Why does Saskatchewan have the biggest legislative building in the country?
Because Sir Walter Scott, the province’s first premier, was a man of vision. He did not build the Leg for the 250,000 or so residents of 1906, he built it for the 20 million he predicted would flock to the province by 1926.
Why are British Columbia and New Brunswick both Canadian provinces?
Because Sir John A. MacDonald, Canada’s first prime minister, was a man of vision. He promised these two far flung territories a national railway and by hook and by crook, mostly the latter, he delivered.
Canada would not exist if these people and many who came before and would come after, did not do bold, impractical things.
Where is the vision today? Certainly not in that beautiful structure at Wascana Park.
In today’s political climate, we would not have the Leg, the TransCanada Railway, the Rideau Canal, the University of Saskatchewan, the Canadian Aerospace Industry, the St. Lawrence Seaway, the TransCanada pipeline, the oilsands, hydroelectric power, the Confederation Bridge or the Candu Reactor because they were done for the future, not the present. The visionaries who built them were not slaves to the tedious bottom line.
Today, instead of doing the difficult thing and leading the world to a greener future, we are bogged down with an endless pipeline debate that basically amounts to attempting to preserve the past.
Here are three visionary energy projects Saskatchewan could undertake for the future, bearing in mind that it’s not just about supplying our own needs, but developing the industries to sell to the world.
1. Nuclear. Saskatchewan has the largest high-grade deposits of Uranium in the world. Canada exports 85 per cent of which our production and uses the other 15 per cent to power reactors in Ontario and New Brunswick. We do not refine it here or produce fuel for reactors here. Heck, we don’t even use it here. There are 19 reactors in Canada, all but one of which are in Ontario. And not only that, we live on just about the most stable part of the Earth’s crust, making Saskatchewan the perfect place to store nuclear waste. Nuclear power is clean, it is safe and it could be extremely cheap. We should be developing a nuclear industry in Saskatchewan including innovating new small-scale reactor technology that could be adopted by cities and towns.
2. Solar. Okay, nuclear is still unnecessarily controversial, but in Saskatchewan we have another nuclear source of power that is unrivalled by any other province, hours of bright sunshine. Since 1966, the average for our largest city, Saskatoon, was 2,264 hours per year. Why are we not embracing solar like it’s going out of business especially since it is just on the cusp of being the business of the future. Again, solar is clean, safe and virtually free once we develop the technology. Where better to do it than Canada’s sunniest province?
3. Wind. Wind and solar basically go hand in hand. The individual visionaries who have adopted solar usually also have a turbine (there’s a completely self-sufficient farm just minutes northeast of Yorkton) recognizing that even being the sunniest province, there are times “the sun don’t shine.” We do not top the windiest province list, but Saskatchewan is definitely up there and the arguments are the same as for nuclear and solar. This province needs to be in the wind business.
When Alberta started developing its oil wealth, it had a really great plan. It put aside money for a rainy day. Norway did the same. Unfortunately, Alberta squandered its legacy. The rainy day fund is gone and instead of diversifying, it doubled down on a sunset industry that is currently in the toilet. Norway, on the other hand, has a rainy day fund that is approaching a trillion dollars and has developed hydro, wind and wave power to meet its own energy needs. And, although the country doesn’t use much solar energy, it is one of the world’s largest producers of solar grade silicon and silicon solar cells.
Saskatchewan is going to the polls very soon. There are lots of day-to-day, nitty-gritty issues, jobs, health care, education, accountability, but we should also be asking our prospective leaders about their vision for the province.
Are we going to be an Alberta, or are we going to be a Norway?
