Andrew Pickford on Final Investment Decisions

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.