Is Canada Wasting Its Energy Advantage? | Doomberg on Oil, LNG, and the Pipeline Future

Is the real energy crisis a shortage of molecules — or a shortage of common sense?

In this high-stakes episode of Power Struggle, energy commentator Doomberg returns to break down Canada’s position on the global energy chessboard. From Venezuela’s heavy crude to Alberta’s untapped potential, he argues Canada should be a global energy powerhouse — if only it could get out of its own way.

With host Stewart Muir, Doomberg explores:

• Why Venezuela’s oil isn’t the threat it seems
• What Trump’s second term means for pipelines
• How Canada’s LNG timing still matters — and why it’s not too late
• Why Saskatchewan is a “hidden gem” in global resource politics
• The risks of land uncertainty and climate narratives in B.C.
• Why Canada must diversify beyond a single trading partner

This episode goes beyond headlines, cutting through spin to expose the physics and economics behind energy decisions that shape our future.

Don’t miss this unfiltered perspective on what’s really driving energy geopolitics — and what Canada must do to stay in the game.

Watch more at: https://resourceworks.com

The energy conversation is polarizing. But the reality is multidimensional. Get the full story with host Stewart Muir.

Reach out to us with thoughts, questions, or ideas at info@powerstruggle.ca

Linkedin
Instagram
Facebook
Twitter

🎧 For audio versions of our podcast visit powerstruggle.ca and listen on the go in your favourite podcast app!
Video available on Power Struggle’s YouTube! https://www.youtube.com/@PowerStrugglePod

Chapters

• 0:00 Setting The Stakes And Guest Intro
• 2:03 Molecules Or Physics: The Real Crisis
• 3:40 Venezuela’s Heavy Crude And U.S. Refineries
• 5:20 Pipelines, Kearney, And Canadian Diversification
• 7:19 Is Venezuela A Threat Or A Mirror?
• 10:31 Trump Year One: Energy And Headline Risk
• 15:25 Transactional Power And American Exceptionalism
• 19:27 Donro Doctrine And Canada’s Role
• 22:58 Explaining Canada’s Energy Identity
• 26:37 LNG Timing Myths And Long-Term Bets
• 29:00 Saskatchewan’s Resource Edge
• 33:22 Property Rights Uncertainty In B.C.
• 37:09 Clean Vs Dirty: Trade-Offs, Not Morals
• 42:00 Grids That Work: Nuclear, Hydro, Gas
• 46:05 Trade-Offs From Dams To Nuclear Risk
• 49:55 Global South Reality And Coal
• 52:40 Briefing Carney: Hedging With China

Transcript

SPEAKER_00: 0:11

Hi, I'm Stuart Muir, and this is the Power Struggle Podcast. Today's guest is Doomberg, one of the most widely read independent voices on energy, markets, and geopolitics anywhere in the world. Through a hugely influential Substack publication and frequent media appearances, Doomberg has built a reputation for cutting through conventional narratives, focusing on the forces that actually drive the global economy, energy, supply chains, and power. Oh, did I mention physics? His work is followed closely by investors, policymakers, and industry leaders for its clear-eyed analysis of oil and gas markets, geopolitical risk, and the unintended consequences of energy policies. Today we're bringing that outside perspective to Canada to talk about Venezuela, the United States energy dominance, Canadian competitiveness, and what our energy sector looks like from global chessboard. Welcome back to Power Struggle Doomberg.

SPEAKER_01: 1:04

Come on. Thanks for the kind words. Always enjoy our conversation. Congrats on the um momentum the Power Struggle Podcast is building. Glad to have played a small part of it early on and uh looking forward to another great discussion today.

SPEAKER_00: 1:18

Well, thanks. Your your time is at a premium. Your your counsel is some of the most valued. Really feeling lucky to have you back today. You know, most people look at a barrel of oil, they see a dollar sign or a political statement or something to do with climate. You know, Dunberg, you look at it and see a specific density of energy. I get your sub stack. I really enjoy getting your newsletter every week. It comes in, and I just always learn something. Your perspective on modern life being made possible through this. And I just before we dive into a whole bunch of hot topics, you know, we're it's a few days, just timing-wise. Um, right now as we sit here, it's a few days before the first year anniversary of the swearing in of Donald J. Trump in his second term as U.S. president. A lot going on in the world. But before we dive into things, tell me, is the biggest crisis in energy today a lack of molecules, or is it just maybe a lack of basic high school physics among the people in charge?

SPEAKER_01: 2:15

Yeah, great question. Uh there's certainly no lack of molecules. Um the long-term real price of all commodities is lower. This is a counterintuitive sort of mental model that we've been working with since the beginning of Domberg. Um, there's an enormous amount of hydrocarbons under the earth. Um, the earth itself is bombarded by a relentless supply of solar energy. Um, there's an infinite supply of uranium, and we know how to extract energy from that. Um looking broadly across the globe today, the physical markets, um, at least the ones that matter, are extraordinarily well supplied. Um prices are um, as measured in, say, ounces of gold, as cheap as they've ever been. And um, the real crisis is a crisis of knowledge. Um, you know, as Western society has evolved, there's been a separation between the flicking of the light switch and an understanding uh of where the energy behind the machines that power um the lights actually comes from. And that's a true luxury of the rich. Um when cultures and societies forget the basics of physics, they're often shocked back to reality. And I I think we're a we're a few geopolitical crises away from that happening again. Trevor Burrus, Jr.

SPEAKER_00: 3:40

In the oil world, Venezuela's heavy crude oil is often called the perfect substitute for Alberta's bitumen, which is the largest export, period, of Canada. Now, with the Trump administration signaling a massive push to revitalize Venezuelan fields, should we be worried here in Canada?

SPEAKER_01: 4:02

Yeah, it's a great question. It's uh certainly one that is top of mind of many Canadians. I wouldn't say that Venezuelan crude is a perfect fit to substitute for Western Canadian select, um, often sold at a discount to that product. Um there's no question that the U.S. Gulf Coast Refinery Network was built with Venezuelan heavy crude in mind, but not necessarily the heaviest of the heavies that are coming out of Venezuela today. Um that is a relatively modern phenomenon. Um historically, Venezuela peaked out at around 4 million barrels per day. And um it's under one million barrels a day. This compares to Canada, which is roughly around six. It's gonna take an awful long time for Venezuela to add quarter million barrel a day increments to its current supply. Um and I think the main outcome of the rather shocking extraction of Maduro that the Trump administration has done. I mean, I it's easy to let such events become normalized. It is it is not a normal thing what has transpired. Um nonetheless, I think the the proximate outcome, the most pressing outcome for Canadians is this proposed pipeline is going to get urgently approved. Um, we've written about Canada a lot. We were one of the first to predict Kearney's rise. Um probably the best call we've made in a while. And um the overarching motivation to have made that call is the the sort of the physics, the thermodynamics of having to unstick Alberta's energy. It's just unnatural that a global energy superpower like Alberta and British Columbia and Saskatchewan, you know, that Western Canadian region would be so beholden to one customer. And so um to the extent that Kearney is Nixon going to China, um Kearney has to be the one to stare down the climate change movement. And we think that um the the Orangan bad boogeyman and his actions in Venezuela is bullish for pipeline construction companies, engineering firms, midstreamers, um, because that pipeline is going to get built. And the objections of uh the environmentalists um are going to be steamrolled now. If the trade war wasn't uh a big enough catalyst um for the Canadian uh leadership to realize the need to diversify, uh certainly what has transpired in Venezuela, uh I suspect, um, will push them over the line.

SPEAKER_00: 6:29

Aaron Powell Your predictions are generally bankable. And you've often said that energy is about moving mass, because you do reduce things to uh uh sheer physics and things that could be measured and counted. Uh Canada has plenty of energy, but it's had poor luck building pipelines that give access to the world's growth markets, by which, of course, uh I mean Asia. And Venezuela, they have sway to build what they want to build. But it's a broken country. So uh forming that into a question, Dumerg, is the Venezuelan threat to Canadian producers if there is one? And you've uh introduced some cautions on this. Is it a 2026 problem if it's a problem, or is it a 2036 problem that we'll be maybe worrying about over the longer term and it's not as urgent?

SPEAKER_01: 7:18

I don't even actually necessarily view it as a problem. Um look, Canadians tend to be hard on themselves for a country uh with with your population to produce six million barrels a day and twenty billion BCF per day of natural gas. Um six million barrels a day of oil, twenty BCF per day of natural gas is an impressive feat. Um top five global energy producer, uh at least as measured by hydrocarbon energy, world-class nuclear fleet, world-class um hydroelectricity in Ontario and Quebec, um especially in Quebec. Um there's lots to be proud of of Canada's energy policy. Um there's much optimization to be had for sure. I think there's you know, one of the things that we try to um uh push through to our uh predominantly American subscriber base, who rarely thinks about Canada, is um the sort of relatively metastable state of Canadian borders and the challenges within Canadian politics and you know, the Western culture versus Quebec versus the Maritimes versus Newfoundland, Newfoundland and Labrador and then Ontario and the you know, this stuff is real, it matters, um, it impacts things. Canada has a lot of maturation to do as a country still, uh a lot of old wounds to heal with the indigenous people and so on. Um but correcting for all of that, I mean just compare the arc of Venezuela to Canada, you correctly identify Venezuela as, quote, a broken country, and by definition and by comparison, Canada is the opposite of that. And so there's always room for optimization. Um but Canada does a lot well. Now we would argue, given Canada's enormous natural resource base, that the average Canadian should be far richer. Um and the the fact that they aren't is a is the genesis of political tensions. Um, you know, both the the the mean and the median you know net worth of of average Canadian citizen should be much higher. Um there's no reason why Canada can't be Norway if you know managed a little more competently. And there's no question that Canada's a tough beast to tame just given the size and cultural diversity that exists and the complex history that led to its formation and to its borders changing and and so on. And so I I I think um being quite familiar with Canada, we're one of the rare sort of US-based publications that is, I think, which gives us an advantage in securing a healthy dose of Canadian subscribers, and we're quite happy to have all of them. Um you know Canadians tend to be a little hard on themselves. Um it's hard to live under the cultural bright light of your southern neighbors. Um but at the same time, there's you know, especially we have many conservative subscribers and and they think we're far too upbeat about Canada. We think the prospects of Canada are quite good. Um institutions are very strong, and and it all depends on your reference point. And so um I would argue if you put the reference point of Venezuela being a broken country, Canada looks great. And um, there's some fine-tuning to do at the edges, but um, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

SPEAKER_00: 10:27

Good thing to hear. I appreciate that. Um bigger picture. We're just a few days short now of the one-year anniversary of Donald Trump's swearing-in and return to the White House. What just happened uh in this year, and there's three more years to go. Where are we headed?

SPEAKER_01: 10:42

Yeah, you know, as a content creator, um Trump is both, you know, nectar from the gods and one of the most frustrating things about our life because he is a walking giant headline risk. You know, we're we we have to research, write, publish, promote, um, and defend a piece every four days, and nothing worse than getting a piece into edit, and then a headline crosses that makes the piece either irrelevant or wrong because Trump has zigged again when you're writing about his latest zag. Um he's a very complex figure, and I don't want to sugarcoat it. He is everything his critics and his biggest supporters say he is. Um he is uh the guy who hires Chris Wright as Secretary of Energy and hopes to spark a nuclear renaissance and is laying the groundwork for American energy dominance and resonates with blue-collar workers in the de-industrialized US Midwest in a way that no retail politician has ever been able to achieve. And he's the guy who launched Trump Coin three days before his inauguration, and he's the guy who did Trump University, which is just undeniably a fraud. And there's all manner of um uncouth things that he says. I think his use of social media is shocking. He's all of those things. And um he's an incredibly polarizing figure. Um but additionally, you have to understand that the Canadian media machine, the British media machine, the European media machine goes into overdrive to accentuate the bad about Trump and hardly ever, if ever, um gives the man any due for the good decisions that he makes. And so um it's easy to have an extreme opinion on him. Um but I I would say that um we're entering a pretty dangerous phase. Um his greatest supporters don't realize that the precedence he sets can ricochet back uh to them. Um the US political situation is entering a very dangerous phase. Um the US has started arresting former presidents as a mental model we've been grappling with for the past year. Uh once Trump was arrested. You know, uh that was a a a serious line that was crossed. For all of his bluster, Trump did not pursue Hillary Clinton legally after he won the 2016 election, for example. Um and once you start arresting former presidents, it's really hard to stop. Um and that's because um retribution is irresistible. And when you have a situation like the US where you start arresting former presidents, it means the incumbents don't want to leave. Um I can assure you that a shockingly high number of the current sitting cabinet members of the Trump administration will end up in jail if the Democrats take over in 2028. Um that's just a path that the US is on, and Trump has has contributed to that um in the past year. Perhaps understandably if you're a super fan of his, but at the same time um, you know, we we seem to be crossing serious lines. Um so for example, Trump's comment that um international law means nothing to him and that he is only bound by his own internal moral compass. Um it's a pretty dangerous thing to say.

SPEAKER_00: 14:12

Yes, where does that lead?

SPEAKER_01: 14:14

Well, it leads to law of the jungle. Mighty is right. Yeah. Um and the the challenge with that, by the way, if you're an American listener, is uh there's some other strong animals in the jungle. Like the US wildly overestimates its geopolitical power. Um and we say this as as a team who lives in the US, and our American subscribers don't like it when we say that. But China's a very strong country. Russia's a very strong country. If if the rules of international law are to be completely cast aside, unless you're willing to escalate to nuclear war, that opens up all manner of unpleasant outcomes for the U.S.

SPEAKER_00: 14:57

As we try to understand this further, and we've now got uh quite a phase to to do that. One thing I wanted to ask you about, because of your background on Wall Street, the uh financial uh mindset, we're hearing a lot about Howard Lutnick, and I know he's not the only one with that perspective who's uh influential in the White House, and Donald Trump himself is from that world of um, you know, that that flinty uh New York approach in which you've been steeped. Uh what's to understand about how uh Howard Lutnick sees a candidate or sees anyone he might be doing business with?

SPEAKER_01: 15:36

Yeah, so great question. Um he is one of many characters in the Trump um cabinet. I I I would say, again, to give Trump his due, there are many talented people in his cabinet. Um people with significant business experience, um self-made billionaires who you know earned it through building great companies and remunerating their investors and um and so on. Um Steve Whitcoff, for example, even though he's not formerly in the cabinet and not a member of the government, is a very successful uh businessman in his own right. And and these characters tend to get portrayed in the media in a way that is somewhat sometimes unfair to them. Um to broaden your question beyond Mr. Lugnant, um Trump views the world in a very transactional way. And um he is also a person um that can be influenced by ego. Um that that's pretty clear. Um we note with interest how he's received as he goes to these various countries, and the the glittier the the the statue they give him, the the better the deal is for the for those who welcome him. And and I think people play to that. But um Trump speaks in the language of transaction, of deal making, of you know, even when he's talking about uh going to war with Iran, you know, they better make a deal, you know, and be pretty happy to make a deal. Like Trump loves making deals. I think that's that's he is who he is. The thing about Trump is um he doesn't hide what he's thinking very well. And he speaks to the press all the time. And so if you get sort of used to listening to what he means, um it can be pretty clear what's going on. Last thing I would say he's also quite influenced by whoever has spoken to him last. So if you catch his ear just before a major decision, you you're gonna have a disproportionate impact on that decision. I think the evidence for that is is pretty clear. So Lutnick is um a transactional guy. Um throughout the entire administration is a strongly held view of American supremacy. Uh American exceptionalism, I guess, is is the academic phrase. Um and um very patriotic people, I think. Uh they genuinely believe that. Um last thing I would say is they all came of age in the 1980s when um the evidence for American exceptionalism was quite strong. You know, we wrote a piece describing this early on in Trump's administration called Hulkomania. 1985 was like peak Americana, right? You had Mike Tyson on the scene, the heavyweight champion, you had Hulk Hogan body slamming Andre the Giant at WrestleMania. You know, you had um you know the American auto industry was off the mat and fighting back against Japan. And you had Ronald Reagan and um Mr.

SPEAKER_00: 18:26

T.

SPEAKER_01: 18:27

Mr. T and the A team. You know, this is this sort of he grew up with that. Um and and uh we'd like to say like Hulk Hogan's you know, may he rest in peace, is literally not walking through that door. Like the those days are gone and and and the rest of the world has caught up and in many ways surpassed the U.S. And you know how empires move down the podium is is is a is is historically a quite a very dangerous thing. And and that's we're in the thick of that today. And and in many ways, Trump's personality and and his path function um including the Russian fraud, I think it's a fraud, and and the 2020 election, which was quite controversial, and then his return, he's a very resilient person too. So he he he's he's a fascinating character. I think I I saw on Twitter like somebody posted that you know in 300 years Trump will be a mythical figure that nobody believed will have existed. And that's like a great way to find it.

SPEAKER_00: 19:24

Yes, I mean the the river of time here, there's some back eddies sometimes. And your reference makes me think about the return to uh the 1800s, the Monroe Doctrine, and now we're hearing about the Donro Doctrine, which in this conversation we're having, energy is about the chokehold, the energy chokehold on the Western hemisphere. I mean, if if the Trump administration treats the Americas, including Canada, as its private U.S. gas station, uh, what does it mean for a country like Canada that has prided itself as a special partner? I mean, so many of us in Canada have cousins. I have cut my American cousins. In Boston, to simply become another asset to be integrated based on the whim of the president. Wow, we're we're traveling through time here.

SPEAKER_01: 20:11

Yeah. Canada's always been torn between two great powers, um, the US and Great Britain, of course. And um neither of those great powers has always necessarily had the best interests of the average Canadian in mind throughout history. And um, you know, the current Prime Minister of Canada was the former head of the Bank of England, interesting interesting selection for the job, and that's what happened. Um and um Trump is is a temporary phenomenon is what I tried to uh explain to our subscribers and people we talk to in our private lives. Like one of the phenomena that we see in this sort of hyper short news cycle world, TikTok clickbait, internet-driven Twitter society is people tend to draw tangent lines to sine waves. You know, um things are going in a certain direction now, they will go in that direction forever. And um to everything there is a season, to every Trump there will be a counter. And um we try to coach people to not make irreversible mistakes um in how they behave, what they say, in their analysis. Like um don't forget, it was a year ago we had you know the the cadaver that is that is Joe Biden as the president of the United States. I I think these things change pretty quickly. Um who knows what would have happened if the the the bulletin Butler was an inch off, you know? Um and here we are. So he is a phenomenon. Um but I I I wouldn't I wouldn't get I wouldn't put too long term uh uh on on the current trajectory. The means have a way of regressing. Uh fundamentally, from a standpoint of physics, um the US and Canada are natural partners. Um as difficult as it is for Canadians to believe now, um there's a huge amount of cultural overlap between the countries. Um there is a huge amount of business that goes back and forth across the border. Um yes, like any sort of close relative, there's the occasional squabble. Um but thermodynamically um a close, highly functional relationship between the two countries is in the best interest of both countries. That relationship will persist beyond the current slate of leaders. And um, we are long-term bullish on North American prosperity if only because it is blessed with everything you need to be prosperous, and cultures that have a track record of wanting to be prosperous and and successfully achieving a level of prosperity that is the envy of the world.

SPEAKER_00: 23:01

That's encouraging. Um I'm looking at recent companies in Canada, some of oil sands companies that are fully Canadian, Sunovis, Suncore, Canadian Natural. They're talking about things in unison now a little more when you look at the investor presentations, for example, the um low decline, long life. This is something that's always been true of the oil sands. It's easily defined space. You know, there it is. Uh you you can point to it on the map. That's where the oil sands deposits are, that's where you go and mine them. Um but it's been a long time uh in bringing about this mentality about what it means uh to have the Canadian energy. Do you have any thoughts on how we can get greater broad public understanding of how there's something distinct and special about Canadian energy, uh Canadian oil in particular. I mean, you've written about this so often, I always look forward to your takes on it. But if we want to bring that to a wider audience, what's a way to do that?

SPEAKER_01: 24:00

Um one is that Canadians must finally have an honest conversation about climate alarmism. Um the average Canadian has been convinced that um their nation's natural bounty is a sin um in aggregate, more so than it is a a precious foundation upon which to increase the standards of living of the average Canadian. Um the the Canadian media, the traditional Canadian legacy Canadian media is is profoundly um impacted by very strong outside forces, predominantly the British, and I'm just going to say it. Um we read everybody's propaganda and the British is by far you know the worst of it, and it leaks into Canadian coverage. Um there's a couple of cultural aspects of Canada that um are great and also you know uh in the classic way, you know, your strength is your weakness. Um and of course when you talk about cultures you have to oversimplify and you risk offending, and so I'm gonna try to choose my words carefully, but Canada has a very strong um internal pride of a hard day's work. Lumberjacks and miners and you know, f fishing and and um there's pride in in a hard day's work and to live off the land and and that culture, especially in Western Canada, but also true in the Maritimes and and Ontario and Quebec. And but at the same time, that can run counter to the um sort of entrepreneurial innovative spirit that few would argue is is stronger in the US, right? And so when you talk about Canadian, 100% Canadian companies in in the oil and gas part of the economy feeling a little bolder in their investor presentations, that boldness comes far more naturally to an American entrepreneur than it does the average Canadian. There's humility uh in Canada. Um and so you know, you don't on on the on the the the the path from the average Canadian to Trump is probably a happier medium, where you you know the average Canadian sticks the chest out a little bit more and keeps the chin up a little higher, but at the same time is not necessarily you know from the Howard Lugnick school of negotiation. But um this this you know, the the the person I keep coming back to when I try to explain Canadians to um to our American friends is Stomp and Tom Connors, right? So what what is Stomp and Tom singing about? He's singing about labor. I mean Sudbury Saturday night is a bunch of miners blown off steam at a bar, right? Stomp and Tom lionizes labor. Um labor in Canada is good. Labor is is how you earn for your family, and you celebrate the holidays together after a hard day's work. You and and and in the US there's more of a focus on capital. Um and you know, the distance the the distinction between labor and capital is a real one, and it's easy for labor to convince itself that it's bad to be capital or that capital is unhappy, and you know, um there's more virtue in being labor than there is in greedy capitalism. And and that's just not ideal either. And I think again, um if if you ask me, you know, could the US toggle down the capital mindset a little bit? And sure, and but could Canada toggle it up a little bit? Um absolutely. And I I think the regulatory framework in Canada is just not inducive to capital formation. The mindset is just not quite at the level needed for capital to selectively choose Canada from the outside world to congregate. And so um, of course, very generalized statements. But that's our view of based on both cultures. I don't know if that resonates with you or what you think of what I just said.

SPEAKER_00: 27:50

Yes, and I I want to come back to how this translates to advice that you would give. Um but before getting there, I I just want to look at the current picture. We've got some LNG opportunities coming up, big ones on the West Coast. There's the MOU, you've referenced the the new pipeline that you say could be built, should be built, and you say will be built. So there is obviously some promise there. But one of the things we're constantly uh being told is that oh, your timing's off. Sorry, you missed the market, LNG, the prices are going to go down next year. So just don't bother Canada. You're you're too late to the party. The U.S. Gulf has taken it, Australia. So don't bother. Um I'm always inherently suspicious of that when I hear it because I think there's other interests at play when we're being told that. Uh what's your thought on it?

SPEAKER_01: 28:37

Yeah, you don't make um commodity investments based on the one-year strip price. Uh you know, these are immortal assets uh once they're built. And you make them for um decades-long strategic purposes. And so once you come to the conclusion that natural gas is the cleanest, burning, cheapest hydrocarbon on the board, at least in Western Canada via pipeline, in the Permian via pipeline, um and is every bit as competitive with oil on a dollars per million BTU basis, landed LNG in Europe. In fact, they trade in lockstep with each other because they do the same thing. They get burned to create heat to do work. Um does Canada want to be a major energy player beholden entirely to the U.S. Or does Canada want to be a major energy player that has a diversity of uh and customers? Or does Canada not want to be a major energy player at all and leave leave the hydrocarbons in the ground? Those seem to be the three choices on the board. And um, if I were uh solving for Canadian prosperity, I mean I think the answer is quite clear.

SPEAKER_00: 29:43

Now, often we see uh in the Canadian provinces, we see Ontario as the the uh engine room, that's where the manufacturing is, that's where the population base is. Alberta is where the energy is, it's entrepreneurial, it's getting things done. BC, it's the problem province because it's the barrier to markets. But recently you were talking about another province that doesn't come up when uh we're talking about Canadian provinces. Saskatchewan, you've been highly complimentary of their realist approach to energy transition issues. They're focused on uranium, which they have in abundance, their uh physics-based necessity, nuclear power that they supply uh uranium to the world. And and in your recent writings, Saskatchewan comes across as this rare pocket of sanity in a country that in the past decade especially grew hostile, as you said, to its own resource wealth. Um what's what's the charm of Saskatchewan to Dunberg?

SPEAKER_01: 30:42

Yeah, so um we wrote a piece called Tempting Target, which came out a week before Trump snatched Madura. And so um the the social media, the social preview to that piece was uh, you know, um Alberta, Venezuela, um, Greenland, sure, but don't sleep on Saskatchewan. And um when you just look at the resource per capita, Saskatchewan is one of the richest places on earth. Um a million and a quarter people in a province the size of Texas with you know world-beating potash deposits, uranium, like the best uranium deposits in the world, um amazing farmland, great timber up north. Um didn't even mention helium in that piece, and oversight on our part. Um oil and gas beginning to punch above its weight. Um you know, if you combine Alberta and Saskatchewan, and historically they they probably should have been, um and there's some question as to how it came to be that they were separated as provinces, you know, by the influence of the Eastern elite. It's the great boogeyman of Canadian history. Um and so um we wrote that piece um to bring Saskatchewan to the attention of the average American who who couldn't spell it for sure, and and probably couldn't find it on a map. Um everybody in the US not everybody, a fair number of people in the US know about Alberta, um, but shockingly few of them know about Saskatchewan, and and um we pride ourselves on catching things early. I think um the combination of Alberta and Saskatchewan seems inevitable. And were the separatist flames that are just beginning to flicker in both provinces begin to accelerate into an inferno, um not perhaps a complete joining of the U.S., but a renegotiating of the economics between those two provinces and the U.S. would seem to be something to keep your eye on. Um and so um we, you know, we can't just write um, you know, renewables bad every piece. We like to have a few off-the-wall uh cuts and some predictions. And and um we had been studying Saskatchewan for a while um and um decided to put pen to paper and put it onto the mascot.

SPEAKER_00: 33:12

Well done. And I think you've informed a lot of Canadians. We probably don't think about Saskatchewan as much as yeah we we should, especially here in Vancouver where I'm sitting, our port, it is the throughput for so much of the output of uh agri foods and uh uh uh different uh different Saskatchewan commodities, and we see it every day, except we don't really know it's there because it's it doesn't it's not labeled Saskatchewan.

SPEAKER_01: 33:38

You know, um I've traveled the world in my time in industry, and you know when you go to places like Saudi Arabia or Qatar, I mean the sidewalks are paved in coals. And when you go to the Paris of the Prairies, I mean it's a nice enough city, Saskatoon, um, but the average resident of Saskatchewan doesn't feel as wealthy as the average resident of Qatar, I can assure you, and and on a per capita basis, they they absolutely should. So where is the wealth going, I think is an interesting question. And when there's a disparity between wealth extraction and wealth distribution with the locals, there tends to be political upheaval and uprising. And and so the great shepherds of Canadian wealth would be wise to spread it a little more evenly amongst the um the people of Alberta and Saskatchewan. Now, British Columbia is a whole different story. We've written about BC as well.

SPEAKER_00: 34:32

Well, Dunberg, um here's a recent headline in the Wall Street Journal: Canada's$1 billion question. Do property rights still exist in British Columbia? This is the opener for a report from the journalist Men in Toronto. They sent him out west last month. And he quotes Thomas Isaac, who's a Vancouver-based lawyer specializing in Aboriginal law. And he says this the ruling, referenced in uh headline, could have a, quote, fatal impact on the economy if you start playing around with something that is as core as the ability to hold private property, close quote. Now, can you give me some insight uh into how this article must have been read by its audience, starting with New York's financial district, but many others too?

SPEAKER_01: 35:18

Yeah, um, we we wrote about this uh affair uh in uh in Domburg, and um this of course has to do with the unceded land issue in British Columbia. Um when I spoke earlier about the fact that um Canada's borders and Canada's history um there's a lot of unresolved issues. Um the manner in which uh historically uh sort of First People's Land uh was uh appropriated, some would say misappropriated, um has varying degrees of legal resolution across Canada, as you know, I'm sure. And um amongst the most murky is British Columbia. And um if you were to peruse the legal claims of of the indigenous people in Canada, um what is the difference between what was done to the Northwest Territories and what uh hasn't been done in British Columbia? It's just a different acknowledgement of the same legal issue. And so um there's this very serious uh crisis developing which uh ultimately pits the desire to make up for the sins of the past with the economic realities of today. And um that's a pretty I mean, on its face, a fascinating situation because it does force a reckoning of some pretty deep scars um that have not fully healed uh in the country. But at the same time, um if you're the fifth generation owner of a home that you know your your grandparents built, um, or great-grandparents built, or great-great-grandparents built, um, to get a letter in the mail that your home is not is no longer yours is is quite the shock as well.

SPEAKER_00: 37:20

Does that mean risk on, risk off for Canada as an investment destination?

SPEAKER_01: 37:24

Yeah, so great question. Um I I think Canada is is always going to be a risk on. And if you could resolve look, it's just look, we like we have an expression around here, uh nothing a fine can't cure, you know, um there's a big fine to be paid. You're not going to uproot people's homes and tear down cities. Um but there will be an accounting that has to be made and a restitution that has to be paid. And in fact, once sort of such market constraints are cleared, um then the bull cycle can begin.

SPEAKER_00: 38:06

Another deep polarization, and that surely is one on the indigenous front, we've bifurcated the world, or someone has bifurcated the world into clean and dirty energy labels that that feel more like moral judgments than engineering terms. And I'm just wondering whether the push for clean energy, quote unquote, is is less about carbon and maybe more of a cultural signal. And and by extension, the Trump administration's energy dominance philosophy or move, is it less of a policy shift, maybe, and more of a full-scale counter-offensive in a culture war, another front in the culture war, you know, positioning hydrocarbons, also known as fossil fuels, alongside things like DEI or trans rights as one more battleground for America's identity rather than a question of thermodynamics?

SPEAKER_01: 38:58

Aaron Ross Powell So look, um the way you have framed it, clean and dirty, good and bad, um, implies a bifurcated potential state. You know, there's good and bad, there's two outcomes. And um in energy, uh there are no solutions, only trade-offs. And one of the great lies of the environmental movement, the climate movement, is that um there exists a solution, quote unquote, to this challenge that requires no trade-offs on the part of the average citizen. And that is a lie. And um it is a lie that is a s that it is a simple choice between our current standard of living and more carbon or our current standard of living and less carbon. Um your standard of living will toggle with how much carbon you get to emit. And um you can decide collectively that you will degrade everybody's standard of living. in order to make some sacrifice to the carbon gods that China will happily and greedily step in and emit for you, which is what's been happening. Um or you can decide that um this is a risk worth taking and we will deal with the consequences as they arise. And I think that is the sort of the choice that America has made under Trump. It's the choice that many Europeans would make if they had true democracy in the European Union, which they do not. But the great lie of this whole era is that if you just throw a couple of solar panels on your roof and drive an electric vehicle in the cities that you will somehow save the planet from catastrophe without any meaningful sacrifice. Energy is life. Lack of energy is death. We're putting a piece out this weekend um about thermal comfort sort of like the rawest of the raw physics needs of the human body leading with um a great recording of um To Build a Fire by Jack London on our sister publication um Classics Read Aloud. It's a wonderful 40-minute reading over on that publication, um which we'll highlight in the next piece. 85% 83% of global primary energy is from coal, gas and oil. That's roughly what it was 40 years ago, roughly what it'll be in 40 years. All humans everywhere want a higher standard of living. Look your your standard of living is literally defined by how much energy you get to waste. And what do I mean by that? Order is is not spontaneous. 90 degree angles do not exist in nature on their own. They need to be built they need to be maintained that takes energy the human endeavor is a constant unrelenting struggle against the forces of entropy as Jack London's great story makes this really clear in order to impose order on your local environment which is a direct measure of your standard of living you have to waste heat. You cannot impose order in a local environment without wasting heat. The second law of thermodynamics forbids it. And so if you go from a heated home to a heated garage where your modern vehicle with climate control ports you to a a nice office that is also well within thermal comfort, you're doing pretty well for yourself. And if if you're you know cutting your own wood and boiling water over an open fire and and you know foraging for food in the wild you're probably not doing as well.

SPEAKER_00: 42:35

Yeah I I was just going to remark that this is the first and it might be the only ever power struggle episode that both Jack London and Stomp and Tom Connors have been mentioned to great Canadian cultural icons. And thanks for bringing those up. But um but seriously one thing I just wanted to touch on before we move along is uh Dunberg you you you are not uh an opponent of uh energy forms that have different lects of uh of an environmental footprint or at least a carbon footprint you're an exponent of exploring all the new ideas that cross your desk. So if anyone ever characterizes you as sort of a you know booster of of uh higher carbon because that's your thing, can you just straighten us out on that?

SPEAKER_01: 43:19

Sure. Look um we are realists and we hate when people lie to us. And um we're all for look if you gave me the ideal grid um you would have baseload nuclear highly dispatchable hydro and highly dispatchable natural gas. And that would be probably the lowest carbon content grid you can manage in most of the Western world. Not all of the Western world has access to great hydro resources and so where you don't you need dispatchable baseload energy like natural gas. But we're also huge proponents of of geothermal. Like what let show you some consistency in in hating being lied to fusion is just a giant boondoggle fake a fake solution to problems that that don't actually exist. I hate fusion um whenever I see a fusion hype cycle like Trump's media company merging with a fusion company I mean what a joke that annoys us just as much as people saying that you can do solar and wind and batteries only and run a grid. You can't if you could it we'd be doing it there isn't a single town or city or village that runs just on solar and batteries and wind because it won't work. Let's do the demonstration project the fact that that um that it hasn't been done yet is all the evidence that you need. So um in an ideal world you would select a balance of primary energy inputs that optimizes the median standard of living of the average person divided by the impact on the environment because there are no solutions only trade-offs and you could toggle how much you care about the environment versus how much you care about the standard of living of the average person and those are choices and trade-offs that we can have intelligent discussions about. But when you're lying you remove the ability to have an intelligent discussion and it becomes a propaganda war. Look the hydrocarbon or so the the hydroelectric dams of Quebec came at great environmental cost. Like let's not kid ourselves there was enormous sacrifice up front environmental degradation, tens of thousands of caribou indigenous lands flooded irreversibly huge capital expense having built it's a pretty awesome source of power today. It allows you to incorporate intermittent renewables um it can be the battery of the US Northeast although I don't think that's necessarily a proper use of Canadian resources but who am I to tell Hydro Quebec what to do? But like let me give you another story of trade-offs. People talk about nuclear energy and waste and meltdown risk and all this nonsense. In the 1970s there was a thousand year storm in China which happened seemingly every 10 years. And um a giant dam collapsed its name escapes me in the middle of China and that led to a series of cascading dam collapses and to the best approximation because data is hard to come by in communist China somewhere between 5000 and 25000 people died. Okay? Compare that to the hyperventilating around Fukushima where to the best of our knowledge one person died directly from cancer related to exposure four years after the event more people have died falling off of wind turbines trying to repair them or maintain them than have died from uh Fukushima now what happened after that tragic dam collapse in China did did we go about the business of taking down all the hydroelectric dams in the world? Of course not because with all things other than nuclear power humans are capable of a sane discussion around trade-offs that doesn't exist with nuclear energy for example um you know zero is an emotional number we must have zero radiation exposure as you're eating a banana and getting radiation as you fly on a plane and are bombarded with radiation like let's have a discussion about trade-offs and so um a smear of the sort of pro-renewables crowd is that anybody that doesn't agree with them wholeheartedly is a stool of the fossil fuels industry, right?

SPEAKER_00: 47:47

Trevor Burrus And this is a cultural problem that you've described correct correct China doesn't care about this and China's burning half the world's coal.

SPEAKER_01: 47:55

56% of all the world's coal is being burned by China today. Like China whatever coal um Britain doesn't burn is getting burned in China for a slightly lower price. Happily so India's going to burn as much coal look the 7 billion people in the global south live at a fraction of our standard of living and who are we to tell them that um they can't climb Maslow's hierarchy of needs and reach the point in the apex where you have the luxury of worrying about climate emissions, carbon emissions, climate change.

SPEAKER_00: 48:27

It's truly a luxury of the rich look Doomberg in in a few weeks you'll be celebrating five years since you launched Doomberg in the heart of the pandemic. You've become phenomenally successful as the Doomberg brand. I know you were on the scene uh for a long time before that but uh your your uh sway and recognition in the world of energy is really something congratulations on that by the way we'll be lighting a cake for you we'll be having a little you know party here at the office of power struggle because you're you're such a uh figure of uh leadership in this but um seriously um given the status you now have um let's sit you down in front of the Prime Minister of Canada he's about to go to China or he's maybe in a plane right now while we're speaking I'm not sure but he's gonna be meeting with China um in China in Beijing with the leadership there. Um there's other profound questions on the mind of the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister's advisors, Prime Minister Mark Carney. What's your briefing to the Prime Minister?

SPEAKER_01: 49:22

Yeah that's you know he's in a bit of a sticky wicket I suppose um stuck between um rock and a hard place of Trump and G. I I would I would say that um Carney has done a reasonably good job of threading the needle between Trump, the EU and China China has a huge need for Canada's resources. In an auction all it takes is two bidders so developing stronger relationships with China as a hedge to the US is probably reasonably prudent so long as it's done in a way that doesn't um trigger an overreaction uh by the by the Trump administration, which one has to be careful to do. My true advice to Carney would be to think beyond Trump and to think beyond Xi and uh to begin the process of repairing Canada-Chinese relations just because they are not at least compared to historical uh in the in the best position they've ever been um if the pipeline is to be built China will be the destination. Um and then the last thing I would tell Carney um which is something we've been toying with internally is that um there is a world where um a grand bargain is reached between Putin G and Trump. It seems very distant today um as a as a remote possibility especially in light of the alleged attempted assassination of Putin which the Russians are beginning to whisper that they believe Trump knew about and was an active participant in its planning. In a world where um multipolarity is the norm um trade with China is going to normalize. And already today we we we we posted on notes an interesting um an interesting little development that the big trading houses are already getting licenses from the US to trade Venezuela and have recruited with China. Trump's going to keep the oil flowing he said as much people don't believe him and so you know there's a world where um a detente is reached between the big three superpowers and Canada plays a meaningful role in both China and and the US and their energy futures. And um to not get caught up in the uh extremes of the day. I think um once the Supreme Court ruling comes out may have already come out while we're recording this and depending on how that goes um that would be the time to renegotiate with the U.S. But um you know it it's it's never good to put all your eggs in one basket and and China is a is a very large basket and and um diversifying a few eggs in that direction is probably prudent.

SPEAKER_00: 52:18

Doomberg that's been a fascinating conversation and to listeners thank you for tuning in to this episode of Power Struggle the podcast I'm your host Stuart Muir. Today's conversation with Doomberg offered a sharp outside Canada perspective. It was great having Doomberg back energy, geopolitics, the forces shaping our economic future and the world. If you found this analysis useful, I strongly encourage you to check out Doomberg's work. It's easy to find check it out on the Substack you can subscribe to it. There's a free version you can pay for it like I do. It's one of the best investments I make in being well informed. It's widely read and top of its class in terms of energy and markets globally everyone who's in the know reads it. If you enjoyed this show make sure you subscribe on Spotify, Apple Podcasts YouTube, anywhere else you get your podcast we're there. And please share this episode with anyone who cares about energy, climate policy, dialogue about Canadian affairs you can find more episodes information at powerstruggle.ca it's all there at Resourceworks resourceworks.com I'm the uh founder and CEO of ResourceWorks based in Vancouver we're doing so much work to build uh awareness to these things so um once again thanks for tuning in and and Dunberg you're still here thank you for being here it's my pleasure Stuart