored with Dr. Monica Gattinger, examines the extent of polarization over energy and environmental issues in Canada. This includes distinguishing between polarized and fragmented opinion on key topics like the national carbon tax, pipelines and energy transition. The survey assesses attitudes towards energy and environment across several demographic groupings, including political affiliation, region and age. For more information on Positive Energy's public opinion survey research, please visit the Positive Energy website.

Ian T. D. Thomson talks with Positive Energy Faculty Affiliates Professor Stephen Bird of Clarkson University and Professor Erick Lachapelle of the Université de Montréal. Their latest survey report, co-authored with Dr. Monica Gattinger, examines the extent of polarization over energy and environmental issues in Canada. This includes distinguishing between polarized and fragmented opinion on key topics like the national carbon tax, pipelines and energy transition. The survey assesses attitudes towards energy and environment across several demographic groupings, including political affiliation, region and age. For more information on Positive Energy's public opinion survey research, please visit the Positive Energy website.

Ian T. D. Thomson continues his interview with Positive Energy Research Team member Duane Bratt, Professor and Chair of the Department of Economics, Justice, and Policy Studies at Mount Royal University. Dr. Bratt discusses the legacy of Alberta's Climate Leadership Plan (CLP), including its ongoing influence on federal climate policies. Positive Energy will publish Dr. Bratt’s case study in the coming weeks as part of its ‘What Works’ case study series exploring various efforts to address polarization over energy and climate.

Ian T. D. Thomson interviews Positive Energy Research Team member Duane Bratt, Professor and Chair of the Department of Economics, Justice, and Policy Studies at Mount Royal University. Dr. Bratt discusses the history of the Alberta Climate Leadership Plan (CLP): an ambitious policy program developed by the previous NDP government to address climate change in the oil and gas-rich province. Positive Energy will publish Dr. Bratt’s case study in the coming weeks as part of its ‘What Works’ case study series exploring various efforts to address polarization over energy and climate.

Ian T. D. Thomson interviews Nik Nanos, Chair and CEO of Nanos Research and Chair of Positive Energy's Advisory Council. Mr. Nanos discusses two opinion surveys developed by Nanos Research in collaboration with Positive Energy. One survey examines Canadian public opinion on climate and energy issues; the other explores expert opinion on the topics.

Earlier this month, Positive Energy hosted a debate to examine and address polarization in Canadian politics, in particular its effects on energy decision-making. The question: Can Canada better meet its future energy, environmental, social and economic needs with large projects and system-wide approaches, or local projects and community approaches? The debate featured four experts with diverse and extensive experience on energy issues across Canada. Arguing for large projects and system-wide approaches were Mike Cleland, Senior Fellow with Positive Energy, and Shannon Joseph, Vice President of Government Relations for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. Arguing for local projects and community approaches were Chris Henderson, President of Lumos Energy, and Tonja Leach, Executive Director of Quality Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow (QUEST). The debate was moderated by Shawn McCarthy, a journalist and Senior Counsel at Sussex Strategies. For more information on the December debate, please visit the Positive Energy website.

Today on the program, Nik Nanos’ keynote address from Positive Energy’s October 7th Conference is highlighted. Entitled “DIVIDED? Polarization and Canada’s Energy Future in an Age of Climate Change”, The conference convened senior leaders from business, government, Indigenous communities, civil society and the academy to examine and address polarization in Canadian politics, in particular its effects on energy decision-making. Nik Nanos is the Chair and CEO of Nanos Research as well as Chair of the University of Ottawa’s Positive Energy Initiative. In his keynote, Mr. Nanos highlighted new survey research. This survey work - now available on Positive Energy’s website - examined public opinion as well as energy expert opinion on Canada’s energy and climate policies. Video recordings of the keynote and of the other discussions from the conference, are available on ISSP UOttawa’s YouTube Channel.

Ian T. D. Thomson talks with Michael Cleland, Senior Fellow, Positive Energy, uOttawa, about his latest article for Energy Regulation Quarterly. Mr. Cleland discusses Canada’s climate change history, the importance of vocabulary used in Canada’s energy debate, and the evolving role of institutions in climate and energy policy.  Read Mr. Cleland's piece, co-authored with Positive Energy Chair Monica Gattinger

Welcome to the new Positive Energy podcast.  In our debut episode, Ian T.D. Thomson talks with Professor Monica Gattinger, Chair of Positive Energy and Director of the Institute for Science, Society and Policy, University of Ottawa, about why Canada’s dialogue around energy and climate issues has become polarized—and what we can do about it. For more on Positive Energy's new report,  Canada’s Energy Future in an Age of Climate Change,  please visit the Positive Energy website.