US Edition
Renewable cleanup rules making Alberta less competitive for investment: report
- The Alberta government published a new code of practice last week requiring renewable operators to estimate full cleanup costs for solar and wind projects.
- In February 2024, new regulations were introduced requiring an initial security deposit of 30 percent, which increases to 60 percent after 15 years to guarantee sufficient funding for site reclamation.
- A Business Renewables Centre-Canada report found Alberta's reclamation security requirements are the most costly among 27 jurisdictions and do not account for salvage value.
- Alberta Energy Regulator estimated $36 billion in environmental liabilities as of June 2024, while BRC-Canada noted that renewable projects are sensitive to upfront capital costs.
- The costly rules may discourage investment and risk Alberta losing its position as Canada's leading renewable energy developer, according to BRC-Canada's director Jorden Dye.
Insights by Ground AI
Does this summary seem wrong?
22 Articles
22 Articles
All
Left
5
Center
3
Right
1
Alberta's new reclamation rules make too expensive to build solar or wind — let me explain - PVBuzzMedia
The Alberta government’s updated Code of Practice imposes the highest reclamation security costs in North America for renewable energy projects — a move that industry experts warn could derail billions in investment, stall development, and shift Canada’s clean energy momentum to more competitive provinces. The post Alberta’s new reclamation rules make too expensive to build solar or wind — let me explain appeared first on PVBuzzMedia.
Business Renewables Centre-Canada - Alberta's new reclamation security rules increase burden on renewable energy industry
JORDEN DYE, director of the Business Renewables Centre-Canada (BRC-Canada), made the following statement in response to the Government of Alberta's new rules governing reclamation security for ren. . .
Coverage Details
Total News Sources22
Leaning Left5Leaning Right1Center3Last UpdatedBias Distribution56% Left
Bias Distribution
- 56% of the sources lean Left
56% Left
L 56%
C 33%
11%
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
