Explorez tous les épisodes du podcast The Gravity Well with Jenny Yeremiy

Erin Collins of the CBC National reached out for an interview regarding the newly announced AI data centre permit ban in Texas. I explained I am a geophysicist who spent 22 years in the oil and gas industry before being pushed out while advocating for environmental goals aligned with Justin Trudeau’s land back through industrial site cleanup and restoration and that I host The Gravity Well podcast, to focus on social and environmental issues for the public. The conversation centers on my concerns about AI data centres—which I explain is as an extension of the oil and gas industry. Before it was: methane gas as a bridge fuel, bitumen beyond combustion, carbon capture and utilization (not storage), pipelines to the west coast, “blue” hydrogen or nuclear—and surveillance systems backed by nefarious actors, like Meta who monetize misinformers, funneling money to politicians, the police and military. I also argue that what is marketed as artificial intelligence is actually machine learning that lacks genuine intelligence and can be manipulated, citing websites allegedly designed to mislead Albertans toward a separatist referendum as an example.

Erin raises serious concerns about the resource demands of data centres, particularly regarding water and energy. I note that Alberta’s oil sands already consumed 260 billion liters of fresh water in a single year, and that adding AI data centre power demands could increase water usage by 12 times. I draw a parallel to Corpus Christi, Texas, which is facing water bankruptcy due to AI data centres, LNG facilities, and petrochemical plants. I also warn that data centres (correction) require diesel backup storage for natural gas turbines at a time when refined fuel supplies are under strain globally.

I go further than what the Texas Governor has done—halting all new AI data centre permits—by calling for a complete halt to AI data centre construction and operation across North America, framing it as a choice between essential resources like food, water, and healthcare versus information systems she sees as providing no societal value. I reference a CNN report about an AI hallucination that allegedly nearly caused a major international military incident with China as evidence of AI’s dangers. I urge political leaders to consult the oil and gas industry to understand what is at stake, arguing that informed decisions must be made urgently.

The interview closes with my expressing appreciation for the Texas Governor’s decision to pause data centre permits, acknowledging it as an example of political courage needed from leaders facing these limits. I emphasize that the most urgent priority should be centering the economy on water restoration and halting all hyperscale AI data centre construction and activities, immediately.

Thank you for your time, Erin.

Check out my latest conversation with Charlie Angus / The Resistance on Meidas Canada regarding diesel shortages

Two Alberta teachers and education advocates, Tania and Lindsay, who run the pages “Remove Nicolaides” and “Let’s Talk Alberta Education” respectively, join me to discuss the realities of Alberta Public Education: its mismanagement at the hands of our Education & Childcare Minister Demetrios Nicolaides, and his predecessor: Adriana LaGrange. Tania is a kindergarten French immersion teacher in Calgary-Bow who became involved in advocacy after simply trying to sign Nicolaides’ recall petition, while Lindsay describes herself as a “reluctant influencer” with nearly 20 years of teaching experience who started her online presence the same summer the first screeners were introduced. Both discuss how the UCP government’s decisions since 2019 have systematically eroded public education in Alberta, beginning with dramatic cuts to Program Unit Funding (PUF), which had previously provided holistic early childhood assessments and in-school therapeutic supports such as occupational therapists, physical therapists, and speech-language pathologists working weekly with students. Removing these supports after COVID, when students arguably needed them most, has caused unaddressed developmental gaps to snowball as children progress through the school system.

In place of the earlier holistic screener system, the government introduced mandatory literacy and numeracy screeners that both teachers argue are developmentally inappropriate, anxiety-inducing, and produce no meaningful data or corresponding support. Lindsay describes the current screeners as something no teacher asked for, and notes that even the expert credited with designing them bases his university courses on “screening and intervention,” not screening alone. Weber Academy, a high-tuition private school, publicly stated the government screeners were “far too basic” and provided “no meaningful or valuable feedback,” and that administering them would come at the school’s own expense. Administering the screeners requires one-on-one time, substitute teacher coverage, and additional planning burdens that fall entirely on already overstretched teachers, with any resulting intervention also placed on teachers’ shoulders rather than dedicated support staff.

The conversation also explores the political and ideological influences shaping these education policies. Tania identifies a Christian think tank called Cardus that has sent policy memos directly to Minister Nicolaides, with at least three policy directions being implemented by the government in near-verbatim alignment with those memos. One such memo, sent before the teacher strike, outlined strategies for the government to manage a prolonged strike, including paying parents directly from savings on teacher salaries and encouraging movement into charter, independent, or homeschool settings. Both teachers emphasize that the government locked teachers out three days after the strike began rather than using the notwithstanding clause immediately, which they argue was a deliberate strategy to deplete the Alberta Teachers Association’s financial resources and weaken its ability to advocate for teachers.

In closing, both advocates urge parents and Albertans to stay informed, attend school council meetings, and continue supporting public education. Lindsay warns that schools are already in crisis before October, with insufficient resources, growing class complexity, and a widening gap between government rhetoric and classroom reality. Tania notes that Nicolaides has now expanded the screeners into grades four and five, even while schools lack enough hired teachers to manage their existing workloads. Both teachers stress that the future of Alberta depends on properly funded and supported public classrooms, and that the “more is more” framing used by the minister is empty without meaningful, evidence-based action.

Want to take action?

Email your Education Minister at: education.minister@gov.ab.ca. Request that he RETURN Program Unit Funding (PUF) to public school kindergarten students and CANCEL the meaningless and harmful—void of adequate intervention—pre-screening practices.

This episode features a discussion with Kayla Piccinin, Carol Edwards, and Jasona Rondeau -- who are promoting a province-wide town hall event called “Ground Zero,” organized by the Alberta Transparency Project. The event is centered on the issue of AI data centre development in Alberta, particularly following the Synapse project, which the group successfully opposed in Olds. Carol Edwards, a retired professor and project analyst, became involved after the project was proposed near her home, while Jasona has spent four years helping landowners navigate regulatory processes when projects arrive in their communities.

The guests emphasize that the event is relevant to anyone concerned about environmental impacts, health, property values, water, and agricultural land. Jasona stresses the importance of learning the facts and understanding how to act at the municipal level, noting that project approvals involve four separate regulatory streams. Carol urges people of all skill sets to get involved and participate on the front lines, while Kayla highlights the importance of everyday conversations and sharing information to raise awareness.

The October 1st event will be held at the local legion hall in Olds, Alberta, doors open at 5 pm, with plenty of parking! Jasona notes that people from around the world are already anticipating the live stream! The event is volunteer-run and funded, with a donation option planned for attendees. I express hope that the model developed in Olds to fight data centres can be replicated elsewhere across the province.

Want to learn more?

BIG TECH, BIGGER QUESTIONS IN ALBERTA

CJSW radio in Edmonton covered the St. Alberta data centre town hall hosted by Give Voice: a grassroots organization of mostly retired women. Keepers of the Water Director, Jesse Cardinal, Olds Resident and retired Simon Fraser University Professor, Carol Edwards, and I spoke.

DATA CENTRES: Who benefits? Who pays?

Plans for new data centres in Alberta threaten water resources and energy prices, I sat down with The Climate Lens’ Steve Bentley to discuss.

Before listening to this conversation, consider:

* Premier Smith’s first action in office was an attempt to exert Alberta sovereignty, over Canada, but most importantly, ahead of First Nations who proceeded all of us, and have fought for their sovereign rights since time immemorial.

* After two court ruling, a hurdle-smashing Forever Canadian petition, we are still facing a 10-question referenda most of us do not want.

* The US has declared war against us, yet Alberta’s Premier won’t cut them off. Despite all other provinces agreeing to fight, Canada continues to capitulate to Smith.

* Both Smith and Carney are throwing out environmental protections, climate targets, and International law in the name of AI surveillance technology and threats to national security.

* Developers, like Sam Altman of OpenAI, are sounding the alarm that deregulation seems to be leading to self-destruction, by way of uncontrollable AI algorithm agents.

* Fueled by and for the fossil fuel industry who is destroying itself, and our way of life with it, with our money through illegal, unprovoked wars and genocide. Blocking renewable and restoration alternatives whilst they destroy the global trade system, which feeds us, for all the world to see.

* The referenda agenda is already underway: students are being cut off from public school and families from healthcare. Jobs are drying up, along with our freshwater table, and any logical reason to let this agenda continue.

A rebellion is urgently needed, what are you waiting for?

The conversation opens with a focus on the ongoing situation in Gaza and Palestine. Wesam Cooley, a regular on The Gravity Well, describes the conflict as a genocide now approaching its three-year mark, continuing despite a ceasefire that Israel has not respected. Recent incidents include a building collapse where a child was found alive among dead family members, and a quadcopter drone strike that killed both a paramedic and a 15-year-old boy who had gone to help him. We note that Israeli political opinion polls show near-unanimous support for the military campaign among Israelis, and that upcoming Israeli elections are unlikely to change the direction of the genocide, as no candidate campaigns on ending it.

The discussion then expands to the broader regional war, including Lebanon, the West Bank, and Iran. Wesam explains that the US launched a war against Iran in February, and that Iran has responded by using its geographical control over the Strait of Hormuz to restrict oil flows to any nation supporting the US military action. Brent Crude has surpassed one hundred dollars per barrel, and the economic damage is described as irreversible, with rationing expected in the coming months and years. Yemen’s Ansar Allah has also seized the western coast of Yemen and is positioned to besiege the Bab al-Mandeb strait, while also attacking Saudi oil infrastructure, resulting in Saudi Arabia temporarily exporting zero oil. I add that oil and gas infrastructure damaged through bombing cannot simply be restored, with replacement timelines stretching years or decades, and that the CEO of Chevron has publicly acknowledged coming shortages of diesel, jet fuel, and fertilizer.

The conversation shifts to the geopolitical position of Canada, the Alberta separatism referendum, and the US imperial decline. Wesam argues that the US, facing the collapse of its West Asian presence, is now looking to expand control over weaker targets, with Canada being especially vulnerable. The Alberta referendum is described as dangerous not because the separatism question itself may pass, but because any yes vote on the nine constitutional questions could trigger a constitutional crisis that would be used to legitimize US intervention in the province. I note there is no defined threshold for success in the referendum act, meaning the organizing faction can declare victory on any outcome. Both speakers call for mass public action, with Speaker 2 suggesting that blocking key intersections in Calgary and demanding Danielle Smith’s resignation before October could be decisive.

In closing, the speakers reflect on the Ukraine war and the broader failure of Western institutions. Wesam states that the war in Ukraine has been lost, that a peace agreement was sabotaged by Britain in 2022, and that Ukraine is now forcibly conscripting men off the streets while running short of military age men. Russia is described as warning that continued Western drone supplies being used to attack Russian civilians may make those supplying nations legitimate military targets. Both speakers argue that the root cause of these interlocking crises is a billionaire class that makes decisions insulated from their consequences, and that meaningful change requires collective organization and the removal of that class from power. China is held up as a counterexample of a society providing affordable goods and a collectivist future, with Wesam arguing Canada should be seeking deeper ties with Beijing rather than Europe or Washington.

I prefer a future for the collective than a military state, may the force be with you if you agree.

I welcome Edmonton-based journalist Jeremy Appel, of The Orchard who is based in Edmonton and contributes to numerous news outlets including the National Observer, the Toronto Star, and Ricochet. Appel also has a book forthcoming on Premier Danielle Smith titled “Dark Phoenix: The Rise, Fall and Reemergence of Danielle Smith,” which he describes as a spiritual sequel to his earlier book on Jason Kenney. We then turn to a story Appel covered regarding Reuters, which is owned by Canada’s Thompson family and derives much of its revenue not from journalism but from data and AI services. Specifically, Reuters operates a database called CLEAR that aggregates personal information on Americans, including immigration status and social security numbers, and has contracted with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to assist with deportation efforts. When Reuters was asked about safeguards, their response amounted to cancelling the contract if misuse were discovered, which Appel found unconvincing.

The discussion then broadens to the role of big tech in serving state interests, including Google Maps renaming Lake Ontario to “Lake America” at Trump’s informal request and Zuckerberg gutting Meta’s fact-checking apparatus upon Trump’s return to office. Appel connects this to the Alberta referendum, arguing that the immigration questions underpinning it are built on fiction and that the broader separatist movement is fundamentally about liberating the oil and gas industry from federal constraints. He traces this narrative back to Jason Kenney, who amplified Alberta grievance politics around equalization payments and pension contributions, framing federal structures as conspiring against the province despite Alberta being among the wealthiest provinces per capita. Appel argues that Danielle Smith has taken this further, fusing state power with corporate interests in a manner he describes as more authoritarian than the neoliberalism practiced by Kenney.

Our conversation turns to the political landscape ahead of the referendum, with both speakers expressing frustration at the Alberta NDP’s strategic approach of targeting an imagined suburban Calgary swing voter rather than articulating a bold alternative vision. The host shares her own experience running as an independent candidate after Notley refused to discuss a just transition before the election, and argues that the NDP cannot win by trying to out-promise the UCP on oil and gas. Appel notes that Smith is skilled at framing hard-right positions, including restrictions on immigrant access to healthcare and schooling, as reasonable compromises, while the underlying claims are based on misinformation. He also raises concerns that gerrymandering of Calgary ridings may render electoral strategy discussions largely moot.

In the final portion of the conversation, Appel outlines his upcoming work, including a piece for The Walrus on the AI data centre revolt, an excerpt from his book in The Walrus, a piece in Maclean’s on Smith’s new authoritarianism, and a Globe and Mail op-ed arguing that Smith is not a separatist but that the truth is actually worse. The host reflects on the broader stakes facing Alberta, arguing that the province is being distracted by the referendum spectacle while facing genuine existential challenges around water, ecological collapse, and economic transition away from fossil fuels. Both speakers express admiration for federal NDP leader Avi Lewis as a rare political figure willing to speak honestly about these issues. The conversation closes with Appel plugging his book launch in Edmonton on October 13th and a planned event in Calgary in early November.

If you’re in the Edmonton area, get tickets for Jeremy’s book launch event here.

Monday, September 14 is the Calgary-Shaw By-Election

Early vote between September 8-12.

Calgary-Shaw Communities

* Shawnessey

* Somerset

* Yorkville

* Belmont

* Pine Creek

* Chaparral

* Walden

* Wolf Willow

* Legacy

Tell your Calgary-Shaw friends this is an option to send Premier Smith and the United Conservative Party (UCP) of Alberta a strong message.

Become a member. Volunteer. Donate. Vote.

Kyle Campbell, the Alberta NDP candidate for the Calgary-Shaw by-election, introduces himself as a longtime South Calgary resident who coaches his kids in basketball and baseball and works in insurance. He states clearly that he supports remaining in Canada, noting that the overwhelming majority of people in Calgary-Shaw share that view and do not understand the need for a separation referendum, particularly given its enormous cost. On the broader referendum questions, he argues that the immigration-related questions unfairly blame newcomers for the UCP government’s own financial mismanagement, and that he would not trust the UCP with any attempt to alter the Canadian constitution. He also criticizes Premier Danielle Smith for travelling to the United States during tariff negotiations and urging Canada to accept whatever terms the Trump administration offers, arguing that Canada is stronger when all provinces stand united.

On the issue of AI data centres, Campbell supports the Alberta NDP’s position of pausing all new data centre implementations until proper consultation is completed, a framework is established, and clear benchmarks are set to measure whether projects are meeting Albertans’ needs. He notes that Alberta already has deep expertise in energy-intensive infrastructure and should apply that knowledge to this new sector. Regarding healthcare, Campbell shares his personal experience of being diagnosed with cancer in 2023, during which he faced a six-week wait for a basic blood draw due to the province’s privatization of blood work, and his physician had to call him from personal holidays because no one was covering her practice. He argues that meaningful healthcare improvement is achievable by consulting frontline workers, collecting their incremental suggestions, and implementing them, describing it as a listening and doing problem rather than an insurmountable one.

On public education, Campbell points out that the Calgary Board of Education has identified ten schools that need to be built within the Calgary-Shaw riding alone, and that parents returning to school found classroom conditions deeply troubling. Rising busing costs, now at $500 per child per year, are forcing families to send children out of their own communities, undermining the very reason many families move to the suburbs. He recounts conversations with parents who are homeschooling or paying for private school not out of preference but because the public system fails to support children with special needs, including those with autism. Campbell calls on the government to simply build the needed schools, hire the necessary staff, and listen to education experts, arguing the solution is straightforward.

In closing, Campbell frames the Calgary-Shaw by-election as being focused on education, healthcare, affordability, and the question of remaining in Canada. He emphasizes his belief that politicians should do what they say they will do and urges voters to participate in advanced polls running September 8 through 12, with election day on September 14. He presents the Alberta NDP as the only party with a genuine commitment to making progress on these issues and hearing everyday Albertans.

Early vote between September 8-12

Monday, September 14 is the official Calgary-Shaw By-Election voting day.

The conversation opens with Mikayla Resists—last on The Gravity Well in May—arguing that global conflicts and Alberta’s political situation are driven by imperialism, greed, and resource extraction, framing the struggle as “people versus the power” rather than left versus right. She expresses frustration with the separatist movement, noting that despite sharing some anti-establishment rhetoric, separatists refuse to consider tools like general strikes and openly oppose unions, even though unions secured workers’ rights and benefits. The conversation then shifts to an ongoing data breach involving the Centurion Project, with Mikayla stating she is still monitoring the situation and working with a developer to build blockchain-based voting verification, while warning that Elections Alberta has only a year to issue fines and has not updated its website since late April. I connect the data breach to Premier Danielle Smith’s behaviour, suggesting US involvement and noting that Smith immediately travelled to the United States after the breach became public.

We then discuss two confrontational events Mikayla attended. At a pancake breakfast, Mikayla planned to confront Danielle Smith about AISH and ADAP policy changes, and also noted the presence of Chief Warren Driechel, whom she had been seeking accountability from regarding a trip to occupied Palestine. After her friend raised issues including trans rights and AI data centres, Smith deflected with a question about social media use, prompting Mikayla to loudly challenge her for platforming separatists, resulting in the now-known “f**k your fascist pancakes” moment. Following this event, Mikayla received, and is still receiving, serious threats and was followed by separatists. At the Alberta Independence rally at the legislature, a speaker named Leyton Grey, described as an indigenous lawyer, made statements defending residential schools, and a preacher called for bringing God into the separatist movement. Mikayla interrupted the rally, called attendees traitors, and was subsequently given a 90-day ban from the legislature by provincial sheriffs, while her friend was physically roughed up and briefly handcuffed.

The discussion broadens to cover US demands on Canada, with me listing 13 proposed conditions (https://finance.biggo.com/news/934d7490-f69f-4fa3-8cec-ccecd7485b62#:~:text=According%20to%20Canadian%20media%20reports) including veto power over Canadian infrastructure decisions, right of first refusal on critical minerals at a preferred price, elimination of cultural and language protections, and the ability to sue the Canadian government. I also make reference to the Alberta Prosperity Projects “Foundation of Freedom” surrender document, which Thomas Lucaszuk suggests should be mandatory reading here:

We criticize Smith for continuing to push for an Alberta separation referendum while Canada faces these external threats, contrasting her with Quebec’s premier who refused to discuss any referendum while Canada is under such pressure. Mikayla states that Smith has collaborated with separatists, knowingly allowed them to infiltrate her party, and appears to be acting as an agent for US interests rather than representing Albertans.

Our final segment focuses on grassroots resistance and the AI data centre issue. Mikayla visited Olds, Alberta, where residents are fighting a proposed data centre that would sit across from a local home, with no adequate plan for water or noise, and where the CEO of Synapse admitted he came to Alberta for its natural resources. I raise concerns about old natural gas wells being repurposed to power data centres instead of being cleaned up through the Orphan Fund, and questions the unnecessary use of freshwater when glycol could be used instead. Both hosts conclude on a note of cautious optimism, urging Albertans to vote no in the upcoming referendum, praising growing cross-divide cooperation, and committing to door knocking and canvassing efforts through Public Interest Alberta. Mikayla closes by challenging separatists to consider what they will do when they lose the referendum, noting she has yet to receive an answer.

Become a “Together NO” volunteer with Mikayla and me: albertareferendum2026.org/volunteer/!

TAKE ACTION: meet at the Hyatt Regency (8th Avenue & Centre Street) on Wed, Sep 9 at noon.

LEARN MORE: BIG TECH, BIGGER QUESTIONS

Welcome back to The Gravity Well with Jenny Yeremiy! I sat down with Kyle Joseph yesterday, a grade six teacher and Progressive Tory Party candidate for the Calgary-Shaw by-election on September 14th, to chat about his stepping up during a significant moment in Alberta’s history. Kyle firmly states that Alberta must remain in Canada, noting that separation would be logistically problematic given treaty rights, and legally difficult under the Federal Clarity Act, which requires a two-thirds majority in the House of Commons. He also expresses concern that the premier is dangerously fueling the idea of separation and questions the UCP’s direction, pointing specifically to the fact that UCP candidate for Calgary-Shaw Mike Derry’s campaign manager, Craig Chandler, has openly supported separation. On the referendum’s nine questions, Kyle states he will personally vote no to all of them, distrusting the government’s motives and concerned that some questions are being used to target immigrants.

Regarding US trade negotiations, Kyle criticizes the premier for abandoning a Team Canada approach and giving up leverage with both Ottawa and Washington. He draws a pointed contrast between the premier’s willingness to use Alberta’s resources as leverage against BC but not against the Americans, questioning where her loyalties lie. He illustrated the importance of cooperation with a story about his own grade six students, noting that fighting against others rather than negotiating guarantees no one will want to help you.

On data centres, Kyle raises concerns about the provincial government pushing the initiative through without proper community consultation or environmental review. He notes that public feedback, including at AI data centre town halls, has been overwhelmingly negative, yet the government has proceeded regardless. On education and healthcare, Kyle argues that per-student funding has fallen far behind the rest of Canada, that there are not enough schools, teachers, or education assistants, and that the healthcare system faces similar pressures. His party’s approach centres on a strategy of recruit, retain, and collaborate with frontline workers such as teachers, nurses, and doctors, emphasizing that simply hiring large numbers of new workers is ineffective if burnout drives hundreds to leave the profession shortly after.

In closing, Kyle expresses pride in having run a positive campaign and frames the Tory Party as a return to common sense, moderation, and governing for Albertans rather than for political self-interest. I express my gratitude for his participation under Pete Guthrie’s leadership, noting that the by-election and the broader issues at stake represent one of the most significant moments in Alberta’s recent history. Both Kyle and I acknowledge the courage of those willing to challenge the current UCP government, including those facing personal legal consequences for doing so.

If Calgary-Shaw votes UCP does it affirm a separatist agenda?

If you live in or near Calgary-Shaw volunteer to support Kyle and the Progressive Tories here:

The water cycle is broken. The sustainable development narrative has failed and Water Bankruptcy is on the Horizon but the solutions and expertise needed are here and clear. In this episode of The Gravity Well Podcast with Jenny Yeremiy, co‑hosted by Bob Morrison, I speak with Dr. Tricia Stadnyk—a Canada Research Chair in hydrologic modelling and environmental engineer at the University of Calgary—about water modelling and water security in southern Alberta and beyond. Tricia explains that her work spans global to local scales, using models to understand how climate change affects continental water supply and then zooming down to impacts on communities, ecosystems, farms, Indigenous communities, and urban areas.

Tricia outlines a “modelling chain” of distinct but linked tools: climate models provide temperature and precipitation inputs, which feed land‑surface or hydrology models that estimate bulk water supply from rain and snow before human use. Groundwater and groundwater–surface water interactions are often modelled separately because of their complexity and long timescales, while hydraulic models simulate how water moves through rivers, enabling flood forecasting and floodplain mapping that influence insurance rates. At the end of the chain, water resource management models (“worms”) incorporate human interventions such as licences, irrigation withdrawals, reservoirs, and releases to estimate post‑use water supply. These models are usually run sequentially rather than fully coupled, with each step increasing in resolution to translate global climate signals into local hydrologic and hydraulic predictions.

The discussion then turns to specific processes and uncertainties, including glaciers, groundwater, and land‑use change. Tricia notes that the contribution of glacier melt to systems like the Bow and South Saskatchewan Rivers is complex and only recently being studied in detail, with earlier climate models underestimating glacier loss because they missed feedbacks such as wildfire ash darkening ice and accelerating melt. She explains that glaciers are crucial for headwater supply and that their melt feeds both rivers and groundwater, affecting late‑summer baseflows and water temperature, which are vital for aquatic ecosystems. Land‑use changes such as logging are incorporated by dynamically updating land‑cover data from satellite imagery so hydrology models can adjust runoff responses, while other cumulative effects (like fish health) are handled by separate ecological models that use hydrologic outputs such as flow and temperature. Throughout, Tricia stresses that model choice and complexity must be “fit for purpose,” balancing computational limits and the need for timely decisions, especially for operational tasks like flood forecasting.

A major theme is the shift from traditional “standards‑based” engineering (e.g., designing for a single “1‑in‑100‑year” event) toward adaptive, risk‑based management that embraces uncertainty envelopes and integrates environmental, economic, social, and cultural risk. Tricia argues that decision‑makers must choose where within a range of possible flows to design, based on their tolerance for being wrong and the consequences for communities and infrastructure, and that this inherently political and social process cannot be automated away by AI. She calls for a federal water policy framework that centers water in governance and economic planning, asking what the “resiliency threshold” of Canada’s water supply is rather than aiming merely for “sustainability,” given that basins like the South Saskatchewan are already oversubscribed and in deficit. This includes scrutinizing new industrial developments (from oil and gas to data centres) through a water‑availability lens and recognizing water as the limiting factor in many sectors.

The conversation also highlights serious data and governance gaps. Tricia explains that many social and local water uses are poorly captured: licences are modelled at their full legal volume because actual consumptive use is not monitored, return flows from irrigation are often unmeasured, and tributary and small‑stream uses can be invisible to models.

If your body were as sliced and diced as our water system is—how do you think you would fare?

Now consider, you are ~60% water.

The Federal and Provincial Governments are selling more fossil fuel development (pipelines, production, and gas-powered power plants for AI data centres) without environmental impact assessments and without accounting for past investment failures. For example, our $35 billion Trans Mountain Expansion pipeline investment will never be paid back as users are lobbying for toll reductions.

Seems timely to revisit Bob Morrison and I’s interview from last September with Dr. Brad Stelfox (who also appeared in The Harms of Coal Mining), a zoologist and land-use scientist who has spent over 35 years developing cumulative effects models that integrate overlapping land uses—such as roads, agriculture, oil and gas, and forestry—to show how they reshape landscapes in Alberta and beyond. His work focuses on linking social, economic, and environmental dimensions, quantifying benefits like jobs and royalties alongside impacts on natural capital, including biodiversity, soil carbon, and water quality and quantity. Stelfox argues that most models used by industry and government chase “win‑win‑win” scenarios and fail to honestly represent trade‑offs, leading to a narrative that Alberta can expand all land uses without compromising water or biodiversity—something he says has never been achieved anywhere. He points to evidence of profound losses in natural capital since Alberta became a province, with rapid ongoing degradation of water, biodiversity, and soil carbon.

In other words, Alberta and Canada need to adopt a “Less i$ more” economic model: where more land (water, air, and biodiversity) is restored rather than developed.

Brad, Bob, and I discuss how Alberta’s growing population and sharply increased per‑capita resource use have driven extensive externalization of natural capital, meaning environmental costs are left out of economic and political decision‑making.He explains that humans and land use inevitably consume water, carbon, and biodiversity, and that Alberta is no longer just drawing on “interest” from these systems but is cutting deeply into the ecological “capital.” Using native mammals as an example, he estimates that pre‑European times they made up about 99.2% of biomass, whereas today Alberta has perhaps only 4% of its pre‑European native mammal biodiversity, with most biomass now in humans, livestock, and pets. Water quality and quantity have also deteriorated, with many prairie creeks ploughed over or converted to irrigation canals and parents reluctant to let children play in creeks due to health risks, especially in southern Alberta. He characterizes Alberta’s prevailing mindset as “me here now,” focused on short‑term economic growth and local interests rather than long‑term landscape health or the well‑being of future generations.

The discussion then zooms in on southern Alberta’s landscapes and water. Stelfox describes a west‑to‑east gradient where eastern lowlands have already lost most of their biodiversity and water quality, leaving little remaining natural capital to lose, while foothills and mountains—especially the eastern slopes—are now at greatest risk. These high‑elevation areas function as “water towers,” accumulating snow and releasing critical spring flows that support fish, wildlife, and all downstream land uses, including logging, agriculture, mining, oil and gas, transportation, and residential development. He estimates that Alberta receives roughly 700–800 billion cubic meters of precipitation annually, with about three‑quarters evaporating and 130–150 billion cubic meters flowing through rivers and aquifers, forming the basis of all land uses. Yet these headwaters are being incrementally eroded by expanding acreages, roads, recreation, cattle, and especially intensive logging, which alters hydrology, increases sediment, reduces soil organics, and undermines aquifer recharge. He argues that current forestry practices diverge from best management practices on paper and are not adequately enforced, and he questions why mining, off‑highway vehicles, and riparian residential development are allowed in such critical headwater zones.

Finally, the conversation turns to policy, economics, and the difficulty of change. Stelfox notes that the Alberta Land Stewardship Act was intended to sit above other legislation and force explicit trade‑off discussions about limits on water withdrawals, timber harvests, fossil fuel extraction, livestock numbers, and even population growth, but these ideas became politically unpalatable once industry and government realized they implied constraints on economic expansion. He observes that all major land‑use sectors—forestry, energy, agriculture, transportation, residential, recreation—have experienced exponential growth yet still see their current scale as “unacceptably too small,” planning for further expansion under a growth‑driven economic model that systematically depletes natural capital. I connect biodiversity loss to Indigenous community impacts and Species At Risk (such as caribou and trout), arguing that these are indicators of ecological and ultimately human risk, and I highlight how extensive piped‑water systems around Lethbridge and Edmonton show that society is already overdrawing its “water bank account.”

A Less i$ more economy is needed, where industrial sites and access ways no longer serving us are re-naturalized for ecosystem function at scale across so-called Alberta and Canada.

You need to help Brad, Bob, and me create the political will for the polluter to finally pay.

No, and in light of the fires in Peachland and Summerland, British Columbia, this past weekend, let’s revisit my conversation with Thoughtful Journalism’s Markham Hislop and commercial insurance broker Derek Connick from last summer. This discussion was around climate change, water, and insurance risk in Alberta and Canada. I explain that Markham and I connected during an election period and have since collaborated on topics like oil and gas liabilities, with Markham founding the Energy Circle and me starting this podcast to tackle difficult subjects such as climate-related insurance issues. Markham describes his work as an energy journalist running a large independent media outlet focused on the global energy transition and its implications for Canada and Alberta, emphasizing the growing importance of “risk” in public discourse and the reluctance of society to confront increasing climate-related risks. Derek introduces his 37–38 years of experience in property and casualty insurance across Western Canada, noting that water-related risk has become increasingly significant, particularly in Alberta.

The discussion then turns to how climate change is disrupting traditional insurance models and data, with Markham citing industry reports that centuries of actuarial data are being undermined by frequent “once in a thousand year” extreme weather events. Derek confirms that climate change is increasing both the frequency and severity of events, forcing insurers to rework models and reconsider whether and how to continue offering certain coverages. He explains how insurers use loss ratios, expense ratios, and combined ratios to assess profitability, and how catastrophic years push combined ratios above 100%, meaning insurers lose money. Derek outlines different insurance needs, using farmers as an example: they require property coverage, sewer backup, crop hail insurance (sometimes including wildfire), and possibly groundwater coverage, illustrating how water-related risks intersect with agriculture.

Our conversation explores practical impacts on homeowners and commercial clients, including rising premiums and coverage limitations in high-risk areas such as floodplains along Calgary’s Elbow River and hail-prone regions like Medicine Hat and Red Deer. Derek notes that brokers have become more proactive in ensuring clients have sewer backup and at least some overland water coverage, even when full flood insurance is unavailable or unaffordable, while commercial property owners are increasingly attentive to severe weather risks, though not all explicitly link them to climate change. He explains reinsurance as “insurance for insurance companies,” provided by global reinsurers who are highly attuned to climate risk and can pressure domestic insurers to limit coverage in certain geographies, contributing to higher premiums and tighter terms. Markham and Derek discuss an emerging inflection point where rising premiums (e.g., a 50% increase after hail damage) and affordability crises may finally force consumers to connect climate change with personal financial risk, potentially prompting demands for “build back better” approaches and government involvement.

In the latter part of the conversation, we broaden the lens to systemic issues: government backstopping of major events like the 2013 floods, stalled efforts to create a national flood insurance program, and the growing complexity of wildfire and cyber risks. I raise mitigation strategies such as cloud seeding in Alberta’s “hail alley” between Calgary and Red Deer, and Derek explains the use of silver iodide to reduce hail size, while noting scalability limits and possible climate-change-driven storm intensity that outpaces response capacity. They then connect water, pollution, and energy: Markham and I highlight conflicts over water use between oil and gas, agriculture, and cities under worsening drought, and Derek warns about selenium pollution from coal mines in the Oldman River system, stressing that ongoing pollution is typically excluded from commercial insurance under absolute pollution exclusions, leaving taxpayers and communities exposed. I underscore that Alberta’s regulatory framework and reduced inspection capacity mean polluter-pay principles and remediation laws are not adequately enforced, while the province continues to allow the use and pollution of roughly four million barrels of fresh water per day for oil production, raising serious questions about doubling production amid severe drought and cumulative contamination.

Want more?

Listen to Bob Sandford explain the global water bankruptcy we are facing, his report for the UN came out in January 2026.

This conversation—from fall 2024—with Alberta conservation leaders, Lorne Fitch and Kevin Van Tighem, centers on the ecological crisis and water security issues in Alberta’s Eastern Slopes and headwaters, framed through cumulative impacts from activities like irrigation expansion, coal and gravel mining, clear‑cut forestry, fossil fuel development, and recreational off‑highway vehicle use. We emphasize that Alberta is a finite, increasingly arid headwaters province whose land‑use decisions already exceed ecological thresholds, undermining river flows, biodiversity, and downstream provinces’ water security. We argue that treating the eastern slopes as an “unexploited frontier” or a warehouse to be ransacked has produced flood and drought risks, degraded native trout habitat, and shifting baselines where many no longer recognize how much has been lost. Throughout, Kevin and Lorne help link land‑use choices directly to water management, insisting that every land decision is effectively a water decision, and that current regulatory and industrial frameworks fail to account for natural capital and long‑term ecological integrity.

In response, we explores what should stop and what should replace current practices. We criticize expanding irrigation and building more dams in a context of declining natural flows and climate‑driven aridity, noting that empty reservoirs cannot solve drought and that engineering approaches cannot “outrun” climate change. We call for halting new coal mining in the Eastern Slopes, curbing excessive clear‑cutting, reforming forestry in both working forests and protected areas, and rethinking urban and industrial expansion into wildlife corridors and sensitive groundwater‑dependent ecosystems. I argue that all new fossil fuel development should cease, with industry redirected toward abandonment, decommissioning, and large‑scale restoration, including addressing hundreds of thousands of oil and gas sites and massive oil sands tailings ponds. We also highlight problematic technological “fixes,” from carbon capture and storage to atmospheric chemical injection by insurers, as examples of trying to control rather than work with nature, often creating new risks.

The conversation then turns to solutions and pathways forward, balancing individual and collective responsibility. On the personal side, Alex uses Calgary’s water‑main rupture to illustrate how simple behavioural changes—like skipping one toilet flush—can scale to millions of liters saved, while I contrast this with the vast volumes of water sent daily to oil sands tailings to show the importance of scale. Collectively, we stress the need for courageous land‑use planning that embeds cumulative‑effects science, ecological thresholds, and the value of water, space, and biodiversity, rather than entrenching status quo economic uses like timber, beef, and motorized recreation. We advocate for large‑scale, ecologically meaningful restoration—beyond “postage stamp” projects—across the eastern slopes and South Saskatchewan River basin, including removing roads, restoring beavers and wetlands, and supporting regenerative agriculture, while creating meaningful jobs for youth and reorienting environmental graduates toward repair rather than further development.

Finally, we discuss how to organize and build the political and cultural will to act. Kevin recounts how opposition to opening the Eastern Slopes to coal mining united ranchers, Indigenous communities, hunters, fishers, urban environmentalists, and people across the political spectrum, demonstrating the power of collective stewardship of common land. Building on this, he proposes a “macro” strategy of reclaiming the narrative from vested interests—e.g., resisting misframing climate‑driven fires as forest‑management failures—and a “micro” strategy of choosing one headwater sub‑drainage to fully restore as a proof of concept for water security, biodiversity, and landscape health. Lorne and Colin emphasize bioregional organizing, knitting together local leaders and existing groups in each major headwater watershed, engaging with tools like Alberta’s nature strategy survey and South Saskatchewan Regional Plan review while also building grassroots, basin‑scale voices that can steward public lands. The conversation closes with Kevin and Lorne underscoring that the eastern slopes are a gift from previous generations, part of Albertans’ “DNA,” and that honouring this legacy means not squandering it but embracing stewardship, recognizing that every land‑use choice is a water decision, and focusing one’s efforts where they can be most effective.

One outstanding question lingers: How far is too far?

According to the Government of Alberta.

The episode—from the Water in Southern Alberta podcast miniseries co-hosted with Bob Morrison which originally aired in June 2025—brings together legal and planning experts to unpack how Alberta’s water law and water market function, especially in southern Alberta. Arlene Kwasniak, a long‑time scholar of water law from the University of Calgary, outlines the complex legal framework governing water, starting from the Canadian Constitution’s division of powers between federal and provincial governments over issues like fisheries, navigation, federal lands, Indigenous lands, and provincial property in water. She emphasizes that alongside federal and provincial statutes, Indigenous law, common law, international law, and policy all influence water management, but her focus is on Alberta’s Water Act and water‑use rights. Before modern legislation, common law riparian rights gave only landowners adjacent to water bodies limited household and “extraordinary” uses, with built‑in equity and sustainability because all riparians shared the same rights and could enforce them in court. These rights were largely extinguished by the Northwest Irrigation Act, which vested ownership of provincial waters in the Crown and introduced the prior allocation principle—“first in time, first in right” (FITFIR)—where licence priority is determined by date of application and senior users are fully satisfied before juniors in times of shortage.

Arlene traces the evolution from the Northwest Irrigation Act to Alberta’s Water Resources Act and then the Water Act, noting that groundwater was brought under Crown ownership and FITFIR in 1962, replacing the old rule of capture. The Water Act introduced major river basin divisions and approved water management plans—currently for the South Saskatchewan, Battle, and Milk River basins—which must be considered in key regulatory decisions like transfers. It also created statutory authorizations: household and agricultural exemptions with quantified annual volumes, and licences that grant diversion rights for specified purposes (municipal, irrigation, commercial, habitat enhancement, recreation, water conservation objectives, and others) typically on renewable 10‑year terms, while older licences have no expiry and are easily renewed. New licences can include water conservation objective (WCO) conditions that allow the director to restrict diversions when flows fall below set thresholds, whereas older licences may have in‑stream objectives (IOs) that are generally less protective. Arlene contrasts both WCOs and IOs with scientifically determined in‑stream flow needs (IFNs), arguing that WCOs and IOs are more politically set and often below IFN levels, limiting ecosystem protection.

Assessing the Water Act against an idealized water law, Arlene finds major shortcomings. She notes that while there are some tools to curb impacts for new licences, existing licences are strongly protected, there is no expropriation power for water rights, and cancellation is only possible when rights have gone unused for three years with no reasonable prospect of use. The Act offers only limited mechanisms to secure sufficient in‑stream flows, does not recognize or secure Indigenous water rights, and does not integrate quantity and quality regulation, conjunctive management of surface and groundwater, formal watershed governance, clear rules for alternative sources (wastewater, rainwater, stormwater, saline water), or climate change mitigation and adaptation—though the government is proposing amendments on some of these fronts. Household use has the highest priority, partially securing basic human needs. Overall, Arlene would grade the Act a “D” and says she would not pass it, arguing Alberta could have moved away from FITFIR toward more equitable systems like those in Saskatchewan, Australia, and New Zealand, but powerful sectors—oil and gas, municipalities, and agriculture—resisted change. In practice, Davin McIntosh—a water rights consultant and broker who specializes in facilitating water transfers in Alberta, with prior experience as a planning and municipal development lawyer and involvement in a significant proportion of water transfers in the Bow River Basin and Southern Alberta—points out that priority calls under FITFIR are rarely made, with Alberta preferring voluntary reductions to avoid cutting off junior users, especially municipalities whose licences are technically subject to FITFIR but whose drinking water cannot realistically be curtailed.

Davin then explains why and how water transfers were introduced. As recognition grew in the 1980s–1990s that full exercise of long‑standing rights could push rivers below environmentally sustainable levels, the Water Act added transfer provisions, and a 2007 moratorium on new licences in many areas made transfers the main mechanism for reallocating water. He describes an eight‑step process:

* finding a suitable right (difficult because rights are rarely advertised and cancellation risk discourages signalling non‑use),

* negotiating price and contracts despite uncertainty of approval,

* confirming the licence is in good standing (including compliance checks and sometimes costly reconstruction of works to match old plans),

* submitting a paper application,

* responding to extensive and discretionary requests for information from the director,

* publishing mandatory public notice and handling statements of concern, possible public meetings, and finally a decision. He highlights the director’s broad discretion and evolving, often unwritten policies—such as disallowing transfers “around a corner” in a Y‑shaped tributary, apportionment rules limiting how much can move from a mainstem to a tributary,

* partial good‑standing determinations, and

* the 10% conservation holdback that created government WCO licences but is now proposed to be scrapped due to limited overall transfer volumes.

With only about 400 transfers approved since 2007, roughly half being arm’s‑length, the conservation holdback has not significantly boosted in‑stream protection.

Throughout the discussion, we stress that enforcement of ecological needs and federal powers has been weak. Arlene notes that IFNs are not directly recognized in the Water Act, that WCOs and IOs fall short of IFNs, and that private in‑stream flow licences are not currently allowed, though government can and has issued WCO licences to itself.

More water lessons within the Water In Southern Alberta miniseries.

Bob Sandford introduces himself to the Concerned Citizens on Climate Change (4C) group, in February of 2026, as a long-time Alberta-based water and climate expert who now serves as senior government relations liaison for global climate emergency response at the UN University Institute for Water, Environment and Health, noting that his institute recently launched a major global report on “global water bankruptcy” at the UN General Assembly. He frames his remarks within UN principles and Indigenous rights, emphasizing that all cultures contribute to a shared human heritage. From his vantage point as an Albertan, he criticizes the UCP government’s libertarian direction, arguing that its policies undermine healthcare, education, and environmental protection while flooding the public sphere with divisive, misleading messaging that distracts from deeper crises and an apparent agenda to dismantle democracy and separate Alberta from Canada. He warns that amid these distractions, a long‑advancing global water crisis has become an even more immediate threat than accelerated climate warming, which Alberta’s government largely denies.

Sandford explains the UN “global water bankruptcy” concept as a post‑crisis state where societies persistently withdraw more water than renewable flows can support, depleting natural capital such as snowpack, glaciers, wetlands, and groundwater that provide “liquid income.” The report shows that even water‑rich countries like Canada, and regions such as southern Alberta, are not immune and may be nearing water bankruptcy, prompting initiatives like the Canada Water Agency. He argues that Alberta has failed to “repay” nature through forest, watershed, and biodiversity protection, and that maladaptive responses—creating weak watershed bodies, building more dams, drilling deeper wells, and diverting rivers—temporarily mask insecurity while deepening insolvency. Nature, he says, is now “initiating foreclosure” by shutting off water, as seen in glacier loss and shrinking snow and ice, and each drained wetland or logged headwater further erodes resilience beyond what engineering can replace.

Summary continues before this news update!

WOW: Did you see Hoekstra on Ryan Jespersen’s Real Talk?

With water bankruptcy—and the West Texas Intermediate system collapse on the horizon—can you believe what is coming out of Pete Hoekstra’s mouth?

Frequency of Contact with Alberta Premier:

Admits that he talks to Alberta Premier Danielle Smith “maybe once every three or four weeks” and speaks with her representatives in Ottawa “at least every week.”

Lack of Expertise on Canadian Perspectives:

States: “I’m not an expert on Canadian citizens or why they think the way that they do or what drives them and those kinds of things.” This is Pete’s job.

Acknowledgment of the “No Need for Canada” Position:

Confirms: “He says we don’t need Canada” — acknowledging that the president has made this statement on the record.

The Sales Approach:

Expects the Canadian provinces to “put on your sales hat” and actively pitch why buying from Canada is beneficial, rather than expecting automatic trade relationships.

Bob and Water Bankruptcy continued

Looking ahead, Sandford urges Alberta to formally acknowledge water bankruptcy risk and adopt transparent, fair rules for sharing scarcity, with participatory processes and strong social safety nets—conditions he says are absent under the current government. He links water security directly to food security and broader sustainable and circular economies, noting that water is often the only issue warring or divided groups can agree on, citing examples from the Middle East, the Northwest Territories, and transboundary agreements with Alberta. He highlights emerging climate science from James Hansen suggesting another El Niño and accelerated warming that could push global temperatures toward 2°C in the 2030s, with Canada warming at twice the global rate, implying severe drought, reduced snowpack, year‑round wildfire risk, and deep social and economic disruption in Alberta by 2027 and beyond. He likens the current moment to “Munich 1939,” arguing that Alberta is unprepared for three degrees of warming, with unpredictable precipitation, concurrent floods and droughts, and increasingly manipulated water licensing.

Politically, Sandford and other speakers connect water to a broader project of “rescuing, reviving, and restoring democracy” in Alberta, suggesting that the looming threat of water bankruptcy could galvanize citizens across issues like education, healthcare, and food security without relying on existing political parties.

TAKE ACTION

Join Public Interest Alberta’s, “No thanks. We choose hope.” Campaign!

In light of the closing of the Alberta Water Council—as we learned from Jay White—and the 2026 Global Water Bankruptcy report—courtesy of Bob Sandford—now is a great time to revisit Engineer J. Bruce Smedley’s recommendation to form a public water agency.

This conversation from August 2024 centers on Alberta’s escalating water crisis, framed by drought conditions, failing infrastructure, and inadequate government planning and oversight. I outline recent drought impacts, including four southern Alberta communities that had to have water trucked in, and highlights the auditor general’s findings: modelling is limited to parts of the province, most basins lack conservation objectives, there is weak monitoring of water pressure and risk triggers, and enforcement of water licenses and compliance is ineffective. Bruce stress that current models assume “water in equals water out” and ignore losses from heat and evapotranspiration, and that surface water analysis is largely missing, with monitoring focused on rivers and streams rather than the full hydrological picture. We also connect Alberta’s decisions to downstream regions, noting that Alberta is effectively “the taps” for Saskatchewan and Manitoba,—not the Mississippi basin (oops!)—so local choices have far-reaching consequences.

Against this backdrop, Bruce presents his proposal for an integrated water resource preservation and restoration agency that is public, independent, apolitical, interdisciplinary, intercultural, and accountable.

Bruce’s Water Agency Framework

* Terms of Reference: coherent initiative of social planning with an interdisciplinary approach to managing water basin resources and their uses to identify and satisfy water resource stability and sustainability sufficient to secure ecological, social, and human subsistence indefinitely given resource conflicts, external disruptions, and climate change.

* Scope of work: to include intake, withdrawal and loss of every drop of surface water, groundwater, aquifer, relative to watershed management including; flood control, tourism, hydropower, fisheries, water quality, navigation, sand and gravel extraction, and riverbank enhancement, erosion, relocation, etc.

* Adequate data collection and information consistent with the scope and modeling requirements.

* Scenario modeling and analysis including climate change, extreme weather, financial and institutional risk.

* Government and public response, input, and real time communication and information.

* Forecast modeling consistent with sustaining food, health, safety, ecosystem, and biomass sustainability.

* Agency accountability that ensures system integrity and optimized investment decisions, allocation of capital resources, time horizons, and project implementation and operations.

* Communication to inform public awareness. disaster readiness, and ensure contingency plans are available for rapid disaster response, food and water security, as well as communicate cost, liability, and inherent risk in real time, consistent with global weather fluctuations of hours, days, and weeks.

* Government and industry funding, staffing, scheduling, and accountability.

His letter calls for a 10,000‑foot, river‑basin‑wide perspective that considers future water supply under climate change, glacier loss, and increasingly extreme and erratic weather, rather than just current allocations. He argues that no one is currently modelling entire basins or systematically integrating rainfall, aquifers, usage, and ecosystem needs across agriculture, urban, recreational, and wildlife uses. The proposed agency’s terms of reference include tracking intake, withdrawal, and loss of every drop of water from mountain precipitation through snow and ice fields to river flows, recognizing that only about 25% of falling moisture becomes usable river water. It would use complex systems modelling and advances in mathematics and AI to run scenario analyses, identify failure points, and guide long‑term, province‑wide planning, funded on a multi‑decade horizon rather than political cycles.

The discussion then broadens into practical implications, governance gaps, and examples of both failure and opportunity. We describe failing and aging infrastructure, such as Calgary’s major water pipe installed 49 years ago and similar vulnerabilities in other systems, noting that promises of “hundred‑year” assets outlast the people responsible and erode accountability. We criticize fragmented watershed councils that can only advise, not veto projects like proposed Bow River dams, and point out that infrastructure‑heavy solutions are being pursued despite scientific skepticism and uncertainty about future water availability. We highlight how development, oil and gas, and gravel extraction are expanding water use in sensitive areas even as shortages loom, and how sampling is mis‑targeted—focused on rivers rather than wells where contamination and drying are actually being observed by landowners. Bruce’s experience with government responses underscores a pattern of political “feel‑good” letters that claim things are under control without engaging the urgency or substance of his proposals, reinforcing the need for public pressure and stakeholder‑driven change.

Finally, we emphasize accountability, equity, and systemic thinking about water, food, and land use. Bruce insists that all humans need water and should be treated equitably, and that agriculture, urban use, and industry must be reconsidered to reduce waste, including shifting to local food systems such as rooftop or vertical farming to cut transport and water use. Alex cites Dutch vertical gardening and local greenhouse operations as proof that low‑water, local production is feasible and could reduce emissions and pesticide use. We argue that small changes—like replacing imported strawberries with local production—can significantly alter complex models because everything is interrelated, and warn that once we alter systems (e.g., dams, clear‑cuts, urban heat islands), there is “no going back,” so interventions must be carefully evaluated for ecosystem impacts on flora, fauna, and even jet streams.

Next Up, I’ll jump ahead reshare Bob Sandford’s outlining of risks of Global Water Bankruptcy. Stay tuned!

Help me get to 500 subscribers on YouTube and 1000 here on Substack! Like and share this video.

The Gravity Well project as an effort to use dialogue to address environmental and social dilemmas, with a particular focus on water crises in Southern Alberta and the Eastern slopes as “taps” that are being degraded by logging, coal mining, oil and gas, and roads, as referred to in my conversation with Harley Bastien. This episode, released in August of 2024, features environmental historian, Shannon Stunden Bower, an associate professor at the University of Alberta, a white settler scholar working in environmental history and historical geography, and a leader in the Network in Canadian History and Environment (NiCHE), which aims to bring historical perspectives on human and non‑human nature to researchers, the public, and policymakers through blogs, books, and other publications. Bruce Smedley, a professional engineer with 50 years’ experience in environmental projects worldwide, adds that water has been central to industries from pulp and paper to mining and fisheries, and that his long engagement with climate change and environmental impact assessments has made him attentive to how industry, governments, and Indigenous communities intersect around water issues.

Shannon then situates the famous “Dust Bowl” drought of the 1930s in a longer climate and economic context, explaining that settlers arrived during an unusually wet 15‑year period and mistook those conditions for normal, whereas tree‑ring records show that multi‑year droughts are part of the Prairie West’s long‑term climate. The 1930s crisis was intensified by three factors: lower‑than‑expected precipitation, collapsing wheat prices during the global depression, and accumulating damage from unsustainable agricultural practices such as black summer fallow, which degraded soils. We connect this to colonial policy, noting how agricultural colonization and the creation of Alberta and Saskatchewan in 1905 were intertwined with the Department of Indian Affairs under Duncan Campbell Scott, reserve segregation, and legal mechanisms that dispossessed Indigenous peoples and blocked their emerging agricultural success, such as among the Blackfoot in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Shannon elaborates that agricultural settlement was “tightly coupled” with Indigenous dispossession, genocidal policies, and measures like the Peasant Farming policy that forced Indigenous farmers to use outdated technology while neighbouring settlers used modern machinery, all within a broader “clearing the plains” project described by James Daschuk.

Our discussion turns to the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (PFRA), created in 1935 as part of Canada’s “New Deal” response to the 1930s emergency, and operating until its elimination in 2009 under Stephen Harper’s government in what some have called a “war on science.” Shannon describes PFRA’s early soil‑conservation strategy of strip farming—alternating cropped and fallowed strips to anchor topsoil—which produced unintended consequences by creating more field edges that favoured wheat stem sawflies, leading to severe pest outbreaks that caused some farmers to abandon strip farming despite ongoing soil loss. PFRA’s small‑scale water development projects, such as dugouts and stock‑watering ponds, are presented as relatively successful in providing reliable water for households, gardens, and livestock without large‑scale irrigation, whereas later large irrigation schemes were more complex. Shannon also recounts PFRA’s role in international development in northern Ghana, where Canadian expertise was exported to build water infrastructure; the project had mixed technical success but led to serious unintended health impacts due to increased water‑related diseases carried by snails and mosquitoes—risks that had not been present in the Canadian prairies—highlighting the dangers of transplanting models without local ecological and cultural knowledge.

From there, the conversation broadens to contemporary farming, irrigation, and governance. Bruce notes that many prairie farmers historically arrived with little climate knowledge, took decades to learn the land, and now face soil deterioration and micronutrient loss after a century of farming, while cultural mismatches—whether Europeans in Canada or Canadians in Africa—underscore the importance of local knowledge. Shannon explains that farms have grown larger since the 1930s, making intimate, soil‑attentive management harder, and that the elimination of PFRA and other public agricultural science capacity under neoliberal “small government” has left farmers more dependent on corporations like Monsanto, whose mandate is profit rather than public interest, thereby increasing farmer vulnerability. She traces Alberta’s irrigation history from small individual schemes to corporate and cooperative models, and then to a 1930s shift that framed irrigation as a public good to justify state investment in large infrastructure, with later efficiency gains in the 1960s–70s; nonetheless, she stresses that “you can’t build your way out” of most problems and that more infrastructure alone often creates new issues. We contrast proposals for more dams, irrigation, and even north‑south water transfers—raising concerns about species transfer and failing infrastructure like the Oldman Dam and St. Mary Reservoir—with their preference for restoring headwater forests, removing roads and industrial sites, and enhancing natural storage and habitat.

In the final part of the conversation, we explore potential paths forward. Alex advocates for wetland restoration as a low‑cost way to filter water, maintain movement to reduce sulphates and phosphates, and increase biodiversity, citing artificial wetland basins in his own community that effectively filter hill runoff before it reaches treatment plants. He and others draw parallels between past and present “New Deals,” migrant promises, and cycles of empire, industrialization, and monocropping, arguing that large machinery and annual GMO seed systems from companies like Bayer have disconnected farmers from their land and trapped them in unsustainable models, while small‑scale, greenhouse‑based local food production offers more intimate, resilient alternatives.

Check Out More from Shannon and Bruce in the Water in Southern Alberta podcast mini-series.

In May of 2024, after watching the Dried Up documentary, I reached out to Harley Bastien of the Piikani First Nation. I asked Harley to tell me what I am missing in my thinking and he delivered. Reviewing this conversation today, I notice that I open with reference to Dixon Hammond and the Beaver Creek Watershed Crew, as well as giving power to landowners, not First Nations—yikes! A couple weeks ago at the Chiefs Steering Committee’s Think Tank on Water in Edmonton that the term “stakeholder” refers to taking a stake. Makes me wonder if it was not a coincident that I worked in the “Stakeholder Relations” department for the oil and gas industry rather than the Indigenous Relations department.

The conversation begins with me situating the dialogue in the context of watershed protection and headwaters stewardship in Southern Alberta, describing how a local council brought together Indigenous representatives, residents, experts, and council members to ensure landowners lead decisions about their river system. I explain that despite 20 years of local work to care for the river, the broader headwaters remain vulnerable, emphasizing that logging, coal mining, and road building damage water sources and calling for restoration of the eastern slopes as protected “taps” for regional water.

Harley introduces himself through his Blackfoot identity, explaining that he comes from the Ani people and sees himself as part of a lineage stretching back perhaps 10,000 generations, with a way of life “etched” into his being. He describes being taught that humans are not above other creation, that everything—including plants, animals, air, and even beings beyond Earth—has a spirit, and that Blackfoot teachings acknowledge “star people” or star beings who have visited Earth. Alongside this traditional upbringing, he recounts his “Canadian” education, brief work in oil and gas that he left because of its destructive impacts, and his subsequent decades in environmental consulting, where he deliberately avoided government employment and instead built private-sector initiatives like Harmony Walkers and Buffalo Rock Tipi Camp to blend Indigenous and Western science. He also serves on Alberta’s Indigenous Wisdom Advisory Panel but criticizes its focus on making oil sands appear acceptable, calling this misaligned with his values.

As the discussion deepens, Harley contrasts Indigenous land-based learning with Western education, arguing that many scientists and professionals learn about land from computers and brief field visits rather than living on the land, which he sees as “missing the whole boat.” He recounts a vision quest that led him to “save the land” as a way of saving his culture and all those generations, and he critiques how perspectives are shaped by greed, arrogance, and narrow upbringing. He is sharply critical of Western schooling and religion, calling education “one of the roots of all evil” when it transmits lies, such as teaching that Columbus “discovered” a land already inhabited, or presenting sanitized histories that erase Indigenous presence and contributions. He denounces churches as often functioning like financial institutions and “torture chambers,” rejects mythologized religious narratives, and insists that children are being failed when they are not taught the truth about history, land, and humanity’s dependence on the rest of creation.

Harley then links these critiques directly to environmental crisis and intergenerational responsibility, stressing that trees, animals, air, and water do not need humans, but humans absolutely need them. He condemns short-term, self-centered thinking focused on personal wealth, three-year returns, and material legacies while ignoring breathable air, clean water, and the broader web of life, arguing that most people are “me and ours” oriented and unwilling to look 100–200 years ahead. He describes “giving back” as a total life commitment—every day his “boots hit the floor” he is working for Mother Earth and all his relatives, not just human descendants, and he criticizes performative or minimal efforts, unpaid though his own work often is. Using stories from his childhood berry-picking in the mountains, he illustrates teachings about leaving enough for other beings, staying quiet to respect mountain spirits, and the warning that if those spirits leave, the mountains and all dependent life will suffer—contrasting this with today’s “three ring circus” of industrial activity and recreation in the headwaters that threatens to dry rivers and spark future “water wars.”

In closing, Harley asserts that Mother Earth will survive and reorganize without humans, as she has before, and warns that if humanity continues on its current path, nature will eventually “flush the toilet of man,” a force no wealth, science, or military can stop. He expresses that he personally has no hope under present conditions but invites others to prove him wrong by changing, emphasizing that the first step is truth—especially in education—through revising curricula to correct myths about figures like Columbus and Cortez and acknowledging that colonial powers had no legitimate right to claim Indigenous lands.

Follow and Support: Harley’s legacy lives on in his son, Trevor Bastien

The Surest Way to Block Open-Pit Coal Mining

Join our Piikani Partners in asserting their constitutional aboriginal right to healthfully consume fish from their traditional waters of the Crowsnest and Oldman Rivers.

This episode previously aired in February of 2024, Colin Smith of Land Lovers Network joined Alex MacGillivray (my former co-host) and I. Colin and I connected through anti–clear‑cut logging advocacy with the Calgary Climate Hub in Southern Alberta. Colin introduces himself as a lifelong Southern Albertan with a background as an electrician, small business owner, and caregiver, now extending his caregiving to land and ecosystems; he describes how caring for his grandmother during the pandemic led him to deep engagement with soil microbiology, the soil food web, and high‑quality composting, culminating in Compost Club meetups at an urban farm hub in Calgary.

A major portion of this discussion unpacks the “nine planetary boundaries” popularized by Joe Brewer’s work on regenerating Cascadia, which I frame as “laws of the land” as literal earth system limits and a way to define the polycrisis humanity faces. Colin walks through boundaries including climate change, biosphere integrity, land‑system change, freshwater change, biogeochemical flows (nitrogen and phosphorus), ocean acidification, atmospheric aerosol loading, stratospheric ozone depletion, and novel entities like microplastics and PFAS chemicals, emphasizing that most thresholds have already been crossed and that nitrogen/phosphorus flows are “most off the chart.” Colin adds detailed examples such as Lake Winnipeg’s blue‑green algae and microcystin issues linked to phosphates and dams, and notes Geological Survey of Canada findings that such formations are associated with several major past extinctions, while Colin and Alex highlight the ubiquity of microplastics and PFAS, including tire‑derived microplastics reaching even remote mountain lakes. They stress that these interacting boundaries create feedbacks—such as aerosols temporarily masking warming—and that recent removal of Sulphur from marine fuels may have accelerated atmospheric warming, illustrating how different boundaries can counteract or amplify each other.

In response to this crisis, our conversation shifts to bioregions and ecological‑based economies, drawing on Indigenous territorial perspectives and watershed‑based governance. Colin explains bioregions as nested, fractal landscape units defined by watersheds, flora, fauna, and climate, using Southern Alberta’s Bow River Basin and its tributaries (Ghost, Jumping Pound, Elbow, Highwood, Sheep, Oldman) as examples, and contrasts this with nation‑state borders and modern capitalism’s pull toward resource extraction and urban concentration. Alex and Colin discuss territorial self‑governance and local food systems, citing Redcliff, Alberta’s large greenhouse complex as a model for year‑round vegetable production that reduces transport emissions, and proposing co‑locating greenhouses with existing gas wells to use natural gas and captured carbon for food production. Colin and I then highlight social design principles from Joe Brewer’s work: defining shared identity and purpose, equitable allocation of contributions and benefits, fair and inclusive decision‑making, fast conflict resolution, and “stability projects” as a starting point before deeper regeneration, all aimed at moving from a wasteful, ever‑growth economy toward collective, outcomes‑based systems.

Throughout, we grapple with the emotional and political dimensions of ecological collapse. Colin argues that recent spikes in wildfires, floods, drought, and other anomalies suggest we are “outside of the realm of survivability” for current lifestyles, and criticizes short‑term political thinking and promises of unlimited growth, calling instead for grassroots, mycelium‑like community organizing, unexpected alliances across political divides, and a redefinition of wealth away from material growth toward regeneration of natural abundance. He and I emphasize the need to face grief and fear together, avoid tribalism, and use nature itself—through initiatives like Land Lovers and Compost Club—as a healing, community‑building context that mirrors the diversity and interdependence of healthy ecosystems. The episode closes with me reiterating that the crisis is not just “climate change” but a nine‑facet planetary problem driven by a wasteful growth economy, and expressing hope that conversations like this, and potential collaboration with Joe Brewer, can help “pull the tapestry together” among many people already doing ecological work in Alberta and beyond.

For more information on Joe Brewer’s work, check out this YouTube playlist on bioregional organizing I made:

This conversation centers on plug-in or “balcony” solar systems and how to make them safe, legal, and accessible in Canada, particularly Alberta. Chris Cashen, CEO and co‑founder of Volta Home, explains that his Vancouver-based startup is building what they describe as the first compliant plug‑in solar solution for North America, having spent about a year on the project and recently completing lab validation with a utility partner and Powertech Labs in BC. A simple connection is meant to make rooftop or patio solar accessible to many types of occupants, including renters.

Dr. Joe Vipond from the Calgary Climate Hub describes their charity’s role in empowering Calgarians to participate in climate solutions, including through an electricity working group that became interested in European “balcony solar” as a way for renters, condo owners, and people without suitable roofs to join the energy transition. He notes that plug‑in solar can offset about a third of a household’s electricity use, which is significant in the current context of energy costs. I mention that jurisdictions like England are pushing such legislation in response to energy shortages linked to the war in Iran, framing this as a timely discussion. Joe and the host also highlight that current microgeneration regulations were written for larger rooftop systems, not small 800–1200 W plug‑in units, so the law simply hasn’t caught up yet.

Chris outlines the complex stakeholder landscape—safety and compliance bodies, utilities, authorities having jurisdiction, municipalities, and even fire departments—and explains that Volta Home began by working with Underwriters Laboratories and engaging CSA to create and harmonize UL 3700 across North America so manufacturers can build to a single standard and reduce costs. He describes how they then engaged their local utility to validate grid export and compensation for homeowners, noting that in Europe millions of such systems have been deployed, adding near utility-scale capacity in a short time and offering utilities a potential advantage if they support rather than block the technology. Looking ahead, Chris expects a UL 3700 technical committee to form around late fall to early winter, with a possible official standard by mid‑next year, after which “nano generation” policies—similar to Germany’s simple online registration for sub‑600/800 W systems—would be needed to unlock widespread adoption.

Joe explains that while anyone can technically assemble a panel and microinverter and plug it in today, doing so is illegal because current legislation requires an interconnection permit and a licensed electrician, making small systems uneconomical: systems might cost $800–$1,600, but the interconnection permit in Alberta is at least $4,000 plus roughly $1,000 in electrician costs. The Calgary Climate Hub is therefore pushing legislative changes to remove the interconnection requirement for these small systems, mandate compliance with standards like UL 3700, establish a “right to install” despite landlords or condo boards, and provide liability releases for utilities and other entities. Joe cites Europe’s more than four million installed systems and the absence of solar-related safety incidents (with only one fire tied to a battery system, which is not what they’re currently discussing) as evidence of safety. He calls plug‑in solar a “no‑brainer” for homeowners, utilities, and governments, and urges citizens to support the campaign via pluginsolarpower.ca by sending letters and signing petitions, while Chris recommends using that site as a central “single source of truth” and notes that federal policy, modeled on Germany or the UK, is needed to align standards, legislation, and market adoption across Canada.

Join the Calgary Climate Hub MONDAY, June 29 at the Sunalta Community Hall from 6-8:30 pm.

Please note: I am taking a break over the summer and will be running water conversation reruns from the past 3 season.

Reach out should you wish to discuss something urgent!

The conversation begins with two updates from me before Brad Lafortune of Public Interest Alberta announces a new campaign called “Together—NO!” aiming to oppose Premier Smith’s treasonous October 19, 2026 Alberta referendum which— beyond the illegal separation question—includes nine questions on immigration and constitutional issues handpicked, leading, and designed to secure “yes” votes aligned with a US agenda regardless of separation. Brad and I argue these questions scapegoat immigrants, attempt to rewrite the Constitution without public demand, and distract from real concerns like affordability, healthcare, education, and cost of living, framing the campaign as a collective, positive “no” to division, chaos, and rights erosion while affirming a desire to remain in Canada and protect democratic processes.

Public Interest Alberta is a nonpartisan, nonprofit, grassroots advocacy organization with about a thousand volunteers across the province, supported by unions such as Health Sciences and UNA, focused on public services and democracy and refusing government funding. They see themselves as a suitable vehicle to coordinate a large, four‑month, province‑wide campaign involving hundreds of volunteers and many partner organizations, including existing networks like Forever Canadian, Water Not Coal, Recall Nicoladies, and groups such as Alberta Voice and the Calgary Alliance for the Common Good, as well as faith communities and newcomer‑serving agencies. The campaign is explicitly framed as a “David and Goliath” effort against a well‑funded government communications push, with the speakers emphasizing the need for people‑powered organizing, financial donations, and broad civil‑society collaboration to send a clear message that “Alberta’s better than this referendum.”

A major component of the strategy is a robust, data‑driven approach: Together—NO! is working with an experienced Canadian polling firm to test assumptions, measure baseline attitudes, evaluate which messages are most and least effective, and see how government framing holds up when contrasted with fact‑ and values‑based counter‑arguments. We highlight how prior polling on issues like the polluter‑pay principle showed high support “when prompted,” revealing that awareness, not agreement, was the main gap—an insight we want to replicate here to tailor outreach, raise awareness of misleading question framing, and continually refine messaging through both polling and feedback from real conversations on the ground. This research will guide whether the campaign will address the referendum as a whole or focus on specific questions, and help them “meet people where they’re at” while keeping the core goal of securing “no” votes on the agenda.

Operationally, the campaign is built around a mix of digital infrastructure, regional organizing, and direct outreach. The website albertareferendum2026.org hosts a pledge form where people can commit to voting, volunteering, or donating, and serves as the central hub for staying in touch. We are developing regional campaigns in Calgary, Edmonton, Lethbridge, and likely other cities such as Grande Prairie and Fort McMurray, with plans for extensive canvassing, event tabling, literature drops for those uncomfortable with door‑knocking, and a “road show” in August and September across about 15 locations featuring campaign launches and town halls. Training is structured in two main tracks: “train‑the‑trainer” programs to build local leadership capable of running canvassing operations and regional campaigns, and canvassing workshops (including deep canvassing techniques) to prepare volunteers for hard conversations, equip them with facts about immigrants’ contributions and taxation, and build confidence for door‑to‑door engagement.

Throughout, Brad and I stress values of fairness, neighbourliness, and solidarity, arguing that most Albertans do not want to “punish” newcomers who work, pay taxes, and support communities, and that the government is trying to manufacture scapegoats and a “firewall” narrative that doesn’t reflect real Alberta values. We frame the campaign as an opportunity to build long‑term organizing capacity, empower local leaders, and create space for constructive, respectful conversations that both “agitate” their base and help people reach their own understanding, with the ultimate aim of emerging from the referendum with stronger democratic engagement and renewed focus on strengthening public services rather than pursuing divisive, racially charged constitutional experiments.

Take Action Saturday, June 27 from 11-4 pm.

A rally for Unity from 11 am to 1:45 pm at the McDougall Centre, then an Anti-AI Rally from 2-4 pm!

I am taking a hiatus from the podcast over the summer, I will be rerunning the conversations focused on water to highlight the people doing this work. Should something come up which needs to be discussed, in your opinion, please let me know.

I am speaking at both events tomorrow, I hope to see you there!

The conversation is with Jay White, a professional biologist in Alberta, who recounts his long involvement with the Alberta Water Council and its origins in the early 2000s under the province’s Water for Life strategy. He explains how the Council was conceived as part of a “nested” governance model: the Alberta Water Council at the provincial policy level, watershed planning and advisory councils (WPACs) at the basin level, and local watershed stewardship groups doing on‑the‑ground work. White describes the Council’s multi‑stakeholder composition—environmental NGOs, industry sectors, governments at all levels, and First Nations—emphasizing that participants left sectoral identities at the door to work collaboratively on water issues in a non‑adversarial, confidential setting. Over 22–23 years, he moved from representing the Alberta Lake Management Society to chairing the NGO caucus and serving as vice president, and he still meets with former NGO colleagues despite the Council’s dissolution.

White outlines the “Water for Life” strategy’s three pillars:

* safe, secure drinking water,

* healthy aquatic ecosystems, and

* reliable water supplies for a sustainable economy.

In its early years, the Council quickly tackled drinking water by reviewing 525 major facilities to ensure licensed operators and compliance. Subsequent work focused on water supply for the economy and attempted, with difficulty, to define and operationalize “healthy aquatic ecosystems,” including a failed attempt to define riparian areas that was rejected by government lawyers. Major outputs included a draft provincial wetland policy delivered in 2008, which the government only translated into the current policy in 2013, and a voluntary initiative where all water‑using sectors reduced water use by 30% within two years, a target the chair had chosen somewhat arbitrarily. White notes the Council also produced numerous documents on drought, floods, drinking water, and source water protection, largely through volunteer project teams supported by a small staff, arguing the province received exceptional value for minimal funding.

The turning point of the conversation is the Alberta government’s abrupt decision to terminate the Alberta Water Council. White recounts receiving a January 26 letter giving the Council 90 days to wind down, despite a grant that was supposed to run until late 2026, and being asked to chair the final full board meeting. He reads his “Jerry Maguire moment” statement, in which he condemns the decision as deeply disappointing and the process as a three‑month “erasure” of 23 years of collaborative governance, trust, and capacity. He stresses that the Council was not ineffective or obsolete but “patient” and “inconvenient to haste,” and warns that the loss of its advisory role will be felt later as policy gaps and fractured relationships. Afterward, colleagues reacted with stunned silence and later messages of support; White and others believe the 90‑day cutoff was designed to prevent the Council from securing new operational funding, which typically takes years to obtain. The host connects this to a broader pattern of “erasure,” including reports of documents being removed from government offices after the 2019 election and the rapid dismantling or absorption of major entities in the oil and gas sector.

Board Colleagues, There are moments when the decisions of those in power do more than alter budgets or reorganize priorities. They reveal what we value—and, more troublingly, what we are willing to abandon. For twenty‑three years, the Alberta Water Council served as a place of careful listening. A forum where industry, communities, municipalities, and government itself met not as adversaries, but as stewards of a shared responsibility. Water, after all, is not ideological. It is not partisan. Water is life. And yet, with little warning and less regard, this work has been consigned to a three‑month farewell. Decades of trust, expertise, and collaboration reduced to a winding‑down period scarcely long enough to say goodbye—let alone account for what is being lost. This Council has spent twenty‑three years doing work that rarely makes headlines—and that is precisely why it mattered. As a Water for Life partner, the Alberta Water Council proved that shared governance and collaboration was not a weakness, but a strength. Industry, municipalities, NGOs, and government came to the same table—not to win, but to understand. We did not chase certainty. We built trust. And now, with three months’ notice, that trust is being asked to quietly disperse. I want to be clear about my reaction. I am deeply disappointed by this decision. And I am profoundly disturbed by the manner in which it was made. This was not an organization that failed. It was not ineffective. It was not obsolete. It was patient. It was careful. It was inconvenient to haste. Collaborative water policy is slow by design. It asks people who disagree to keep speaking. It insists that water—shared, finite, and unforgiving—deserves more than short timelines and abrupt conclusions. Three months is not a transition. It is an erasure. Long after this Council closes its doors, the consequences of this decision will remain—felt in policy gaps, fractured relationships, and lost capacity that cannot be reassembled on demand. History rarely marks the moment when stewardship ends. It only records when its absence is finally noticed. We did the work. We honored the responsibility. And that record will stand—whether it is acknowledged or not. Water policy advice is not dramatic. But its absence is. And one day, when foresight is urgently needed and quietly missing, we will recall that it did not vanish on its own. It was cancelled.

We then examine the broader dismantling of Alberta’s water governance architecture. Jay explains that WPACs are mandated to produce regular state‑of‑the‑watershed reports and integrated watershed management plans, but these plans are explicitly voluntary and lack regulatory hooks, leading some industry representatives to disengage once they realize there is no binding requirement. He notes that watershed stewardship groups, which implement on‑the‑ground projects like riparian fencing and off‑site watering, have lost a key funding conduit with the disappearance of the Land Stewardship Centre, creating competition for “paltry” remaining funds. With the Alberta Water Council gone at the top and stewardship funding cut at the bottom, only the WPACs remain, and their own funding agreements expire at the end of 2026, making 2027 a critical and uncertain year. I underscore that these structures were about ensuring clean, sufficient drinking water and functioning ecosystems that underpin the entire economy, and expresses alarm that advisory capacity is being casually removed.

In the latter part of the conversation, we connect Alberta’s situation to national and global biodiversity and climate commitments. White describes the federal “Force of Nature” policy, tied to Kunming biodiversity commitments and the goal of protecting 30% of land and waters by 2030, backed by $2.8 billion in funding. As a biologist working on wetland restoration projects, Jay was eager to see this funding support restoration and reclamation, especially given severe biodiversity losses—about 70% of aquatic species in North America and 40–50% of global biodiversity in the last 50 years—and the current “sixth major extinction” driven by humans. However, Alberta was skipped in the first funding round; White notes the provincial government claimed it did not need the money because 64% of Alberta (the green area) is Crown‑managed and supposedly “essentially undisturbed,” a claim he disputes by pointing to Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute data showing extensive human footprint and fragmentation.

Take Action: Write the ECCC and Alberta Environment Ministers

Subject: Enforce the “Force of Nature” Strategy in Alberta

To: julie.dabrusin@parl.gc.ca

Cc: epa.outreach-services@gov.ab.ca (Grant Hunter); your MLA, the Premier

Dear Hon. Julie Dabrusin,

It has come to my attention that Alberta did not receive any Federal grant money related to the Federal Nature Strategy. As a province with the largest ongoing environmental catastrophe underway—where interbasin transfers are being contemplated to sustain an outrageous level of steam injection and extraction, with growing groundwater contamination concerns, coupled with more than 275,000 conventional oil and gas sites to be restored—I am shocked our province did not seek or receive funding in this program.

Restoring nature is required for Alberta and Canada to regain ecological stability. Each province should receive funds and measure success through biodiversity and water monitoring and mitigation efforts.

Considering the energy and ecological cliff this province and country is facing (due to the war on Iran and the unchecked climate crisis), it is time to ensure this work aligns with Species at Risk and Land Stewardship Laws before it is too late. There is no question we face water bankruptcy if we do not take nature restoration work seriously.

Please advise how Environment and Climate Change Canada and Alberta Environment are working together to ensure the province takes its role seriously in these efforts. The federal government needs to cease oil and gas development, pipelines, tolls, or carbon capture and storage subsidies but rather co-invest in nature and water restoration with industries.

Sincerely,

Jenny Yeremiy, P. Geoph

This episode opens with the me sharing this as my fifth episode with Wesam Cooley and turning quickly to a discussion on the current war in West Asia, a continuation of long‑running Western imperialism in the region. We describe a major turning point on February 28, arguing that Iran is “rising” as a real world power and has reframed the regional “problem” as resistance to Western imperialism and settler colonialism. I I stress a Chinese‑inspired idea of an “inevitability of peace,” even as events on the ground feel the opposite, and asks how Iran’s approach connects to Lebanon, Gaza, and a new memorandum of understanding (MOU).

Wesam explains that the new MOU, pushed by the United States, has not been signed by Iran and is already being violated by Israel, which refuses to recognize that it applies to them and continues bombing Lebanon, including Beirut. He argues that Iran is in a position of military strength, confident it could “end this once and for all” if forced into an all‑out war, though at enormous human cost. We both emphasize that US‑Israeli strategy relies on deliberate attacks on civilians as a core military tactic, citing the bombing of a girls’ school and the broader pattern in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran. We criticize Western media as actively misleading on West Asia, praising Iran’s English‑language PressTV.ir as more accurate about on‑the‑ground realities than corporate Western outlets.

We then connect the war to global economic and energy dynamics, arguing that the US is masking crisis by draining oil reserves and manipulating markets, while Iran leverages its position in a broader struggle over fossil fuels. I describe US oil infrastructure like Cushing as “arteries” now running low, warning that restarting flows will be difficult and that the US is only a few weeks away from feeling severe impacts. I link this to Alberta’s role as a supplier and to the idea that investing in the “most expensive” military has not produced the most effective one, especially when facing a confident Iran willing to prolong the energy squeeze. Wesam notes that Western governments, including Canada, now largely support the deal with Iran to avoid “falling off a cliff,” while Israel alone vetoes peace through continued bombing, revealing its outsized leverage even over the Trump administration.

The discussion shifts to Zionism and settler colonialism, distinguishing between Christian Zionists, who see Israel as part of an apocalyptic prophecy, and Jewish Zionists, who view the land as divinely promised and expandable beyond Palestine into neighbouring states. I highlight the “Greater Israel” project and note that even as Israel loses militarily, it is still grabbing land in Lebanon, aided by a US president with a real‑estate mindset. Wesam explicitly labels Israel a settler‑colonial project akin to Canada, built on racist expansion, genocide, and the confinement of Indigenous peoples into “bantustans,” and argues that Iran, Palestine, and regional resistance movements have concluded they can no longer coexist with this settler colony. He warns that Israel’s deep push into Lebanon may be overextension, likening it to the board game Risk where an army stretches too thin and becomes vulnerable to counterattack.

From there, we pivot to Alberta and Canada, framing Alberta as a “minor front” of US empire where inter‑imperialist competition between the US and Europe plays out over pipelines, resources, and political alignment. Wesam describes competing pipeline visions—one east‑west to feed European markets and another southward backed by Premier Danielle Smith—alongside talk of Canada potentially joining the EU, which the US would oppose in favour of absorbing Canada itself. We connect this to a massive planned build‑out of AI data centres in Alberta, driven by natural gas and championed by figures like Kevin O’Leary, and warn that this expansion threatens water, ecosystems, and Indigenous rights while enriching external investors who can “take the money and run.” I describe the provincial referendum with nine “unconstitutional” questions that she believes are designed to deepen racial divisions, undermine rights, and invite US‑style enforcement (e.g., ICE‑like agencies), and she outlines her work with Public Interest Alberta’s “Together No” campaign to oppose these measures and broader separatist agendas.

In the final stretch, we centre Indigenous nations and Palestinian solidarity as crucial to any meaningful anti‑separatist or anti‑imperialist project. Wesam notes that treaty nations have become the strongest defenders of the land, in part because of long experience resisting Canadian and RCMP abuses, and mentions that chiefs are seeking to have Danielle Smith tried for treason. He argues that if Alberta ever gains a right to secede, every treaty nation must first have the right to secede from Alberta, and that white Canadians must commit to “absolute uncontested sovereignty” for Indigenous peoples and to ending projects like pipelines imposed over Indigenous opposition. He also points to a scandal around the suppression of a Gaza encampment at the University of Calgary, allegedly involving Mike Ellis and possibly Danielle Smith, as a potential lever to weaken the Smith government and its separatist ambitions, but insists this can only be used by an anti‑separatist movement that openly and fully supports Gaza and Palestinian liberation. The episode closes with both speakers stressing reciprocity and solidarity—between settlers, Indigenous nations, and West Asian communities—and inviting anti‑separatist leaders to an upcoming July 5 anti‑imperialist forum in Alberta to discuss how struggles in Palestine, West Asia, and the Americas are interconnected.

Post show media sources

* https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/pm-carney-says-hes-seen-tentative-us-iran-peace-deal-calls-conflict-worth-it/

* https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/iran-war-united-states-israel-lebanon-deal-9.7237094

* Post Media Graphic & Post

* https://nationalpost.com/news/world/israel-middle-east/details-of-us-iran-deal-revealed

* https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/12/business/cushing-oil-inventory

* https://fortune.com/2026/06/10/us-strategic-petroleum-reserve-depleted-lowest-level-since-reagan/

* Bonus market turmoil discussion courtesy of Kpler who offers global trade intelligence:

Meet Kpler at Stampede

I am attending the Kpler stampede party to get the scoop from this oil and gas market flows analyst directly.

The episode of The Gravity Well podcast features Jessica Chung from the Council of Canadians, focusing on AI data centres, their environmental and social impacts, and emerging cross‑Canada resistance movements.

Jessica introduces herself as a water and climate campaigner, formerly a Line 5 pipeline organizer with Sierra Club Canada, living in Guelph with her family. She shares a story about activist Kim Bradshaw lending her a car so Kim could travel by train to glue her hands to an airport tarmac in an anti–big oil action, illustrating “community in action.”

Jessica describes her unusual path into activism: she left law school after being diagnosed with fibromyalgia, then became a yoga teacher, which shaped her ability to “hold space” in movements. This conversation came after I watched a pro‑pipeline “Build Ontario Strong” ad promoting gas for AI infrastructure and wanted an Ontario perspective. Jessica recounts a recent two‑day Civil Society Summit on the AI industry, with 270 attendees and panels on Indigenous data sovereignty, environmental harms, gender‑based violence, labour, war, food systems, corporate accountability, and AI in media and arts. She stresses the summit was not about shaming everyday AI use (like email summarization) but about how AI is being used as a “front person” for oil and gas, justifying continued fossil fuel expansion under nationalist competition narratives.

Jessica frames AI as a neutral tool—like a hammer—whose impact depends on who controls it, what rules exist, and how power is exercised. I echo this, arguing AI can be used for “pro‑social” purposes such as organising toward a water‑centred economy, minimizing energy use, and keeping systems local rather than controlled by foreign entities. I link AI expansion to abandonment of international law and corporate accountability, warning of ecological collapse and citing examples of water contamination and freshwater loss in places like Texas and Louisiana.

Jessica explains that civil society is trying to reclaim the AI narrative from “tech bros” who have captured political attention, and to invite everyday people into the conversation. She notes that youth, highly adept with digital tools, are at the forefront of resisting AI data centres and can mobilise quickly even within short public‑input windows and confirms summit recordings are available at AICivilsociety.ca. I highlight @Alberta_Anti_AI, an Instagram group with over 3,000 members in under a month, and describes coordinated rallies in Alberta and Ontario, including a Unity rally and anti‑AI rally in Calgary, and a previous provincial‑wide day of action with thousands in Edmonton, Calgary, and [21] other locations. Check out @Solstice’s video from the main event in Calgary here.

Jessica cites Hamilton and Burks Falls (Ontario) as recent examples of local resistance, noting that some victories—like projects stopped before shovels hit the ground—are under‑reported but real. In Burks Falls, two 20‑year‑old women organized opposition that led the city to take a data centre proposal off the table. She emphasizes that activism often slows rather than fully stops projects, buying time for alternative paths to emerge. I agree, it’s a David‑and‑Goliath struggle where our wins are measured in delays and vigilance.

I describe Alberta communities organizing against massive data centres, including one 1.4‑gigawatt project (equivalent to 1.4 million homes’ energy use) that drew over 1,100 statements of concern. I criticize incomplete accounting that ignores upstream gas extraction and frac’ing, pointing out that water used in fracking is permanently lost. She mentions strong pushback in Grande Prairie and multiple sites near Calgary, with communities sharing strategies and resources like the airesistlist.org website.

Jessica tells me municipalities are key battlegrounds because AI data centres intersect with zoning, real estate, and venture capital. She describes efforts to support youth organizers who want June 27 to become a national day of action, prompted by BC Greens leader Emily Lowen. With only 16 days’ lead time, they are building a decentralized toolkit tailored to the Canadian context and engaging about 200 people across sectors to define what civil society should be in this moment. She argues AI threatens the entire political spectrum and cites Mark Carney’s “AI for All” strategy as essentially focused on ensuring adoption, not democratic consent.

I underscore AI is unifying issue across left and right, tied to water, surveillance, safety, jobs, and environmental destruction. I cite the Wonder Valley project, which she says would be the largest heat source in the world, and name large AI data centres “gas guzzling” and resource‑wasting infrastructure serving billionaires, contrasting them with low‑power, everyday AI uses. Jessica clarifies that “AI” is often used as a monolithic term, but the real empire project is the race toward AGI—machines outperforming humans on all tasks—requiring massive power to scrape the entire internet. She notes AI can also be small‑scale and community‑oriented, such as tools for preserving local languages. However, she argues current dominant uses deepen social inequity rather than reduce it.

I give a concrete example of AI‑enabled monetization: vehicles from 2026 onward reportedly requiring subscriptions for features like heated seats and full radio use, effectively taxing people’s own property and widening divides. I support national coordination and cites Taiwan’s Audrey Tang using digital tools to achieve 90% public support for policies before voting, as well as the town of Olds exploring people‑driven economic planning instead of elite committees. I link AI data centres to centralized power generation, arguing that renewables’ strength lies in decentralization and security, especially as wars make large {oil and gas] facilities, including AI centres, potential military targets.

Jessica reflects on a broader shift from “power over” to “power with,” calling solidarity a “miracle” given humanity’s long, often violent history. She notes that people now show solidarity beyond shared language or appearance, citing global concern for Gaza as an example. She argues big‑tent movements should not require full consensus and asks how much agreement is really needed to work together, given our survival is intertwined. She references Maud Barlow’s warning that within about 10 years there could be a 40% global water shortfall, stressing the urgency as billionaires continue extracting both resources and power. She highlights that many US AI data‑centre fights are led by everyday people—barbers, teenagers, young adults—and frames this as a moment where “the box has crumbled,” asking who we want to be.

I agree that anyone who cares can participate and recounts narratives that divide provinces: Alberta stereotypes about Ontario’s “Laurentian elites” and Ontarians allegedly seeing Albertans as backward “bow hunks” needing outside guidance. I warn these stories hinder cooperation even as shared threats like AI data centres and looming “water bankruptcy” (citing UN water expert Bob Sandford’s work) demand unity and ecological restoration. I ask Jessica how these narratives look from Ontario.

Jessica says her view of other provinces is primarily relational, shaped by people she’s worked with rather than media narratives, and she feels “unplugged” from many ads and stereotypes because she doesn’t watch organized sports. She acknowledges that separatist movements and social media algorithms fuel judging and generalizing about entire provinces. She stresses that relational work is “everything” because elites benefit when people are easily controlled by pre‑packaged narratives. She cites reports that first‑year university students struggle to finish full papers due to social media’s impact on attention, warning this undermines future capacity to read complex bills or arguments. She argues that change will come less from perfect arguments and more from thousands of people building relationships and community resilience as crises—especially in the Global South—intensify. She frames “divide and conquer” as a deliberate strategy of those in power and calls for stretching our capacity to see each other freshly, beyond conditioning.

I point to Gaza as both horrifying and inspiring, noting that people there have not turned on each other despite extreme conditions. I see this as a lesson in solidarity. I recall a Chinese government representative describing an “inevitability of peace,” which she finds a hopeful framing for this transition from power over to power with. I believe stopping further system deterioration would itself be a remarkable achievement and feel encouraged by emerging resistance.

In closing, Jessica emphasizes that activism is deeply personal and often happens in quiet, internal moments: noticing when we react to flattening narratives, asking who benefits if we believe them, and cultivating a habit of reflection. She calls this “life finding its own intelligence” and stresses that activism is not only public action but also slowing down with ourselves, questioning anger and manipulation before acting. I connect this to spiritual practice and “micro moments” of discernment—asking who is speaking, for whose benefit, and whether a message is truly for us—suggesting such practices are becoming more common.

Join the AI Civil Society today!

AICivilSociety.ca

I threw a microphone on my spouse Chris last week—you may recognize him from Season 1, Episode 5 or the Leadership Training series in Season 2. Our conversation explores common Alberta narratives about other Canadian regions and the federal government, and then connects these narratives to environmental policy, resource extraction, and changing provincial values.

Albertans often view Quebec as a “taker” province that receives special treatment, keeps its wealth, and benefits from federal transfers while restricting Alberta’s ability to develop oil and gas. Quebec is perceived as having different values—linked mainly to French culture—and as opposing Alberta’s oil and gas interests, especially around pipelines and environmental protection. At the same time, I note that Quebec’s stronger climate stance and bans on practices like frac’ing are seen as positive environmental leadership, even if they clash with Alberta’s extractive priorities.

Chris explains that many Albertans misunderstand equalization, believing Alberta should get back exactly what it pays in federal taxes, when in reality the federal government redistributes funds based on national priorities, meaning Alberta may not see a direct return on every dollar. This feeds a perception that Quebec and Ottawa benefit from Alberta’s wealth and block its development, reinforcing grievances that fuel separatist sentiment.

Comparisons are drawn between Alberta’s oil sands and Quebec’s large-scale hydro, mining, and industrial projects; many Albertans feel Quebec gets easier federal approval and preferential treatment for its projects, while Alberta faces more scrutiny. I question whether this perception is actually true, emphasizing that it is a narrative rather than a proven fact.

The discussion then shifts to Ontario and the idea of “Laurentian elites,” described as longstanding political and industrial power networks in central Canada—families, capitalists, and industrial behemoths concentrated along the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence corridor, historically shaping national decisions. Alberta’s story about Ontario includes a sense that central Canada is the political center that decides national outcomes because of its population, leaving the Prairies feeling numerically and politically sidelined.

I recount past experiences of Ontarians viewing Alberta as backward or insignificant (e.g., being asked if Edmonton had paved roads), contributing to a feeling that Ontarians see Albertans as beneath them. Today, Chris notes that Ontario’s Progressive Conservative government is more moderate than Alberta’s United Conservative Party, and that Alberta Conservatives may not see Ontario Conservatives as truly conservative. I highlight that Ontario’s premier has recently adopted more Alberta-like rhetoric on pipelines and natural gas, suggesting some current alignment around resource development.

Despite these political dynamics, many Albertans still believe people in Ontario don’t understand or care about life in Alberta. I challenge the assumption that Ontarians broadly look down on Albertans, suggesting many Ontarians may share similar distrust of government and Ottawa, and that the “they think less of us” story may be overstated.

Narratives about Ottawa in Alberta center on the belief that the federal government is “handcuffing” Alberta, imposing rules that don’t make sense locally and preventing the province from thriving. Chris uses the example of federal restrictions on strychnine for prairie dog control, explaining how the poison moves up the food chain and harms predators and other animals, and how federal scientists pushed for restrictions to protect biodiversity. Political pressure from farmers led Ottawa to loosen these rules, illustrating tensions between private property rights, environmental science, and federal regulation.

We argue that private land use must respect “natural law,” especially in sensitive areas like riparian zones and creeks, where leaving buffer strips and protecting vegetation can benefit both farms and ecosystems. We frame riparian areas as critical infrastructure that reduce flood risk and protect surrounding lands, and suggest that better protection of such areas could have solved many environmental problems.

I advocate for nation-building projects focused on ecological restoration—re-willowing riparian zones, restoring wetlands, and headwater forests—as nature-based solutions that reduce long-term costs from climate-related disasters like severe hailstorms in Calgary, which cause billions in damages and higher insurance costs. Chris notes that current infrastructure spending tends to favour hard engineering (rocks, culverts, road works) because that’s where the money is, while the benefits of ecological approaches are poorly quantified.

Turning to the Maritimes, Albertan narratives often claim that Atlantic provinces have too many federal seats relative to their populations and that residents work just enough to qualify for employment insurance, reinforcing another “taker” stereotype. I recall the older concept of “have-not” provinces and the idea that wealthier regions should help those with fewer opportunities, and wonders if this solidarity has eroded.

Chris explains how the collapse of Atlantic cod fisheries transformed the region: scientific warnings about declining stocks led to calls for quota cuts, but political backlash weakened restrictions, and combined with technological advances and corporate consolidation, this drove overfishing and ultimately a catastrophic stock collapse that has not recovered. This history is used as an analogy for Alberta’s oil industry: I suggest Alberta could face a similar collapse if it over-extracts, especially given constraints like water transfers between basins, risks of over-pressurized formations, and evidence of freshwater contamination near Cold Lake. We argue that while private capital may sees Alberta oil and gas as a good short-term investment, environmental limits and potential catastrophes could force a rapid shift.

Our conversation concludes by tying these regional narratives back to Alberta’s internal identity. Chris says some Albertans behave like a family member who insists on having their way all the time and refuses criticism, even though Canada’s strength lies in its diversity. As a lifelong Albertan, we feel the province has changed: where Alberta once invested in campgrounds, forest rangers, wildlife protection, and a sense of balance, economic development and in-migration have shifted priorities toward making as much money as possible, often at the expense of natural infrastructure that will eventually need repair. This reinforces the broader point that many Alberta narratives about other regions and Ottawa are shaped by political messaging and economic anxiety, and that rebalancing toward environmental stewardship and interprovincial solidarity may be necessary.

Do you agree? What did we miss or where did we go wrong?

This episode focuses on water, cumulative impacts, and long‑term consequences of AI data centres, rather than just short‑term economic promises. Olds resident, concerned citizen turned leader of a local resistance around water sovereignty and now AI data centers, Janey Olson, joins me to explain.

From my perspective—as a geophysicist and oil and gas environmental liability expert—what’s happening in Olds is both shocking and emblematic of a wider pattern: residents are blindsided by huge, high‑impact projects—Synapse and Data District—framed as “done deals” by local and provincial economic arms before people have real information or a meaningful say. Janey highlights that Synapse is a 1.4‑gigawatt project—equivalent to adding about one million homes’ worth of power demand—and that there are two data centres proposed in her small town. I note more proposals appearing near Calgary, in Bonnyville and Fox Creek, and Wonder Valley in Grande Prairie.

A 1.4 gigawatt facility is like adding 1.4 million homes to Alberta’s grid “suddenly” and will affect everyone’s power costs and the province’s competitiveness, and it risks turning Alberta into a “sacrificial lamb” for a federal AI and data‑centre agenda. I explicitly connect this to a push to monetise natural gas and build massive fossil‑fuel‑driven power infrastructure—hundreds of diesel generators, turbines, and chillers running 24/7—just to feed these centres.

I outline who stands to gain from these AI data centers in this conversation with Charlie Angus on Meidas Canada.

Note: Wonder Valley is backed by UAE (https://www.theenergymix.com/70b-wonder-valley-project-still-a-mirage-as-olearys-ai-dream-stalls-in-alberta/) while Kuwait and Qatar are partnered with Brookfield’s Investment partners for Synapse.

Water is at the heart of our concerns. We stress that rural residents are already facing “very scary stuff” around water access and control, and that these data centres are “high draw water users” arriving in a context of growing scarcity. I explicitly thank Janey for “following the water” and say that water is “central to everything we want to have in this world,” making it unacceptable to hand it over to AI data centres “to compete with China” for something that doesn’t add value to the common good. I bring in the warning from UN water advisor Bob Sandford about us being on the “cusp of water bankruptcy,” and argue that this is precisely why cumulative water‑impact safeguards are being stripped away—because honest assessment would stop “this obscenity.”

The removal of environmental impact assessments is, to me, one of the most alarming pieces. I echo Janey’s point that environmental impact assessments—which check cumulative impacts of water and power—have been removed for both Wonder Valley and Synapse, leaving the AUC to look only at project‑specific issues rather than the bigger picture. I call this “critical” at a “critical point in time” and say it’s “quite obvious” that these safeguards have been “thrown out the window” precisely because they would block such “obscene” developments.

Janey notes a deep contradiction between years of carbon‑tax pressure on ordinary people and the sudden willingness of governments to green‑light massive, round‑the‑clock fossil‑fuel power plants for data centres, without robust cumulative environmental review. Janey describes how, after years of being “plagued with carbon taxes,” governments are now “throw[ing] the doors open” to polluting projects in order to “beat China” and make Alberta the “sacrificial province,” and I explicitly underscore that framing for listeners. I emphasise that this is “very big stuff and not something to be taken lightly.”

At the same time, I’m inspired by the scale and quality of local resistance. Janey explains how a small kitchen‑table group in Olds has grown into a record‑setting intervention at the Alberta Utilities Commission, with over 1,100 people stepping up to participate in proceeding 30732. I stress that the AUC staff themselves seem to be trying to do their jobs well and help residents navigate the process, even as higher‑level political decisions strip away environmental safeguards.

Take Action: use Little Town Big Data’s Guide to submitting a Statement of Intent to Become an Intervenor

To amplify these local efforts, clarify timelines and tools for public action, and connect the dots for my audience between Olds, other proposed data‑centre sites, and broader provincial and federal policy directions, Janey walks listeners through the significance of the 1.4‑gigawatt load, the AUC proceeding number (30732), and the steps for filing a Statement of Intent to Participate, and I commit to following up so the public can “jump in when it’s most helpful.” Janey also encourage people to contact the province and the premier directly to demand a moratorium or slowdown so Alberta doesn’t become a “data‑centric guinea pig.”

Here’s the Premier’s Email: Premier@gov.ab.ca.

Olds fight as part of a larger pattern Alberta has seen before—like the coal‑mining battles—and standing up for water is critical for everyone, not just Olds. I call Janey and her neighbours “heroes for Alberta” and emphasize that these projects are deliberately sited in smaller communities where there are “fewer voices to be heard,” which is why broader provincial support from you and me is essential.

CBC Reporter, Eagle Andersen called me to hear my thoughts about the updated information provided by Kevin’s “O’Leary Digital” team in advance of their open house slated from tomorrow, June 4 from 4-7 pm at Grovedale Community Hall in Grande Prairie.

I criticize the new newsletter about a proposed data centre project for omitting key information about what powers the facility, assuming it will rely on natural gas and arguing that this leaves out major parts of the electricity, water, and contamination story. I highlight that the project is expected to use about six billion liters of water per year (six million cubic meters), which is roughly equivalent to the annual allocation for the Greenview District, effectively doubling municipal water use for a single project and with no guarantee that usage would remain capped at that level. I also note concerns about power demand, citing examples like Lake Tahoe where residents were reportedly told they could no longer get grid power due to a data facility, and emphasize that a seven‑gigawatt facility would be a massive addition, equating five gigawatts to the power needs of five million people.

I argue there is “zero benefit” to Canada and Albertans, claiming the project offers only limited construction and operations jobs and primarily serves U.S. government interests, which they accuse of trying to push Canada toward violating international law, climate obligations, and stability. I add that, especially after the war in Iran and anticipated resource shortages, leaders should make “extreme choices” to limit use of fossil fuels and ensure benefits do not accrue mainly to fossil fuel interests.

When asked what information the company should provide, I say the full scope of the project must be disclosed, including how power will be generated and the associated infrastructure, pointing to the example of Olds where oil and gas workers understand the gas turbines, roadways, and infrastructure needed for such projects. Drawing on personal experience working near Grande Prairie, I speculate that a large gas cap over an oil field might be used to extend the life of a field instead of addressing environmental cleanup obligations, calling this a likely costly error. I also reference the prime minister’s recent statement that the U.S. is misleading and argue Canada should not follow a “mega pipeline drill, baby drill” agenda.

On public engagement, I describe significant opposition in Olds, describing “major outcry” and strong grassroots organizing, including people handing out posters and flyers and encouraging Albertans to file statements of concern against the project. I mention an upcoming open house in Olds on June 24, to be attended by the premier and local MLA Sawyer, and question whether Grande Prairie has been given a similar opportunity. For the upcoming open house in the Grande Prairie region, they say they hope the project is “shut down immediately,” arguing Greenview County should prioritize supporting farmers and the agricultural economy and focus on water restoration and cleanup operations instead. I suggest stopping the project now to limit any damages O’Leary’s business could claim, referencing the Grassy Mountain coal project as a precedent where the answer was to “settle.”

I explain my participation a recent webinar through Public Interest Alberta was to inform the public about environmental liabilities and the impacts of data centres on water use, cybersecurity, and water security, describing these facilities as “non‑starters” and noting similar projects have been stopped elsewhere. I see data centres as another face of fossil fuel expansion and argue that carbon capture and storage is not a genuine climate solution, based on their industry experience. I insist fossil fuel expansion for hydrogen, LNG export, or data facilities—especially those they say could benefit “nefarious actors”—must not proceed, and that public opposition and on‑the‑ground action are the only ways to stop such projects.

Regarding the webinar’s reception, I report that hundreds attended and feedback was “really good, really strong,” and they mention a planned follow‑up interview on their platform “The Gravity Well” and further efforts by environmental organizations to keep sharing information. I warn that data centres should not be appealing to Albertans because they bring in large corporate and billionaire interests that do not help the province through challenging times.

When asked why I care, I explain how this is about “our present and our future,” citing their two children and Alberta’s role as a headwater province that should focus on restoring water rather than extracting more fossil fuels. They reference the “keep it in the ground” philosophy and carbon pricing as concepts originating in the oil and gas industry, arguing that remaining resources are not worth extracting and would cause irreparable harm, which motivates them to do this work even without pay.

Here’s the link to Eagle Andersen’s article, please follow him as he will be attending the open house tomorrow and hopes to gain a statement from the Sturgeon Lake Chief. Jody MacPherson of The Missive is following the Wonder Valley story closely: https://www.theenergymix.com/hidden-wonder-valley/.

Thanks to Raul of Charlie Angus / The Resistance’s Meidas Canada, I am thrilled to share the presentation that University of Calgary Public Health Professor, Lindsay McLaren, and I gave at the Public Interest Alberta (PIA) Common Purpose, Collective Action 2026 conference in Edmonton last month. The presentation outlines our backgrounds, a better vision, our experience, an action, and how to join us! Lindsay and I outline the need to recenter Alberta and Canada’s economies around public and planetary health. That comes with:

* Recentering decision-making around water and land restoration, not energy growth.

* Recognizing we are in a polycrisis: seeing multiple and additive crises with the common root causes: extraction, accumulation, and exploitation.

* Unwinding the neoliberal playbook of manufactured scarcity (cutting of public services), division, deregulation, private wealth accumulation, and stunting of our imaginations.

* Reclaiming the term “economy” as “caring for one another”. Own the economy you wish to foster.

* Grow alternatives which include principles of reciprocity, solidarity, and equity.

* Look to other jurisdictions, including the Canadian Quality of Life Framework, to help shape your local well-being economy.

We hope to have a similar meeting in Calgary this fall to continue this effort, stay tuned! A special shout out to TheBreakdownAB for all of Nate Pike’s help in gaining support for recalls.

Should you wish to join Lindsay and I in shaping a well-being economy in Alberta through the PIA Democracy Task Force in Alberta, please email Brad Lafortune of PIA here: brad.lafortune@pialberta.org. Help Brad (or I) know what you’d like to see from the Democracy Task Force.

The Gravity Well | Public Interest Alberta Collaboration

I had the pleasure of joining Brad Lafortune of PIA in co-hosting a webinar on the Artificial Intelligence (AI) data center explosion happening in Alberta, across North America, and the world. Locally, the United Conservative Party of Alberta did not run on a platform of AI water and power consumption or foreign surveillance intensification. The webinar features Representative Melanie Sachs of the House in Maine. Melanie created and passed a non-partisan AI ban bill, ultimately vetoed by a single elected official. Melanie shows the specific project at play in her area and its derelict conditions.

It’s vital Albertans follow the success, and learn from the failures, of other jurisdictions in order to stop AI data center construction in Alberta and Canada.

Stay tuned for more updates on this from Brad, Lindsay and I.

I sat down with Matilda, a grade 10 student at William Aberhart High School, today, on Menstrual Hygiene Awareness Day. She shares her project to install free feminine hygiene product dispensers in the girls’ bathrooms so that no student is ever left without supplies when they need them. And explains that her motivation comes from a personal experience of getting her period at school, finding no products available, and recognizing how stigma keeps students from openly asking for help or even naming what they’re going through. Matilda has turned that experience into advocacy, launching a change.org petition and promoting her work through her Instagram account “@AbeFlowsFree,” where she’s also organizing a bake sale to support the cause. Beyond menstrual equity, she speaks candidly about broader problems at her school, from overcrowded, noisy classrooms without enough desks to packed yoga classes where 35 students can barely move without bumping into each other, underscoring how urgently students need better learning conditions.

Jenny: Okay, thank you for joining me today, Matilda. Let’s start with who you are, what you’re up to and just a little bit about you for people listening. Thank you.

Matilda:

Yeah, thank you for having me. My name is Matilda. I’m a grade 10 student at William Aberhart High School. And yeah, this is my project to get free feminine hygiene product dispensers in the girls’ bathroom.

Jenny:

Excellent. And remind us, today’s a special day, right? What’s today for folks who don’t know?

Matilda:

It’s Menstrual Equity Day and Menstrual Awareness Day. A day to make people aware of people that have periods and how they deal with them and the barriers that are in their way and just kind of an advocacy day.

Jenny:

Amazing. Out of curiosity, is there anywhere people can go to find information about that on today?

Matilda:

Well, there’s a website that I like or an Instagram account called The Period Purse. I follow them. They’re a Canadian-based organization and they have a lot of good information.

Jenny:

Amazing. Thank you so much for that, Matilda. Okay. You’re trying to make sure that feminine hygiene projects are free for any student that needs them in high school, at your high school, correct? Yes. And so what does that look like? Why are you doing that? What’s the rationale behind the project?

Matilda:

Well, I just thought that it kind of started with a feeling that I had when I got my period in a bathroom one day and there was nothing there. I was like, “Well, there’s got to be other girls like me.” And it was a really, really bad feeling and there was nobody else there and I didn’t know that my school had stuff, which they don’t. I was like, “Well, I want to do something to stop this.”

Jenny:

Yeah, that’s nuts. I can actually remember a very similar scenario, not just once but many times when I was in high school where I felt I forgot to prepare myself. And yeah, it’s also something that we don’t talk about enough because it does feel like it’s your own thing that happens and not really just an understanding of what it’s like for before it comes kind of thing.

Matilda:

Yeah. Especially in high schools, there’s lots of stigma around it. People will just say, “I’m not feeling well. I need to go home to a teacher instead of like, I’ve got my period. Nobody will ask each other for products when they need them.” And people will just pretend they don’t have it or they’ll laugh about it like, “Ha ha, I got my period when it’s a serious biological thing.”

Jenny:

Yeah. I’ve heard there are certain cultures that will celebrate it and it’ll be a big moment for people and you’re right. That’s amazing to hear that it hasn’t changed much since I was in high school because I remember having all of those same experiences of shame almost with it or like trying to hide it or just make light of it and not take it seriously. And a lot of problems come with it too. I remember having lots of pain and in some cases where it was debilitating. So yeah, it’s something we should really understand better and be okay with talking about, right?

Matilda:

Yeah, definitely. And that’s like a tangent to my project, of course, my main thing is to get the feminine hygiene products, but I also want to increase awareness and increase people talking about it at my school.

Jenny:

Amazing. So important. I really appreciate you taking this initiative. So how can people help? What can people do to get involved? Let’s start with adults like me and then we’ll talk about students.

Matilda:

I have a change.org petition. So you can go on their website and search for William Aberhart and my petition will pop right up and you can sign that. You can reach out to if you have kids or if you know people who have children at schools, you can email their principal or the administration to ask what their kind of situation is. You can get involved in parent councils or you can email school board trustees and MLAs.

Jenny:

Amazing. Thank you. Those are all awesome and I will try to make sure to give as much information as possible when I post this conversation for folks. What about students? How can students get more involved in what you’re doing, Matilda?

Matilda:

When you’re at school and you have something you can first of all just talk about it, even if it’s a friend or two friends, that’s people that know about it. You can mention it to your guidance counsellor in their appointment. You can insist with your teachers and your principals and your assistant principals tell them that this is something that we need because the more students that bring up this issue, the more likely they are to move forward with it.

Jenny:

Yeah, absolutely. And you’re right. It’s something that we should be expecting of our classrooms, our schools, I should say, because the thing that we think is important is the thing that we will start feeling is okay and safe to talk about, things like that. Amazing. I can see the value in what you’re doing. It’s wonderful stuff. So can you talk a little bit about the state of education for you, Matilda? What’s it like these days? Do you have concerns? What are your thoughts for people?

Matilda:

Yeah. So schools right now, the class sizes are so big that, for example, in my math class, half of the students needed help in the trigonometry unit, but the teacher could only help a few of those students because there wasn’t enough support for all of them and all of their questions because each student had multiple questions and they needed the teacher to go over it multiple times. It’s just crazy. It’s too big and it’s always so loud and sometimes there’s not even enough desks in the classrooms for everybody to sit at.

Jenny:

Thank you for saying that because I’ve heard people try and tell me online that that’s not true. And I had heard that William Aberhart was one of those schools that there literally was not enough seats for students to be in in some classes. It’s crazy.

Matilda:

Yeah. It’s ridiculous. And even in classes like yoga, there’s not enough space in the yoga room for like 35 people to do yoga and not crash into each other every pose we’re doing.

Jenny:

Right. I can just imagine. I’ve been in a yoga class that’s packed and that 35 is nuts. That’s a huge room that’s required for that. Wow. Well, thank you so much, Matilda. Is there anything else you want to add before we close? I’m hearing that people should go to change.org. They should check out your petition. They should talk to the schools that their students go to, make sure that this is accessible and that students should talk about this amongst themselves and with their guidance counsellor and with their teachers and make it a priority. Anything more you want to add?

Matilda:

Students can talk to their parents too. And if you support me, follow me on Instagram at @abeflowsfree and I believe we’re doing a bake sale this month or maybe next, so I’ll follow up

Jenny:

With that. Excellent. So they can look to your Instagram, which is ABE Flows [Free]. Is that correct?

Matilda:

Yes.

Jenny: Great. So @Abeflowsfree on Instagram, find out about the bake sale that’s coming up shortly. Thank you for all you’re doing, Matilda. Make sure you poke me when you’re doing that so I can make sure people know to get out there and get some baked goods with you, support the cause.

Matilda:

Yeah, for sure. Thank you so much.

Jenny:

Thank you. Take care for now.

The episode of The Gravity Well podcast features fellow Alberta activist Chelsea Barnowich (also known as “Chelsea Loves the Moon”), focusing on organizing against separatism in Alberta and broader threats to democracy and public institutions. We begin by outlining an Alberta-wide day of action in Calgary, including a noon event at MLA Mickey Amery’s office, a memorial walk, a march from City Hall to McDougall Centre (with Handmaid’s Tale costumes), and an evening gathering at Riley Park featuring music, biking, booths, and speakers to showcase the province‑wide movement for unity.

Chelsea then explains her current federal petition (E‑7340), originally rooted in Section 35 treaty rights but now focused on asking the federal government to investigate the Alberta Prosperity Project for foreign interference and links to U.S. actors, including Trump‑aligned officials. The petition quickly gained about 10,000 signatures in its first 72 hours and has since surpassed 15,000, with 25 days left at the time of recording, and Chelsea emphasizes that large signature counts make it harder for Parliament to ignore.

Chelsea and I argue that Premier Danielle Smith and the UCP are effectively aligned with separatist forces, citing Smith’s trips to the U.S., her mixed messaging on separatism, and the use of a “firewall letter” strategy attributed to Stephen Harper that seeks to isolate Alberta economically and leverage separatist sentiment to force federal concessions such as Senate reform. They warn that this approach is “playing with fire,” drawing parallels to Brexit and suggesting that even a partial separatist vote could be used by Donald Trump to claim Albertans want “liberation,” especially given Alberta’s large oil reserves and Trump’s openly stated ambitions. I situate this within a broader “MAGA and separatist sandwich,” linking Alberta politics to Project 2025 and a wider right‑wing agenda aimed at dismantling public institutions, entrenching a billionaire class, and promoting a supremacist order.

The conversation also highlights a long list of grievances against the Alberta government: attacks on workers’ rights, attempts to mine the Rocky Mountains, gerrymandering, creation of a provincial police force, underfunding education, benefiting from war‑driven windfall profits, stoking separatism, cutting disability benefits, threatening pensions and CPP, restricting books and critical thinking in schools, and undermining ecological stability, which they argue is essential for any functioning economy. They stress the centrality of treaties as law, not optional policy, and note that Premier Smith has recently spoken about rewriting treaty law, which they see as part of a revisionist and ongoing attack on Indigenous rights.

Chelsea draws on her previous House of Commons petitions on Gaza—one of which gathered 30,000 signatures in 30 days and was followed by a symbolic airdrop of aid—to show that petitions can influence federal discourse and action, even if responses are often limited to explanatory letters. She argues that legal victories, such as recent First Nations court wins on Section 35 and treaty rights, are crucial but insufficient when facing actors like Donald Trump who, in her view, disregard international law, as illustrated by his role in the kidnapping of Venezuela’s president. Her core fear is that a separatist referendum, even with modest support, could be used as a pretext for U.S. intervention in Alberta.

We call for escalating but non‑violent disruption modeled on successful right‑wing tactics, such as highway slow‑rolls and occupations, while repurposing them for the public good. Chelsea advocates repeating the message that “THE UCP IS THE SEPARATIST PARTY” to reach moderates and notes that separatist supporters have been flooding UCP memberships and online spaces. We cite examples such as MLA Jason Stephan’s resignation after pro‑separatist writings, Rob Anderson’s involvement in separatist meetings, polling showing UCP supporters as the strongest base for separatism, and a committee process on the Forever Canadian petition that was allegedly pre‑empted by a pro‑UCP press release, demonstrating democratic erosion.

The episode closes by promoting multiple ongoing and upcoming efforts: other federal petitions (including E-7269 on limiting the notwithstanding clause,

banning AI data centers, [House of Commons petition # e-7427]

and a forthcoming petition about the U.S. ambassador’s use of voter lists), and a June 27 multi‑city, now multi‑provincial rally under the banner “Albertans for United Canada in solidarity with Treaty 6, 7 and 8,” coordinated through Chelsea’s emerging “United Alberta Collection” and website unitedab.ca. That rally aims to bring together Indigenous speakers, recall activists, labour groups, Palestinian protesters, and other movements in Calgary, Edmonton, and Victoria, emphasizing unity, relationship‑building, and mutual encouragement as a way to “charge batteries” and make it harder for the government to ignore public opposition. Chelsea ends by framing the current moment as a “war for our democracy,” urging people to show up in large numbers this summer, occupy the legislature if necessary, and ensure Alberta does not become the “51st state,” while I stress that petitions and street actions can be both effective and joyful forms of civil resistance.

Thank you, Chelsea, I hope to see The Gravity Well community on Friday in Calgary, I’ll be at all three events with the WaterNotCoal.ca petition and a Handmaids’ Tale costume.

“Faith Leaders Across Alberta Oppose” features four leaders of the Alberta faith community with diverse Christian backgrounds who describe their spiritual journeys, articulate commitments to pluralism, and explain why more than 200 faith leaders signed a public letter opposing a recent Alberta government–backed Christian gathering that sought to shape policy through a narrow, right‑wing religious agenda. Across the conversation each of them stress the importance of inclusive public life, interfaith respect, and the “inherent dignity of every person,” warning against privileging one religious voice in policymaking and calling instead for leadership grounded in hospitality, social and environmental justice, “preference for the poor,” abundance rather than scarcity, and everyday spiritual practices that help people respond to rising fear, polarization, and separatist politics with courage, love, and shared responsibility for the common good.

Key themes which emerged throughout the four separate discussions are best summarized by Reverend Dr. John Pentland: hospitality, spirituality, social justice, and risk. Now is the time for faith leaders, all leaders really, to take risks. It has never been more important than right now.

Additionally, plurality is explained throughout this conversation. The importance of seeking different views and multiple outcomes. Not seeking one unified goal.

I am happy to hold more conversation with these leaders or others who support or have signed the letter of opposition. Here’s the full transcript to assist your listening.

Introductions to The Gravity Well and Alberta Faith Leaders

Jenny (00:00:04):

Welcome to the Gravity Well podcast with me, Jenny Yeremiy. I host the Gravity Well to celebrate and share the stories of people looking to empower others with the knowledge and skills required to reestablish stability in our communities. My mission is to work through heavy issues in conversation and process in order to lighten the load.

I acknowledge that I live on the traditional territories of Treaty seven and Metis Districts five and six. The treaties and self-governance agreements established by indigenous peoples are created to honour the laws of the land, maintain balance with nature and give back to uphold reciprocal relationships.

This knowledge and intention are what guide the Gravity Well conversations. I ask for genuine dialogue, real hearts, and openness to different perspectives. This is your invitation to find common ground with me.

Positions taken by participants, either individually or collectively, do not necessarily represent those of the Gravity Well.

This podcast is dedicated to the natural world, our children, nieces, nephews, grandchildren, and all future generations. The Gravity Well is on YouTube and streaming wherever you get your podcasts.

If you like what you see and hear, remember to like and subscribe!

Thank you so much for joining me, Leslie. I’m super pleased to have Leslie Gardner in the studio today. We are today speaking about spirituality and about the recent meeting that the provincial government had with some specific religious leaders and just to break down this issue and opportunity together. Leslie, can we start with a little bit about you, your spiritual journey and what brought you here today? Thank you.

Leslie:

Sure. Thanks, Jenny. I’ve had varied exposure to different religious organizations in my life. Started off Anglican and then as a kid in the country with a Baptist church and then as an adult, became Roman Catholic and I’m now participating in congregations that are Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada. I’m also part of a group here in Lethbridge who started what we call the Lethbridge Inclusive Catholic Community Fellowship led by a woman priest.

Jenny:

Fabulous. And remind me, Leslie, when we spoke earlier, you were mentioning you do studies at the University of Alberta, is that correct?

Leslie:

Yes. Yeah. I’m also part of a community around St. Stephens College, which is a theology college on the campus affiliated with the University of Alberta and had its roots in the United Church. And we’re still very much involved with the United Church, but it’s also much broader than that in the master’s programs and demand programs that we offer.

Jenny:

Incredible. Thank you for all that work. What a journey. Anglican, Baptist, Catholic, now evangelical and united. That’s wonderful. You’ve dabbled in everything Christian, is that right?

Leslie:

Not exactly, but lots of influence from important people that you meet, influencers of various kinds, people you admire. What do they have to share with you? And I’ve been really fortunate there.

Bill:

Hello, everyone. My name is Bill Way and I lived in Alberta for 50 years in Calgary and now I’m five years on Vancouver Islands. My spiritual journey is pretty interesting. I was born Catholic and was brought up to go to church and be a good boy. Around my years in high school and university, I joined a folk choir and I started singing at church. That little tiny version of the Catholic church really appealed to me and we had families that we raised with each other’s children and a really good community. And in that journey, I met a lovely lady from the United Church and my wife’s father was a minister. She was a preacher’s kid. I was Catholic. There’s lots of things that weren’t good about this, but basically that just kept adding to the diversity of my spiritual background. We raised our kids with a concept called double belonging, which means that our kids were too young to know that we’re going to go to church at the Catholic church at nine and then we’re going to jump in the car and we’re going to go to the United Church at 10:30.

They just think that’s what people do. By the time they got to be teenagers, they’d kind of had enough of church. We just sort of did that. And I got more and more involved with the United Church. I actually, without becoming a member, I became secretary of the Church Council. I was on the committee that hired and fired ministers and I continued on with the music too. I was in the choir in the United Church. Interestingly enough, this strange phenomenon called the Roman Catholic women priests came into my life. Not only did I just jump back into the Catholic church, I loved the fact that the RCWP movement abandons a lot of the things about the Catholic church that I don’t like, like exclusivity. In the past, I’d say 10 years, I’ve been an active member of RCWP Canada. About my spiritual journey, it includes my travel.

When we were travelling together, we have travelled to Turkey, to Thailand, to Guatemala and in all of these places, the dominant religion is not the one I was brought up with. And I just learned, you know what? There’s plenty of pathways to a spiritual life. There’s nothing exclusive about it. And the more you kind of hold onto a belief and say, “This is my truth and you better accept my truth.” That is like a bell ringing in my ear saying, “You’re actually not in the right path at all. “ In a nutshell, I’ve gone from Catholic to United. Now I’m back to a new version of Catholic.

Jenny:

Incredible. And I love how you said you, well, first of all, the double belonging, providing space for both of you to continue that faith journey and then eventually wrap around to something that was merging the two ideas together in a sense. It’s so neat. And I love the idea of the dropping some of the things that you didn’t like about the one faith that you were raised in and being able to carry forward a message that you still can get behind. Wonderful.

John:

My name’s John. I am the lead minister at church in Chicago. I grew up in Ontario and moved out here in serving a rural parish for four years where I learned a lot. And then a suburban church in Southern Calgary for 10 years and three years at Calgary, an area United Way. A nonprofit in the city where I learned a lot about how the cities are connected to the great people that are doing amazing work within the city. And then I’ve been at Hillhurst United for 21 years, which is a historic building over 115 years. We’ve been in the neighbourhood. Four practices, hospitality. We believe you got to eat and drink together to know each other better through spirituality. Religion’s got a bad name in the world. We seek to live with religion, honouring the soul and diversity of each person. Social justice, how do we take what we say and sing and pray into the world to transform it and love?

And the last one is risk. Jesus’ most common phrase is being unafraid. And right now we’re living in a time where religious people and secular people are fearful and encouraged to be fearful and hateful is judgmental and we need to risk being open, honest, vulnerable, and loving. That’s a bit about who I am. I cycle every day. I got four kids, a dog and two cats.

Jenny:

Amazing, John. Thank you so much for that wonderful summary. I think those principles are just something I will absolutely underscore as we go through here. It’s just so nice to hear the thought of being courageous now and the importance of people to recognize that fear is growing and that it takes courage and leadership to overcome it. I’m pleased to have Reverend Samaya Oakley in the studio today. First, can we start with an introduction please, Samaya? Thank you.

Samaya:

Absolutely. I am privileged and honoured to serve the fine people at Calgary Unitarians. I had the delightful pleasure of serving as their intern minister back in 2013, 2014. I went away and did ministry in other contexts and other settings in 2023. Early in the year, it was like, “Hi, I need full-time ministry.” And Calgary was looking for full-time ministry and our styles aligned and I ended up joining them as their minister in August of 2023, 10 years later. It was quite a serendipitous connection that we had. I knew them, they followed me. It was a match kind of made in, I’m going to say in heaven, haha we have been doing great ministry together over these last three years that I’ve been with them.

Jenny:

Wonderful. Have you always been a part of the Unitarians movement, Samaya?

Samaya:

I’ve known the Unitarians at a point in my life when my life blew up, my career blew up, my marriage blew up and I was on my own with a four-year-old and two different friends in two different social circles said, “You’d find a home in the Unitarian Congregation.” I ended up joining the congregation in North Vancouver. They’re the congregation I credit with making me the minister that I am today. They really supported me in my path and I speak very fondly of them. Just about 30 some years ago that I have followed the path and I work continentally as well as nationally. I did youth ministry for 15 years and then I officially became a minister and ordained and still do comprehensive values-based sexuality education training, our whole lives program that we run involved nationally with our ministers, the UU ministers of Canada, just finishing my second term three years as my president.

Served as three years another time and just finishing my second term in my three years. So quite involved, lot of professional development. I tend to focus a lot of mine in the area of sexuality and also racial justice. Those are two very strong passions of mine. We have a comprehensive values-based sexuality education program that I mentioned that we’re going to be kicking off this fall. We’re starting with kindergarten grade one program and also a young adult program that will be kicking off, but I’m a facilitator in seven different levels of age-appropriate sexuality education.

Jenny:

Yeah, that sounds very important. I think it would be helpful for people to understand what age-appropriate sexual education looks like and knowing that it is coming from faith leaders, that this is with the best moral and community interest in mind. Yeah, wonderful.

Samaya:

Yeah. One of the things I think that really sold me in Unitarian Universalism is I was sitting around a table just after I joined the NorthShore congregation and it was the first time in my life I had ever sat down. I was young, relatively young, early 30s, that’s young-ish. And it was the first time in my life I sat down with humanists and atheists and mystics, people like me who come from a pagan background and how enlivening that conversation was and how much it opened my perspective and my view on the world because up until then having been raised in a pretty traditional Catholic religion, there’s one answer. And in this conversation there were so many different answers and they were all based on people’s lived experiences, people really passionately looking at their own worldview. I say, when you come through our doors, your work is just beginning because we’re not going to tell you what redemption means or salvation means or how to live a good life.

That is actually something that we encourage people to do for themselves. We will journey with you in that spiritual practice and we will be there with you as you ask those big questions of life that we all ask of life. What does it mean to be a good person? How does my life have meaning and purpose? What is it that I can do and give to the world and how can I do that? How do I make sense of the world in which I live? We don’t have the answers to that. We will journey with you in that exploration. And I think that that is such a beautiful gift that it’s one of the reasons why I signed this letter because of our tradition’s deep commitment to religious pluralism, the inherent dignity of every person and the importance of maintaining a healthy boundary between government and any one religious voice.

That is such an important thing for me.

Jenny:

Oh, that’s wonderful. You’re making me remember because just to give you a litle bit of my religious background, I was baptized in the United Church but went to Catholic school because of proximity. But what I remember most about Catholic school is high school where we learned about the other religions, like you said. And to me what was really neat about that was finding the common threads between each of the religions. I think that was probably the time when I really enjoyed religious studies the most is learning about those different ways of approaching things, but finding those underlying moral values. Is there anything more you’d like to say by my way of explaining pluralism for folks just to understand that better?

Samaya:

In Unitarian Universalism, my congregation here in Calgary, we have people who are about humanists, about atheists. We also have mystics. We also have people coming from various other world traditions as well and that is celebrated here. It becomes part of the tapestry of who you are as a human being. And it is in that interchange in that tension between holding what is really important for me and listening deeply to what is important for you and somehow finding a way through that. It’s living in the tension, living always in that tension and being comfortable with discomfort.

Jenny:

Wow, that is a really important lesson, I think, for all of us right now. Why don’t we underscore the letter please?

Can you help people understand what was in the letter, why did you sign it and the purpose of it? Thank you.

Samaya (00:16:15):

Here’s one of the things sat with me that I was really sort of thinking about is that the gathering was a Christian gathering. I do understand that public officials regularly attend to get at events and faith leaders and myself and premiers. We should all be free to participate in the life of our own religious communities. And I know for us, we would welcome opportunities to host elected officials within our own traditions. And at the same time, I don’t think the heart of the concern is about any one of those elements in isolation. It’s about what that event represented in the broader public context. When a sitting premier convenes or lends significant weight to a gathering that is framed as shaping public policy through a particular lens, particularly one that appears ideologically narrow, I’m wondering what message it sends to those who are not in that circle.

I’m wondering about how it affects the perceived independence and inclusion of other faith communities. And that’s a place where I hear resonance with another concern that I’ve seen named is about the tone and the impact of the event and whether or not it contributed to a sense of a shared civic belonging. I actually wondered if it might even narrow it.

Jenny:

Yes, absolutely. One thing I will say is not only are you concerned about policy being shaped by what has been said in that, there has been policy shaped by this narrow group of people, I’ll be specific. There’s an organization called Cardus, which is very aligned with evangelical Christian faith and is during the strike, for example, the teacher’s strike, they made specific recommendations for the province to take and all of those recommendations were taken by the government. There is evidence of that. And then this event was in my mind then solidifying that for people because it was narrow in its invitation list. Is that right?

Samaya:

That’s correct. Yeah. I think public policy needs to be shaped for the people who are living in a place where the policy is going to be affected. And does that policy really fit for all Albertans, for instance? I don’t think so. And to add to that, it’s also in the public realm where there is one religious voice and I want to counter that with another religious voice because there are other religious voices that are very important and need to be taken into consideration. And that’s where the rub is for me.

Jenny:

Right. I’m going to underscore that there are at least 180 last I looked faith leaders who signed this from many ... Oh, now it’s 202. Sorry.

Samaya:

202. Okay.

Jenny:

And people should see it’s many different faith backgrounds, Anglican, there’s United, there’s Mennonite, there’s Unitarian, there’s the United Church of Canada. I know there’s a Catholic group in here because I am trying to seek voices. There’s an evangelical church in here as well. So many different faiths have taken the time to sign this, faith leaders, excuse me, and members, I should say, who signed this. And I’m just going to underscore some of the things that were mentioned in the letter for people. They speak to a public life is one that makes room for all voices and not to diminish some voices. You want to have a gathering that is shaped by welcoming and humility and that it shouldn’t be shaped by privilege or a limited access and that many traditions are not being represented in that. To understand that’s that plurality piece you spoke to again, helping people who are in the margins and understanding that there should be a diverse chorus of faith communities who are helping shape the province that we share.

Anything else in there that I missed? I know there was something about diversity as well.

Samaya:

When I listen to you list all of the traditions, they all tend to be traditions that have come out of Christianity. That raises a question for me. Where are the indigenous voices in that? Where are voices that come from, let’s say the Sikh tradition or the Muslim tradition or the Jewish tradition? I’m wondering about that because what I would love to see is a more inclusive vision of religious life in Alberta. It’s not necessarily a Christian vision of religious life in Alberta. As I said, there are humanists and atheists in our congregations in the province and how does that impact their view? I just really want to highlight that. When we look at public policy as being shaped by one tradition and one viewpoint, is it really public policy that benefits us all?

Jenny:

Yeah, thank you. So important to mention that this is limited what seems like to Christian views so far. I think I would encourage anybody who’s listening from another faith, please reach out to the organizer of this. I’m certain there’s room for everyone to sign. It would be great, like you say, and maybe I’ve missed it, but to have some other voices on this protest list, if you will.

Bill:

I found out about it through the Roman Catholic woman priest in one of my churches. And as soon as I got involved with it, I said, “Ho, ho, okay, this is not the right pathway.” And what I understand about the letter is that instead of embracing the message from one branch of the church and then try to make that into government policy, to me, that rings true about the Catholic church in about 300 AD when they decided, “Well, you know what? It’s okay to have Rome in charge of the religion. And by the way, it’s now the law and you’re going to be crucified if you don’t get involved with this. “ I’m getting a little bit emotional, but

I really believe that all major religions have a special message about taking care of each other and especially in terms of taking care of people who have no voice, people who have less education, people who are basically different.

Again, I studied quite a bit of Buddhism and a little bit of Islam and certainly Christianity. That base message is, yeah, take care of those people who don’t have a voice because it’s your responsibility You just do that. I was concerned because the event that was described, I think it was May the 5th, really looked like it was exclusive to people with money and really inviting people who had the same echo chamber about what the message was all about. In other words, let’s try to do something for the privileged people, the powerful people, let’s try and get the wealthy people and we’ll gather them together, which I know is a recipe for political strength that if you can tap into people with money and all that, it’s good for politics. It sucks for spirituality. And I guess I’d rather talk about spirituality than religion because the word religion itself just breaks us up into groups.

I’m not into that. I’m into gathering the groups together.

Jenny:

That’s such a wonderful message. And yes, it’s again, a theme I’ve heard from the others who have spoken in this is the importance of standing up for those who don’t have a voice and standing up for those that are marginalized, who are considered different and are not feeling supported in society rather than the ones that are well established and have the power already, let’s say. I’d

John:

Just like to begin by quickly saying clearly this is not a prayer breakfast.

This is the present government lending its ear and its authority to a movement within the province that wants to replace secular law with one religion’s rules, which is Christianity.

As a Christian minister and leader for 65 years I’ve been in the Christian community, the Jesus that is being portrayed by the right wing in this province is not the Jesus of the Bible. This is Jesus that’s manipulated to fit a particular lens on the world.

My first comment would be that this breakfast was not inclusive, that it was who was targeted to the right wing conservative movement within the province. We did have a United Church ministry who attended and his report back to our community was that a group of people who certainly have on religious view and that’s Christian and one particular agenda, which is right wing. He says another talks about banning abortion, eliminating made, promoting anti-trans view in the culture and opposing the anti-hate law.

All of these things are religious questions and issues and concerns. And the fact that these things are talked about without recognizing the interreligious culture of Alberta is really important was at a breakfast last week in Calgary and there were nine different religious communities gathered, 250 people with interfaith, which is far more representative of Alberta and certainly of the world. Christianity is one religion among many. And it was wonderful to hear that all religions are about human rights, all Christians, Buddhist speaks, et cetera. And we need to be standing up and speaking out where these kinds of narrow religious quote unquote statements are being made. Just in short, it wasn’t interfaith. It was not representative of even the Christians. The United Church certainly is more progressive than some of the other churches, but we certainly honour and respect and work with the Catholic community, the Baptist community, the Seventh Day Adventist community, and the Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

The diversity even within Christianity is something that we have to honour and respect and be engaged with. It was faulty and two basis just to end this. It wasn’t inclusive of other world religions and it wasn’t inclusive of the diversity of the Christian faith itself.

Jenny:

Brilliant. One thing you hit home with me is this, if we look at the goals, if we look at the goals and the objectives of this event and try to actually tie that back to Jesus, back to the teachings of the New Testament, where are the examples of those things being fulfilled? To me, it’s the idea of the co-opting of Jesus and what he stood for that is just so important to underscore for people. Thank you. And just the fact that it’s not interfaith even, it’s not representing Christianity as a whole, let alone any other religion. Thank you for that.

Leslie:

I am a believer in free speech and the right to gather and I value diversity. What that means is that not everybody is going to think the way I do and that’s okay with me. I think healthy debate is important. I also have values so that’s what disturbed me about the event because it seemed to be championing and in an exclusionary kind of way, a certain way of being and living and thinking as our letter, the faith leader letter says, Alberta is home to people of many backgrounds, many faiths, many ways of living a good life. That’s what disturbed me was that the event seemed to be very much excluding some people and setting one way of being and thinking and living up as Not only the best way, but the only way. I think that that’s shortsighted.

Jenny:

Yeah, thank you. It’s very important to represent all people and all faiths in the province. So thank you so much for taking a stand for that and making it be known. Leslie,

Can you chat a little bit about the role of faith leaders that you see today, especially in these uncertain times that we are in? The importance of terms like plurality and diversity, which you already mentioned, please.

Leslie (00:30:28):

Absolutely. I think it sits with that word leadership. Faith leaders are leaders. And I think one of the most important things that leaders can do for us is give us a vision of the kind of world that we want to live in and the kind of people that we want to be and that we aspire to be. And I really appreciated the values that were spoken to by the faith leaders in their letter of welcome and humility and inclusion. If you believe in diversity, then it is diversity for all in all circumstances and faith leaders can lead us in seeing the opportunities for doing exactly that. And of course, faith leaders can encourage all of us to participate in different events that practice the values and the vision that they speak about and that we ascribe to them and that we try to be like in a Christian faith, we have a model there of someone who absolutely practiced inclusion and we have an understanding in the writing that’s left behind about the importance of what’s called God’s preference for the poor.

If we understand poverty in a broad kind of way, then I think our faith leaders can help us see all the ways in society from social structures and policies that result in people being “poor”, that it isn’t just economically poor but held back and barriers to success in all kinds of ways. That’s what I mean when I say the poor.

I think the faith leaders have a real role in translating what that phrase “preference for the poor” means in this troubled world.

That’s what I would expect. Faith leaders are role models and cheerleaders and in all kinds of ways are talking about what we should be doing and show us what we should be doing by the way they live their lives.

Jenny:

Yeah, that’s wonderful. I’m glad for you to underscore this concept of preference for the poor. Sounds like a faith leader’s role is to help ensure that those barriers and those potential exclusionary issues are addressed and that that is the focus is to try and make sure that that is something that is supported and lifted through the church. Is that right?

Leslie:

Yes, exactly. Exactly. Another phrase that we can turn to coming for abundance, that we’re expected to live a life of abundance and personal alive, alive in all the different ways that we can be alive. Church as one of the holders, wisdom holders has a role to play again in terms of interpreting what that means day-to-day. What does that abundance mean and how do we celebrate that abundance but also make that abundance available? It has to do with access, access to abundance.

If we believe that the abundance is there and I do, then how do we help every one of us access that abundance and break down barriers and build ladders and lift people up, lift people up? Our job is to lift one another up.

Jenny:

That’s wonderful. Yes. This term abundance is so particularly important right now in these uncertain times. The thought of individualism being at a peak right now, people feeling isolated, not necessarily feeling in community with their, say their neighbours or their organizations. To me, that’s one of the main issues is this thought of competition and this thought of individualism and that can lead to less abundant thinking and rather scarcity thinking. It’s just so important to help people see that.

Leslie:

What happens when 5,000 people share what they have? There is enough if we know how to share and if we know what exactly the structures are that will promote that kind of sharing and that’s what we need. We need those ideas and values of sharing and the collaboration that sort of the other side of what you’re talking about, the individualism. In the West we learn from our historians and our philosophers that we have a very strong culture that emphasizes individual freedom and that’s a good thing. It was a good thing at its time given the context that it was developed in. But I really like the phrase that says, “You know what? Your freedom to swing your arms stops where my chin begins.” And I think it’s important for us all to think about not only our own s, but our collective chin and other people’s chins and how much more abundance we receive when we’re in it together, when we’re all in it together, again, trying to lift one another up as opposed to me trying to get to the top and climbing over whoever is there so we can accomplish so much more together collaboratively as a team, thinking more about in this group, whatever this group is, who’s in the best position right now, who has the resources, who has the energy, who has what’s needed to do what we can all see as needed for the group right now.

That’ll change day to day depending on what’s happening in each person’s environment and life. But if we think of ourselves collectively, all working for the collective good, then it’s a constant conversation and negotiation. “Am I in the best position to do this? Are you? And if you are, then great. I’m happy to let you do it. I can help you if you need my help. “Thinking that way instead of being in competition as you put it.

Jenny:

Yeah, that’s so great because I’ve thought of often sometimes it is better to relinquish that leadership role if somebody else is more knowledgeable or better suited, like you said, in terms of relationships or whatever that looks like. And you’re right, it is a constant check-in question. And I love that you underscored the idea of collective good and how that helps us feel. It’s that feeling of reward that you just don’t get from those individual opportunities I think the same as you do when you accomplish something as a team.

Bill:

Leaning back into the years that I was in the United Church, we had a minister who regularly just kept looking for other sources. It wasn’t only the Bible. It was that plus, plus, plus. And one of the things that she tapped into was just the ground level taking care of each other. I believe that was a fantastic thing for me to experience, that the leader of our United Church would regularly challenge us to think a different way, to accept different things. This plurality is just a lovely richness that adds to what people ... And so I don’t believe that it’s the job of the spiritual leaders to tell people what they should believe. It’s the job of the spiritual leaders to invite them to think fully, to think wholly, to think in small ways completely away from the easy way. It’s easy to love your neighbour if it’s the same person as you, but we are surrounded in this world by other people and the word other should be a keynote that we got to communicate to the other people, not to the people who are in our basket, if you want to call it that.

I believe that real hospitality is another message that I’ve heard before. There’s mystics in the Middle Ages that basically welcome people as innkeeper, take that as a model.

A real good innkeeper invites everyone into their place, feeds them all, clothes them all, takes interest in where they came from and that’s the way I see us. I think we’re in keepers saying how diversity helps the RCWP group that I’m in also takes a look at First Nations wisdom and First Nations attitudes. We’ve gone way beyond the territorial acknowledgements to think about this being the world that we’re sharing with people who have been here for 20,000 years and we have screwed up pretty badly and we still have the choice to get together, listen to each other, benefit from each other, and not just exploit each other.

Jenny:

Oh, that’s wonderful stuff. I had the opportunity to interview Harley Besting, who was an elder of the Piikani Nation. And the way he spoke to me, I feel like our conversation resonated for months afterwards. It wasn’t as if he answered my questions. It was more about having me think about what he was saying and leaving me with some stories that would linger rather than telling me directly the things that I was missing. I love this concept of real hospitality and being in keepers for people and not potentially shaping, I think is what you’re saying, people’s thoughts, but rather just being open to how people come to the same or different ways of seeing a similar issue. And yeah, I just love the concept of accepting, thinking differently and forcing ourselves to think of another way rather than just the comfortable way that we generally like to think about our issues.

Love it.

Samaya:

Well, I was talking with a colleague of mine the other day and at the end of the day, I think ultimately our job is to help people make meaning out of their lives. Right now we are living at a time of such polarisation and a sense of othering. It makes me curious about how is it that we are creating a world, creating a province, creating a city, creating a society where every single person is honoured for who they are, for their inherent worth and dignity, for just existing for being who they are. And those are the people I’m really wanting to reach out to to say, yes, you matter, you matter in this world, you matter in what happens. We are bombarded with a lot of misinformation. How do we help people make meaning of that? How do we help them stay true to who they are, the integrity of who they are and participate in our public life, in our public discourse?

We do live in an interdependent web and when one part of the web is hurting, we are all at risk. The web becomes weakened when one part of it is not as strong as it could be. To me, it’s how do we strengthen the ties that bind us together as human beings? And there’s a lot of room in that for so many different worldviews, many different religions, many different ways of being in the world and it is beautiful and complex all at the same time. When I went to seminary, it was always your job as a faith leader is to afflict the comforted and comfort the afflicted. And we’re constantly living in that tension of challenging the status quo so that we can become better as a society, so that we can become better as human beings as well as providing that comfort for people who are really suffering from how society is minimizing their worth and their dignity.

And so that’s the struggle.

Jenny:

I think of as a parent trying to make sure that your kids are living up to their full potential, but also not pushing them too hard. That’s why I talk about having that balance between support and helping people develop their ... I love hearing being better human beings, making meaning in this world where we are experiencing so much polarization and othering of each other. Yeah, I think that’s really such a great place. And I wonder, there must be practice in this with respect to holding that space for people being able to be in that tension.

Samaya:

Here at Calgary Unitarians where I get the privilege of serving these people and we’re having so much fun together in a lot of different ways, it’s just a delight to serve them. My biggest message for them has been always, do you have a spiritual practice? And if you do not have a spiritual practice, get one. I don’t care what it looks like. It could be a mantra as you were brushing your teeth. It could be as you are out there walking your dog, whatever it is that works for you. And somebody said, “Well, why, Reverend, do I need to do this? I’m a humanist. What is this thing that you are talking about? “ And I went, my answer was what we’re doing is we’re developing a spiritual muscle so that when things happen in the world, we don’t either freeze and stop action or react and make the situation much worse.

When we have the capacity and have developed the spiritual discipline of really focusing in on who I am as a being in this world, when we have that, we then open up a third response. It gives us that breathing space. We learn the techniques to slow down what is happening and respond in a way that acknowledges the flourishment and the betterment of us all. That’s been my biggest message for Calgary Unitarians. It would be my biggest message for anybody is, do you have a spiritual practice? What is it? What does it look like? Because that gives you the spiritual and emotional muscle to respond differently when events in the world are driving us to be filled with anxiety, to be fearful. It opens us up to a new way, a third way, which is a beautiful way.

Jenny:

Beautiful. Yeah, I think of the instinctual versus reactive versus gives you that opportunity for the responsive mindset. And when you say a spiritual practise, I’m going to say in anticipation of this discussion, I’ve been reflecting on potentially my lack of spiritual practice and I used to have, this is going to sound silly, but I used to have a gym class that we used to call our religion. We used to say- Absolutely. And when I think of the potential underlying reason for that label might be just that regular accountability to each other and that sense of belonging and the sense of accomplishment together. Is that a good way to ...

Samaya:

Absolutely. And I also want to throw in another ... When I worked with youth, because I was always talking about spirituality, I was like, okay, a lot of my youth, they played soccer. I said,

“When you are on the soccer pitch and you’re in that zone where it’s just you and the ball and the game and there’s no room for anything else, that’s a spiritual moment. You are in the flow.”

When I was rock climbing, that’s a spiritual ... There’s no room for anything else other than me and the rock and it is like that. How do we develop those practices? And it could be the gym, it could be anything along those lines. That’s why I say I don’t care what it is. It could be walking your dog. Some people actually, that is part of their spiritual practice. They’re out walking their dog morning and night. That is a reset for them throughout their day to sort of, who am I in this moment? What have I got left to do? How do I want to be for the rest of my day? It pulls us into that capital S self of who we are. It connects us with that capital S self. Some people call it that, some people God, some people spirit, whatever your name is for it, it connects us with that and it helps us to feel like we belong to something greater than ourselves and that sense of belonging is something that we all hunger for because we’re not coming from place of fear or anxiety or anything along those lines.

We actually come from a place that is true to our hearts and an integrous place.

John:

And we’re living in a very challenging time. We came out of COVID not long ago and are in some ways still learning what do we learn both the positive and negative of that pandemic that affected all of us. And that was challenging for many people to then have the challenge of the United States and what’s gone on in our relationship with the United States and its place in the world. That’s a challenge economically and emotionally, I would say. What is the role? I mean, I think we need to be an oasis in a world of conflict and division. That doesn’t mean we stick our heads in the stands. It actually means that we encourage people to know they’re not alone

In this challenging time. I think we need to encourage people to understand that in Christianity, the Jesus that is presented in the gospel is one that’s about peace and inclusion and welcoming of the other. Jesus clearly takes the 613 commandments of the Hebrew Bible down into the trend that become the 10 commandments into the sermon on the mount, which is the attitudes that call about the blessedness of those who more and blessed or the peacemakers, blessed are the meek, et cetera. The philosophy and essence of Jesus gets set up when he gets asked, “What’s the greatest commandment?” And he just clearly says, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, your soul, your mind, and your neighbour as yourself.” And I underline the word neighbour as yourself because a lot of what is being preached is division and hate and judgement and clearly those are all things Jesus was again.

It’s a challenge for leaders, but they have to also say to themselves and look themselves in the mirror, which Jesus am I preaching the one that reflects the ideas I have or the ones that reflect Jesus’ vision for the world. It’s a challenging time, but I’ve been doing this 38 years, it’s never mattered more. I’ll say that again…

I’ve been doing this 38 years and it’s never mattered more because we are called to be speaking up and out so that passion is lived in the world.

I think the world yearns for good Christian religion to be spoken and preached and taught and it’s up to us to ensure that we are having people familiar with the Bible, not just saying, “Oh, that’s what it says without actually reading it or speaking to it. “ It’s calling us up and out. Interestingly enough, the word blessed is not a passive word. It means get up, get up and speak out is not just a political thing. It is a compassionate way to encourage people to embrace the world and all of its diversity, which frankly is a gift.

Jenny:

Wow, thank you so much calling us up and out. I’m assuming up from our our seats, let’s say, up from just potentially being…

John:

You know what, COVID kept people indoors and there’s lots still indoors. I think we have to get off our couches and say this matters. My biggest concern right now as I think about the separatist movement in our province is that people are saying, “Oh, it’s just going to go away or it’s not important or we don’t believe in that. “ Well, I think we have to get up and out and say, “Yes, we love our country. We’re part of this country and let people know that have a very small, narrow, non-historical view of the Confederation to speak up and out about this. “ This is really important that we engage with others, not to beat them up, but to help understand and educate each other about the gift of this country and our place, in it,

Jenny:

Incredible. And I could not agree with you more. We absolutely need to take this separatist movement seriously. You spoke earlier about what’s happening in the United States and I will say the clear coordination between the United States and the separatist movement, it is not something to be taken lately. As you said, I loved that you underscored 38 years. There’s never been a more important time. I could not agree more. I’ve been living my adult life since 2000 and really feeling like it’s now or never to uphold the things that we want to see for Canada and for our communities. Last question for you. Okay. Last question for you, Leslie is, and this is about, again, appreciating that faith leaders or spiritual leaders have a very important role to play in terms of helping the social and environmental justice movement more broadly.

How do you or your organization, how do you ensure that you are supporting those efforts or getting involved in those efforts, let’s say?

Jenny (00:55:49):

Thank you.

Leslie:

I think the faith leaders stay in touch just by virtue of their own networks. Many of our faith leaders of all different kinds are connected to groups that are thinking about and acting in social justice kinds of ways. Our faith leaders are already connected to those people. They make those opportunities known to us. If there’s a campaign, a letter writing campaign, we write a letter. We write a letter as a group. The Lethbridge Inclusive Catholic Community Fellowship has already done that with regard, we’ve written a letter to our government representatives expressing some of our concerns about proposed recent legislation. We can do that. We can attend if we know that there’s a rally and a protest, a gathering that’s in support of things that we believe in. We can go to those. I mean, I think it’s important generally that we’re not just armchair cheer.

I think we have to be out there. We have to be doing something. We have to have action and those faith leaders because of the people they know and the networks they move in and the congregants too. I mean, all of us have our own networks and our own ... We watch podcasts, we find out about things and so we can each act in our own little community as well as participate in the big ones.

Jenny:

Wonderful. Yeah. This letter is a perfect example of an action that you guys took together collectively. That’s really great to hear that you’ve written letters with respect to policy and things like that and that yes, I think it is just a matter of connecting and having those relationships and listening when your members or others from the public could bring something forward and assessing whether you support it and put boots on the ground. As you say, it’s just so important for people to see these places being represented and understand that it is a place that we can go to when we are concerned about something deeply.

Samaya:

You can check out our website, CalgaryUnitarians.ca. You can also reach out to me as the minister, minister@calgaryunitarians.ca. I won’t give you my phone number, but email will work just fine. I’m pretty responsive. We will be at the rally on May the 29th. We’re going to be there with Calgary Alliance for the Common Good because we’re a founding member of CACG. And please come out and come to the rally, come find us. We’ll be there with our Calgary Unitarians banner and email me. I would love to hear from people.

Jenny:

Wonderful.

John:

I think we have to encourage people that it matters if they show up. I think that’s the one sort of all I would say for all people if they’re able to be there and to lend their voice and support to say these things matter. I am working within the United Church of Canada to say that we are the United Church for Canada, not just of Canada. The United Church people will be hopefully present to let that be known.

It’s a matter of engagement. Politics is got such a bad reputation, but it used to be something of service for the common good. The word politics means polish, which is the affairs of the city. So everything’s political. The coffee drink, the car you drive, the lawn fertiliser, everything is political. So let’s not say it’s a bad thing and keep it separate. Let’s say what is this call Helping us too. And so my hope is that we encourage people to see a bigger picture and a more loving and compassionate feel themselves and their place in the world. So it’s got to be done with love and joy and not hate and fear.

Jenny:

Love that.

Bill:

I believe that we start out with understanding that there’s two really strong motivations in human life. One of them being love and the other one being fear. I believe that if we get down to the roots of love, then we are going to try to embrace other people. We’re going to try to get out of our comfort zone because we know that we’re being invited to do that as opposed to an atmosphere of fear where you say, “Well, I kind of understand this group’s point of view, but I really don’t understand these other guys because they’re really out there.” By starting out with what we have in common and working together on what we know is our root values, we’re going to get on the right track. And I guess we just have to keep telling ourselves we aren’t in search of the answer that we’re going to publish to everybody else.

We’re actually walking down the same road with a lot of different people. We’re looking for guidance and we get guidance. Yeah, we get guidance divinely. I meditate. I’m very quiet and I know that that helps my prayer life, if you want to call it my prayer life. We keep walking the good road. This is another message that comes from the First Nations version of the New Testament, which is another source. It’s reading the same Bible except it’s reading it through the eyes of the people who have been here for all these years on Turtle Island. And it’s lovely. It’s lovely to think about it in an open way and then you get down to the message first and then you backtrack to, okay, this is how it applies. The other thing that is really key to me after having seen Buddhism in Thailand and seeing Islam in Turkey, let’s get past what we’re different about and let’s take a look at what we do for each other.

What is it that our group does to help people who are disadvantaged? How do we equalize a very unequal world? And you know what? It’s not an enormous task that we can’t do. It’s something that we can make choices in our little zone and just watch the ripples go out from there.

Jenny:

Coming in with that expectation of how do we equalize a very unequal world is a really powerful place to come from. And understanding that it’s our care for each other that ultimately is how we should be measured.

Bill:

Two messages that mean a lot to me right now. And one of them is connection. I want to see connections between me and my grandson and me and the wacko guy who lives down the block from me because I can choose to build those connections. I don’t have to ignore them. I don’t have to say it’s too tough for me to do. The other message that I’ve kind of gathered in this journey lately is the idea that there is plenty for us. We have enough of a world we can make this world work without saying there’s going to be winners and losers because there is enough. Enough is one of the key words that I try to start with every day. I actually got it tattooed to my arm that I won’t show you, but yeah. That’s

Jenny:

Incredible. I love it because yes, this idea of scarcity and that we’re somehow in competition for everything when there is enough is such a beautiful message to leave with. Thank you, Bill. This has been wonderful. I’m so glad we had a chance to connect and I hope we have an opportunity again in the future.

Bill:

It’s been a pleasure. Thanks for asking.

Jenny:

You talked about our interconnectedness. The way I was describing it offline was these pillars of society and just understanding that faith, that spirituality is a pillar of a healthy society and for us to be making sure we look to leaders in this space and understanding that there are really meaningful ways to move us forward if we slow down and just think about how we can include each other’s perspectives.

Samaya:

Have a spiritual practice.

Jenny:

Yes. I heard that too. Thank you so much.

Leslie:

Thank you, Jenny.

Jenny:

Thank you so much, Leslie. I am so appreciative of your time. Lethbridge, I find has a very strong and healthy faith community, let’s say. It’s really nice to have an opportunity to speak to you and to hear more about what you’re doing.

Leslie:

Thank you so much, Jenny. I really appreciate the opportunity. All the best to you.

Bonus questions: what do you suggest people do to help regain a sense of community?

Jenny (01:05:30):

I’m going to ask one extra practical question of you just because you raised it earlier. A common concern I have, and I know others do too, is around, like you said, our neighbours, us being divided. I’ll be specific. My neighbour had flags out of many kinds that were hateful. We’ve lost relationship with them. Or what do you suggest people do to help regain a sense of community?

John:

Well, what I say to my community is this, you begin with the phrase, “Help me understand.” The phrase, your neighbours, help me understand why you want these particular flags up. Help me understand what’s driving this. It is an engagement to have people articulate why they’re feeling the way they are. That’s step number one, I think. The second is you’re going to have a flag that you can fly too. It begins with conversation. It will probably end with disagreement, but hopefully it’s done respectfully. And I know that. I mean, I flew a Canadian flag in my house last year. I’m going to get it out again. It never happened in my lifetime.

Jenny:

Right, me too.

John:

The tragedy in this is I’ve never had to defend why I live in Canada to other Canadians. Easy.

Jenny:

Absolutely.

John:

If you want to know who really gets this, talk to an Uber driver. They’ll tell you what’s like to live in a place that is not safe where governments have influenced in a negative way. It’s really asking people to pay attention and I encourage people to do that.

Jenny:

Wonderful.

John:

Thanks so much.

Jenny:

Yeah. Thank you. Take care for now.

The episode is features Gil McGowan, president of the Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL), about Alberta’s first province‑wide Day of Action scheduled for Friday, May 29, framed as a broad, democratic protest against the current provincial government’s direction and a starting point for a longer‑term movement.

Gil describes the AFL as Alberta’s oldest and largest worker advocacy group, an association of 27 unions representing about 175,000 workers in public and private sectors, founded 114 years ago in Lethbridge by coal miners and tradespeople to fight for the eight‑hour day, health and safety, and minimum wage. He shares his background as a rural Alberta farm kid turned journalist who became active in his union and eventually AFL president.

Gil explains that unions in the AFL decided in December to create a province‑wide day of protest on May 29 because they and many Albertans felt “things were going off the rails” under Premier Danielle Smith’s government. The immediate trigger was Bill 2, which forced striking teachers back to work and stripped their constitutional right to strike, but they quickly saw broader concerns: workers’ rights, two‑tier healthcare, attacks on education, cuts to supports for disabled people, and targeting of Indigenous communities and vulnerable LGBTQ+ kids. He characterizes the government’s approach as “MAGA North” tactics of divide, distract, and scapegoating, and says many Albertans are “quietly horrified” by this direction. Traditional democratic tools like petitions and letters are being ignored, he argues, while the government uses a “flood the zone” strategy—constant policy attacks and chaos—so he believes a unifying protest movement is needed to bring together people with many different concerns.

Warm up your protest voice by singing to the “Injustice” Minister, Mickey Amery, at his office (920 36 Street NE) from 12:00 to 1:30 pm. Here is the chorus, feel free to bring a verse or two!

May 29 is deliberately on a Friday to move from symbolic weekend demonstrations at an empty legislature to at least some level of disruption while MLAs are actually at work. Instead of a single rally in Edmonton, they chose a decentralized, grassroots model: protests “everywhere,” with local committees in 14 communities, including Edmonton, Calgary, Fort McMurray, Grande Prairie, Red Deer, Lethbridge, Medicine Hat, and smaller towns. They launched the Fight Back Now campaign and website (fightbacknow.ca) as the organizing hub for May 29 and potential future protest days, inviting both labour and non‑labour civil society to lead and participate. Gil notes that in Calgary, for example, there will be a large rally at Riley Park at 5:30 p.m. and a smaller protest at Justice Minister Mickey Amery’s constituency office at noon, targeting the “injustice minister” for enabling a separatist agenda.

Then ride your bike down to Riley Park!

Event schedule:

* Gather in the NW corner of Riley Park (8 Ave and 12 Street NW)

* Celebrate with dance music

* Optional: Bring your bike and join the Critical Mass ride at 6:30 pm

* Meet many groups working on diverse causes

* Hear from expert speakers

* Take part in the solidarity song writing contest! Perhaps we’ll have a full Mickey song to share.

Gil and I argue that the UCP’s current agenda lacks a democratic mandate: the 2023 election was close—decided by roughly 3,000–6,000 votes in a handful of Calgary ridings—and the party did not campaign on two‑tier healthcare, exiting the Canada Pension Plan, or separatism. We highlight that the government’s first major bill was the Sovereignty Act, which was not part of the campaign platform. Gil calls the government “founded on dishonesty” and says many UCP voters now feel betrayed because “this is not what I voted for,” and the May 29 protests are also a platform for those disillusioned supporters.

We delve into the ideological roots of the current agenda, focusing on the “Free Alberta Strategy,” co‑authored by Rob Anderson, Danielle Smith’s campaign manager and current chief of staff, which Gil likens to a Canadian version of the U.S. Project 2025. He says the document lays out a blueprint and timeline for moving Alberta toward MAGA‑style politics and separatism, and that Smith has been following it “component by component,” starting with the Sovereignty Act. Polls show separatism is supported by only 25–35% of Albertans overall, but it is a majority view within the UCP and is especially popular among higher‑income earners (over $150,000) who feel economically insecure. Gil and I connect this to oil and gas interests, noting that many leading separatist and UCP figures come from the sector, and that wealthy investors with heavy stakes in fossil fuels oppose anything that might limit expansion, such as climate policy or energy transition.

Gil frames this as part of a global “incumbent’s dilemma”: oil and gas, historically the most powerful industry in the world, now faces serious competition from increasingly cheap renewable electricity. Instead of pivoting and investing to remain competitive, he argues, many incumbents are “stacking the deck” through politics—lobbying, capturing governments, and seeking subsidies—while criticizing renewables for subsidies even as major oil projects now rely on public support. He sees the rise of separatism and MAGA‑style politics in Alberta as a desperate attempt by fossil fuel incumbents to protect their status by rigging the system rather than preparing for a different future, and warns that this is against the long‑term public interest, including that of oil and gas workers.

I stress the need for responsibility beyond Alberta’s borders, especially regarding water that flows to Saskatchewan and Manitoba, arguing that separatist rhetoric shrinks responsibility to “imaginary borders” and ignores interprovincial obligations. The oil and gas industry, with the largest footprint on the landscape, must lead in land and water restoration. I want to return to the industry to focus on stewardship. I also note that subsidies like the Site Rehabilitation Program are preferable to subsidizing new pipelines with questionable markets, and uses this to illustrate how public funds could support reclamation rather than expansion.

The organizing model for May 29 draws inspiration from the U.S. “No Kings” movement, which mobilizes mass protests in defense of democracy against Trump‑era authoritarianism. Gil says they deliberately adopted a similar grassroots, self‑organizing structure: the Fight Back Now website serves as a hub where local committees form, meet online, and then organize real‑world actions, with many committees now meeting independently. The goals mirror No Kings: show people you are not alone, counter the exhaustion caused by “flood the zone” tactics, and create a single space where multiple issues—healthcare, education, worker rights, separatism, minority rights—can converge into a unified movement against authoritarianism.

Gil situates this within a broader historical context, citing movements like Poland’s Solidarity and Ukraine’s Orange Revolution as examples of successful citizen coalitions that united diverse groups against authoritarian regimes. He emphasizes that May 29 is intended as the beginning, not a one‑off event: the AFL recently helped convene an Alberta Civil Society Summit with about 200 participants from unions, Indigenous groups, student organizations, seniors, and racialized and immigrant communities, and they plan more protests and another summit in the fall to deepen cross‑sector networks.

I underscores the importance of “organizing for power” and praises the labour movement’s experience in structured organizing: having hard conversations, clarifying expectations, and building long‑term solidarity rather than one‑time actions. I note that AFL’s role is to seed and support, not control, the movement; in Calgary, for instance, the May 29 committee has more non‑union than union members and is chaired by community activists, which Gil welcomes as evidence of genuine grassroots growth. Gil recounts that the premier’s office mocked him and predicted failure when Fight Back Now was announced, pointing to past efforts like general strike threats and recall campaigns, but he argues that thousands of Albertans were mobilized through those recalls despite artificially high thresholds, and that these experiences built a base of activists now moving into “phase two.”

Gil and I frame the UCP’s rule‑changing as a hallmark of creeping authoritarianism: lowering thresholds for separatist initiatives while imposing high hurdles on citizen‑driven recall and initiative campaigns, and changing laws to shield the government from court decisions. We argue that Alberta’s political stereotype—conservative, pickup‑driving, oil‑patch “Joe Alberta”—obscures a much more diverse population, and that the UCP’s MAGA‑style project is “awakening a sleeping giant” of citizens who want to remain in Canada, protect public services, and reject authoritarianism. Gil insists that these citizens are likely the majority and that their real power lies in collective action, which the May 29 protests aim to facilitate.

In the final part of the conversation, I ask Gil to address accusations that the AFL is simply an arm of the NDP and to explain why a widely expected general strike did not occur after Bill 2. Gil responds that while many union activists vote NDP, the AFL and NDP are functionally separate: only 2 of 27 affiliated unions are formally connected to the NDP, and most unions are officially or functionally non‑partisan, with members repeatedly telling the AFL not to dictate their votes. He argues that workers naturally gravitate away from a government that refuses to raise the minimum wage, attacks public services, and strips the right to strike, and that his job is to defend workers’ interests, which currently means opposing the UCP. He also notes tensions with the NDP: the AFL has developed its own “Worker Agenda,” a detailed policy blueprint on affordability, wages, public services, jobs, and the economy, including proposals like a $20 minimum wage, public auto insurance to lower Canada’s highest auto premiums, and re‑regulating Alberta’s fully deregulated power system, which he says was effectively designed by former Enron figures. He wants the NDP to adopt more “progressive populist” policies—“more like Bernie than Hillary”—but stresses that the AFL’s platform is independent.

On Bill 2 and the missed general strike, Gil gives a candid account: anticipating use of the notwithstanding clause against striking workers, the AFL created a “Common Front” of AFL and non‑AFL unions and a “Solidarity Pact” pledging mutual defence if any group’s right to strike was attacked. When the government used the clause against teachers in October, ordering them back to work with threats of $500‑per‑day fines for individuals and massive fines for the union, the teachers’ leadership decided not to defy the order, partly because they had already been on strike for three weeks and lacked a strike fund. At a critical October 29 meeting, some major union leaders argued they could not ask their members to undertake illegal strikes and face similar fines if the teachers themselves were not defying the order, and “the air went out of the balloon.” Gil and AFL vice‑president Corey Longo did move a motion for a one‑day general strike and many unions were ready, but without teacher defiance the plan collapsed. Gil says he will not blame teachers, but believes the labour movement “missed an opportunity,” let Albertans down, and emboldened the government to escalate; organizing the May 29 Day of Action and future protests is, in his view, part of atoning for that failure.

The episode closes with my reiterating that separatism, though a symptom rather than the root cause, is serious and well‑funded, and that the May 29 protests are a chance for people to stand together on whatever issue matters most to them—separatism, healthcare, education, worker rights, or democratic norms.

Thank you, Gil, for your leadership! Failure and learning are part of the process of building a long‑term solidarity movement.

The episode of the Gravity Well podcast, with Professor Duane Bratt of the Mount Royal University, focuses on two major themes: gerrymandering in Alberta and a massive voter data breach tied to separatist movements and foreign interference.

On gerrymandering, Bratt notes there are no major updates: an MLA committee has been named, but its advisory body and final maps are still pending. He expects the final outcome will differ from both the majority and minority reports and involve significant redrawing of boundaries, not just adding two seats. He contrasts Alberta’s long timeline (next election likely October 2027) with the United States, where maps are being redrawn even as they approach a November 2026 vote.

The main focus is a large-scale data breach: Elections Alberta’s voters list for 2.9 million people was legitimately provided to the new Republican Party of Alberta, which had not run in the 2023 general election but had only contested three by-elections. That list was then transferred—possibly sold or given—to the Centurion Project, a pro-separatist organization that is not a political party. Elections Alberta detected the leak because they “salt” each party’s list with fake names; those fake names appeared on the Centurion list, tracing the breach back to the Alberta Republican Party.

Bratt explains why this is far more serious than a “phone book,” contrary to Centurion leader David Parker’s claim. The voters list includes polling station information and other data never in phone books, and unlike phone books, individuals cannot opt out; people who would normally hide their information (judges, police, some teachers, people fearing harassment or doxxing) are exposed. He calls it a huge breach of privacy and security.

He outlines potential harms: doxxing of public figures (Rachel Notley and Jason Kenney’s personal data have already been released), risks to victims of domestic abuse and child custody disputes, resale of data to companies, and use as a baseline for identity theft (names, addresses, emails, phone numbers). Politically, the Centurion Project held the list for at least a month while gathering signatures for a petition to trigger an Alberta separation referendum in October 2026; Bratt raises the possibility that some petition entries could have been filled using voters-list data without consent, especially since only signatures would need to be added.

Multiple investigations are underway: Elections Alberta, the Alberta Privacy Commissioner, the RCMP, and Edmonton Police Service are all investigating. Elections Alberta has issued cease-and-desist letters to at least 600 Centurion affiliates who had access to the full list, though the true spread is unknown due to the group’s multi-level-marketing-style recruitment (each person recruiting ten more, and so on). Bratt stresses this is a massive breach with political, civil, and criminal consequences, some of which may only emerge over time.

On legal exposure, Bratt notes that distributing the list can carry fines up to $100,000 and up to a year in jail, though he doubts every volunteer will face such penalties. He suggests key figures like David Parker and Republican Party leader Cam Davies could be in serious legal jeopardy, and notes that separatist leader Jeff Rath had previously directed people to Centurion before later distancing himself. Note: Parker is not complying with the Elections Alberta investigation at the moment.

Bratt then details links between the United Conservative Party (UCP) and separatist actors: Mitch Sylvester, leader of the Alberta Prosperity Project, is also a UCP constituency association president; UCP MLA Jason Stephan wrote an op-ed advocating separatism; and a UCP staffer attended a mid-April Centurion meeting where Jason Kenney’s personal information was released. The NDP reported the staffer’s presence to Elections Alberta and the RCMP, yet Premier Danielle Smith has blamed the NDP for not informing her, even though her own staffer was at the meeting, which Bratt calls “bonkers.” He questions why a premier’s staffer was at a private, invite-only separatist organizing meeting and what report he provided afterward.

Bratt and about 40 Alberta academics (political scientists, law professors, criminologists) are calling for a broad public inquiry, arguing that existing investigations are too narrow and focused on legalities rather than ethics and systemic issues. They want an independent, well-resourced, and fast-moving inquiry, given the planned 2026 referendum, to examine questions such as whether parties should receive voters lists at all and whether all parties should be treated equally, especially brand-new or fringe parties. Bratt cites Calgary’s 2021 municipal election, where Elections Calgary withheld the voters list from all mayoral candidates because one candidate, Kevin J. Johnston, was a known doxxer facing criminal charges; the election proceeded smoothly, suggesting parties may not need such lists.

TAKE ACTION! Join the 40 Alberta Academics in Calling for a Broad Public Inquiry

To: generalinfo@oipc.ab.ca

Subject: Request for a Public Inquiry Outside of the Government of Alberta’s Reach

To Whom It May Concern,

The RCMP and Elections Alberta investigations regarding the doxxing of 2.9 million Albertans, including myself, are insufficient and are likely to not be complied with. This breach cannot be considered limited to Alberta as separatism aims extends to British Columbia and Saskatchewan. The scope of a nation wide investigation must include:

Such an inquiry must be:

* Independent, with leadership free from political influence;

* Transparent, with proceedings open to public scrutiny;

* Comprehensive, with the authority to compel testimony and documents;

* Forward-looking, offering clear recommendations to prevent future breaches and strengthen safeguards; and

* Ideally completed before Albertans cast ballots in any future election or referendum.

Considering the investigations undertaken by the current Government of Alberta (example: the Alberta Health Services procurement scandal) have been scope-limited and conducted by individuals with connections to the United Conservative Party of Alberta, it is imperative an investigation occurs from outside the province or outside the GOA’s control.

Please take this threat seriously, as the future of our country is on the line.

Sincerely,

Jenny Yeremiy, Calgary-Bow

Include your postal code

The conversation broadens to foreign interference and separatist propaganda. Bratt notes that David Parker has said he obtained the organizing technology from U.S. Republicans, indicating foreign tactical influence, while the underlying data in this case came from Alberta’s voters list. He points to evidence of separatist-related disinformation originating from Russia, the Netherlands, and Florida, and warns that foreign actors may now have access to the leaked list. Some foreign actors, he says, want to break up Canada (Trump has talked about annexing Canada), others like China seek to sow chaos in democracies, and some simply want to profit by producing AI videos and other content.

They discuss AI-generated propaganda such as the “Sovereign Steel” video, played at Alberta Prosperity Project rallies, which portrays stereotypical rural male roles, marginalizes women (only shown as wife, daughter, and Danielle Smith), and caricatures Mark Carney as a mocking monarch. The creator, “Full Metal Patriot,” is an American who has produced similar content for the U.S. and U.K., illustrating foreign involvement. Bratt notes that while some videos are crude “slopaganda,” they still amplify existing divisions on issues like equalization, immigration, oil and gas, transgender rights, and COVID, by exaggerating kernels of truth.

Bratt references Canada’s recent public inquiry into foreign interference in the 2021 federal election, which found that foreign actors focused on nomination races and misinformation in non-English/French media, potentially affecting a handful of seats even if not the overall result. He argues foreign actors (China, Russia, and now the U.S. element) have reasons to target Alberta as well. He contrasts UCP claims—via Mike Ellis and Danielle Smith—that the RCMP found no foreign interference in the Alberta referendum with CSIS’s director, who told CBC’s The House that foreign interference is occurring; Bratt concludes that foreign interference, broadly defined (misinformation, money flows, attempts to influence outcomes), is already underway even before any vote.

Politically, Bratt notes that Mark Carney has commented on the breach, while Pierre Poilievre and all Alberta Conservative MPs have remained silent, unlike non-Conservative MPs who have spoken out. He criticizes separatists’ “situational ethics”: they oppose government data collection (e.g., gun registry, census) yet downplay the release of data on nearly three million people when it serves separatist goals.

Within the separatist movement, the breach has triggered infighting. Longtime separatist Corey Morgan has condemned the privacy violation and warned it harms the cause; Mitch Sylvester and Jeff Rath are distancing themselves from David Parker, while Morgan and Rath feud publicly. Duane and I also discuss the Overton window and how repeated exposure to propaganda normalizes extreme ideas.

They touch on definitional issues: RCMP and CSIS reportedly do not classify overt statements by foreign politicians (e.g., J.D. Vance campaigning with Viktor Orbán, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent endorsing Alberta separatism, or a potential Trump endorsement) as foreign interference, focusing instead on covert actions. Bratt notes that U.S. commentators like Tucker Carlson and Glenn Beck have publicly called for military intervention in Canada to remove what they describe as an undemocratic government; while not necessarily criminal, he argues these are deeply unethical interventions, especially given Carlson’s speaking tour in Alberta that included Premier Smith.

Throughout, Bratt emphasizes that not all harmful or unethical behaviour is criminal, and that a public inquiry is needed to address broader ethical, democratic, and systemic questions beyond the scope of police or privacy investigations.

Want More?

Have a listen to my latest conversation with Charlie Angus / The Resistance in Edmonton last week!

An update on the long-coming illegal and unconstitutional war against Iran and the broader Gulf Region, or West Asia. Wesam Cooley and I discuss the need for Canadians, Iranians, and Native Americans to come together—The Love Boat, let’s call it—to fight the corrupt and evil political “Epstein Class” of people, as outlined in our March conversation and again in my Sunday, May 3, 2026 conversation with Mikayla Resists. In this discussion, we uncover past errors in the post-World War I Socialist Revolution. That Coronel Larry Wilkerson, Larry Johnson, Scott Ritter and others have said the United States is being led by a mad man, and that the best analogy of where we are is Star Wars. The need for us to be rebel forces finding our own “Strait of Hormuz” choke points in order to regain control of public policy: social justice and environmental regulations.

TAKE ACTION: Participate in the Friday, May 29th FIGHT BACK NOW Day-of-Action!

Following the lead of historical social justice movements, the Alberta Federation of Labour is planning a workers day-of-action in Alberta. With the No Kings movement in the United States, coupled with the knowledge that former workers’ success has come through system disruption, Alberta is beginning her very own “No Queens” movement on Friday, May 29th. Have your voice heard, make your displeasure known. Have a listen to Gil McGowan and Nate Pike’s great conversation about the event on TheBreakdownAB.

Until next time, Comrade Wesam, in solidarity! Find Wesam on Facebook and Instagram under @CalgaryPeoplesAssembly.

The energy discussion I mentioned:

Mikayla Resists returns to The Gravity Well to update us on what she’s been up to since our last conversation on February 4: of the Reclaiming Alberta Report. Mikayla sat in on at least two separatist town halls and one virtual meeting regarding the separatist movement. Topics covered:

* The Alberta Prosperity Project to the Centurion Project hand off.

* The latest meeting where David Parker described the “technology” being used, aka voter lists.

* The soldiering up and educating of separatist leaders to bring in followers using an app.

* Alberta’s relationships between the United States, Israel, Gaza, and the war in Iran.

* TAKE ACTION: Demand Warren Dreichel’s Removal from The Edmonton Police Service

While our city continues to mourn the ongoing genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Gaza, Police Chief Warren Driechel travelled to Israel to meet with the police force notorious for its human rights violations, with the Police Commission's blessing. While the trip has been framed as an "educational" expedition, for Edmontonians this trip was a betrayal. Mayor, Andrew Knack rightly noted that this trip has damaged the social fabric of our city. Yet, in the face of this outcry, Chief Driechel has remained defiant, stating he "stands by his decision."

We, the signatories, demand:

* The immediate resignation of Police Chief Warren Driechel, on the grounds that his actions have undermined public trust and jeopardized community cohesion.

* An independent, transparent, and comprehensive investigation into the purpose, funding, itinerary, meetings, and outcomes of Police Chief Driechel’s travel to Occupied Palestine including full disclosure of any official or unofficial engagements undertaken during the visit.

* The immediate suspension and subsequent termination of any current or future institutional partnerships, training programs, exchanges, or collaborations between the Edmonton Police Service and zionist policing or security agencies, in accordance with municipal, commitments to human rights, international law, and ethical governance.

We know that human rights should never be taken for granted. We know that what Warren Dreichel did was wrong, and he must face the consequences of his actions.

In this episode, Kennedy Halvorson of the Alberta Wilderness Association returns to the studio (last appeared in The Future of Water in Southern Alberta) to co-host coal expert, Cornelis Kolijn with me. This conversation aims to break through coal misinformation causing calamity in the Province of Alberta, and beyond. Cornelis graduated from the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands. He has over 40 years of experience in international mining and metallurgical coal (coke and ironmaking). He’s worked in countries across the globe from Canada to Europe to Australia and all over Asia. He worked for Teck Resources in 2019 and since then has been a consultant for metallurgical coal and coke making, including alternate hydrogen-based direct reduction process and assessing alternatives to blast furnaces. He mentors young engineers and geologists. Thank you to Cornelis and Kennedy for the fabulous conversation!

Resources

The Alberta Energy Regulator’s Statements on Coal Demand

Coal Demand | Alberta Energy Regulator

Battery Circularity and Canada’s Need to Catch Up

Coal Price Volatility, Outlook, Grassy Coal Quality, Rock Waste Piles

AUSTRALIA Resources and Energy Quarterly December 2025

Due to decreasing global coal demand, and an increasing focus on high quality coal, benchmark hard coking coal prices are trending to sub-$200 USD/tonne.

Trading Economics, on April 19, 2026

Benchmark metallurgical coal prices are trending to $185 USD/tonne.

Australia Resources and Energy Quarterly, September 2025

Graphs showing India and South East Asia have been making up for China’s—and others—declining coal imports (left) and Australia’s high quality coal dominates the export market (right).

SMS Group Insights March 2024, The Steel Industry in 2050

Tables highlighting a 71% to 33% blast furnace decrease expected (left) and increasing scrap steel availability from 0.9 to 1.5 Megatonnes per year (right) between 2022 and 2050.

Wood Mackenzie, Steel Value Briefing Tokyo, August 2024.

Remembering that good climate policy is good economic policy, scenarios adhering to climate policy may drop global oil demand by as much as 3/4 of current global metallurgical coal demand.

* Base Case consistent with 2.5oC global warming, as per Wood Mac’s Long-term of 2024Q1. Steady advancement of current and nascent technologies.

* Pledges consistent with 2oC global warming, aligned with Net Zero by 2070 pledges in COP26, in 2021. Incl. policy response to current energy crisis & geopolitical challenges to global economy.

* Net Zero 2050 scenario consistent by 1.5oC global warming, net zero by 2050. Aligns with most ambitious goal of Paris Agreement in 2015.

Cornelis’s Expert Evidence Report on Grassy Mountain

Cornelis expects coal quality to decline rapidly from seam to seam at Grassy Mountain. Coupling this with demand decline, he sees reclamation dollars being unavailable when needed most.

A graph showing the quality of Grassy Mountain Coal being well below Prime Hard Coking Coal quality benchmarks CSR and the neighboring Elk Valley coal seams. As a consequence, Grassy's coal product will have lower market value and pricing compared to the Elk Valley's coal. CSR is the coke strength in the Blast Furnace's process conditions; Extreme Temperatures and aggressive gas-attack degrading the coke, potentially "smothering" the process.

The Fluidity, this is the softening, partly melting of coal during carbonization in the oven is lower than Elk Valley's Prime hard coking coal. Usually, an optimized blend of coking coals is charged into the coke oven and heated to approx. 1100oC. Upon softening and release of gas and tar, the coal solidifies into solid coke. Low Fluidity coals are not as effective interacting with the other coals in the coal blend to form the strong coke structure required in the Blast Furnace.

A graph showing the opening and closing of coal mines between 1996 and 2016. Overall mines were offline 1/3 of the time.

A table highlighting the overstated economic value and employment opportunities across three mines in British Columbia between 1999-2019.

Research on subsidence from underground operations in Alberta and Beyond

Significant movement and ground deformation at the location labelled P4 towards the road and Smoky River: Ground deformation due to natural resource extraction in the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin - ScienceDirect.

Two maps showing the pits and waste rock (left) and proposed mine plans (right) for the Tent Mountain mine. There is evidence of sluffing of the stock piles due to the topography and increased material volume and load in this Google Earth satellite image.

Tent Mountain Google Earth Satellite Image Slumping Waste Rock Pile 1 Aug.2025-2

Underground mining is far from “out-of-sight-out-of-mind”. Apart from the impact on the watershed, methane is likely to escape through the cracks into the atmosphere, adding to the atmospheric greenhouse gas pollution. In some mining areas (Appalachians) in the USA escaping methane caused some homes and buildings to explode. In some cases, escaping mine-gas methane is being flared. The Crowsnest coal seams can be very “gaseous”, referring to underground mine explosions of the past.

Towards an Inventory of Abandoned Mines in Australia

Southern East Slope Geology Complexity and Thinning Compared to the Elk Valley

Two maps showing the surface expression increased complexity (left) and thinning of the coal seam thickness (right) from West (Elk Valley) to East (Crowsnest Valley).

The Joint Review Panel Report Decision, Page 19, finds the project is not in the public’s interest: https://static.aer.ca/prd/documents/decisions/2021/2021ABAER010.pdf.

This Google Earth image roughly shows the original rejected mine footprint (red) and the newly proposed footprint (yellow). As you can see, very little has changed. The map also highlights the tributaries that flow into the Crowsnest River, including Gold Creek and Blairmore Creek, highlighting their direct connection to downstream water systems that will receive contaminants.

Markham is a Canadian journalist and CEO of Energi.Media, one of Canada’s leading independent news organizations. Thoughtful Energy Journalism currently averages over 6 million views/reads per month, and is celebrating its 18th year. Markham also has a sizable and growing US audience.

I was introduced to Markham during the run up to the 2023 election. He was my first energy specific interview. Through his work and our continued collaboration through the Energy Circle, I have been exposed to a much more realistic view of Alberta. A view in line with my lived experience in the oil patch as a Geophysicist and liability expert. I have been introduced to and now work with many of the people Markham has interviewed: including Mark Dorin of the Polluter Pay Federation - PPF, Philip Meintzer of The Drill and Dash Report, and, of course, Charlie Angus / The Resistance. Markham introduced Charlie and I.

Markham started the Energy Circle at the same time I began The Gravity Well podcast. We meet online Thursday afternoons at 3 pm MT to discuss all things energy transition, political, and water related. I am very grateful for Markham’s work, his friendship and for his coming to Calgary to host this event with me! Thank you to everyone who participated and welcomed Markham back to town.

Next Event in YYC

Join the Coalition For Responsible Energy (C4RE) and me on Tuesday, May 12 from 7-8:30 pm at the Bowness Seniors’ Centre (6422 35 Ave NW) in Calgary. The Alberta Government is planning to ram the Mature Asset Strategy (MAS) through the legislature—a backroom deal that pushes the cost of oil and gas clean-up from the industry onto taxpayers. Learn more about what MAS is, how it will impact you, and our plan to stop the handout to the oil and gas industry. Let’s take action together!

Meet other campaign volunteers supporting environmental and social justice.

This episode of The Gravity Well features a discussion about the LaRose v. Her Majesty the Queen (now His Majesty the King) climate change lawsuit on Earth Day. The conversation includes Sadie Vipond, a plaintiff in the case, and Andrew Gage, a staff lawyer with West Coast Environmental Law.

Sadie Vipond is a university student studying environmental science with a specialization in ecology and conservation at the University of British Columbia. She has been involved in the case for seven years, starting when she was in grade seven or eight. The case involves multiple young plaintiffs who have all experienced climate change impacts including fires, heat, extreme weather events, flooding, and medical conditions exacerbated by climate effects.

Andrew Gage works for West Coast Environmental Law and has been focusing on climate change for about a decade. His organization joined the case about a year ago when the David Suzuki Foundation stepped back, providing communications, fundraising support, and legal case development assistance. The lead legal representation is handled by the Arvay Finlay LLP firm.

The case challenges the adequacy of Canada’s climate action under Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees the right to life, liberty, and security of the person. The plaintiffs argue that Canada’s Net Zero Emissions Accountability Act falls short of constitutional obligations to protect youth rights. Importantly, the plaintiffs are not seeking monetary compensation but rather a science-based climate recovery plan to hold the government accountable.

The case faced initial legal challenges when it was struck down by courts for being too broad, but the Federal Court of Appeal allowed it to proceed after the plaintiffs amended their pleadings to focus specifically on the Canadian Net Zero Emissions Accountability Act. This appellate decision itself represents a significant precedent recognizing climate change as affecting human rights rather than being merely a political issue.

The case is scheduled for trial in October 2026. Both sides have exchanged expert reports, and the plaintiffs will be submitting affidavits describing their personal experiences with climate change impacts. International Court of Justice rulings confirming climate change as a human rights issue will support their legal arguments.

The public can follow the case through West Coast Environmental Law’s social media channels and Our Children’s Trust. Donations to support case costs can be made through West Coast Environmental Law’s website at wcel.org/climate-litigation. The plaintiffs emphasize that their goal is to start conversations about climate change as a human rights issue and to hold the appropriate entities accountable rather than blaming individual citizens.

Climate change is not your fault, as my partner reiterated yesterday, the fossil fuel industry has chosen to renege on addressing the harms they’ve created. It is up to us coming together to hold them to account! Thank you, Sadie and the other 14 plaintiffs who stood up for your future and mine!

Follow and support Our Children’s’ Trust for plantiffs like Sadie who has spend a quarter of her life defending your rights.

This episode is a discussion between host Jenny Yeremiy and Professor Duane Bratt from Mount Royal University about Alberta’s Electoral Boundaries Commission process, their one-of-its-kind report, and recent government intervention which looks a lot like gerrymandering.

TAKE ACTION: Email Your MLA, the Premier, and the Justice Minister, cc’ing every elected official in Alberta. Scroll down for an example letter!

On the Original Commission Process

The Alberta government created an Electoral Boundaries Commission in 2024 to redraw electoral maps for the 2027 election. The commission was structured with five members: a retired judge (Justice Miller) as chair, two government appointees, and two NDP appointees. They were limited to increasing seats from 87 to only 89.

The commission spent about a year conducting public hearings and reviewing submissions, ultimately producing a unanimous interim report that all five members agreed upon. The report recommended adding seats in Calgary, Edmonton, and Airdrie due to population growth, while amalgamating some rural ridings in Central and Northern Alberta.

The Split in the Final Report

Something unusual happened between December and January - the two United Conservative Party (UCP) appointees completely changed their position and created an entirely different map . This resulted in two separate reports: a majority report (supported by Justice Miller and the two NDP appointees) that largely maintained the interim recommendations, and a minority report from the two UCP appointees that proposed extensive “hybrid ridings”.

The minority report extended urban ridings far into rural areas - for example, a Lethbridge riding extending to the BC border and Calgary’s Glenmore riding extending almost to BC. Professor Bratt argues this appeared to be gerrymandering designed to dilute urban (NDP-leaning) votes by combining them with rural (UCP-dominated) areas.

Summary continues below ad.

Join Markham Hislop and I, THIS FRIDAY from 6-8 pm in Calgary at the Montgomery Community Association. Let’s talk water, energy, and any other concerns you’d like to discuss under Danielle Smith’s Alberta and Mark Carney’s Canada. Ask me questions about the recall campaign, ask Markham about guests and what he sees coming in the global electric revolution.

Don’t let the ticket price be a barrier, grab a Student & Senior free ticket!

Government’s New Process

Rather than adopting either report, the government announced yesterday they will recreate the entire process. They’re establishing a new legislative committee chaired by MLA Brandon Lunty, supported by another independent panel with the same structure as the original commission. This new process will take only six months instead of over a year and won’t hold new public hearings.

Constitutional and Legal Concerns

Justice Miller’s majority report stated the minority recommendations were likely unconstitutional under Section 3 of the Charter of Rights (fair elections). Unlike other Charter sections, Section 3 cannot be overridden using the notwithstanding clause. If a gerrymandered map is adopted, court challenges are expected that could nullify it, potentially forcing use of the old 87-seat map despite significant population changes.

Broader Democratic Concerns

Professor Bratt places this within a pattern of “erosion of Democratic norms in Alberta,” including attacks on universities, judges, municipalities, weakening Elections Alberta, and frequent use of the notwithstanding clause. He argues this undermines public trust in electoral fairness and feeds into separatist narratives.

The timeline is also problematic - Elections Alberta needs about 18 months to prepare for elections, but the new report won’t come until October 2026, just one year before the 2027 election, while also handling up to 10 referendum questions.

My Take

Smith’s UCP wants to forget the ABEBC’s efforts and use the 2023 maps, this way urban votes count less than rural votes and defeat the entire purpose of the commission to begin with: to balance the population growth.

TAKE ACTION: Write the PM, your Premier, justice ministers, and MLAs!

Subject: Stand up for democracy - accept majority electoral boundary commission report!

To: mark.carney@parl.gc.ca, ministerial.correspondenceunit-mailout@justice.gc.ca, premier@gov.ab.ca, ministryofjustice@gov.ab.ca, Calgary.Bow@assembly.ab.ca Cc: Rajan Sawhney , Peter Guthrie , Angela Pitt , Glen ven Dijken , Scott Cyr , Sarah Elmeligi , Danielle Smith , Diana Batten , Amanda Chapman , Irfan Sabir , Joe Ceci , Mickey Amery , Janet Eremenko , Peter Singh , Julia Hayter , Samir Kayande , Parmeet Singh , Myles McDougall , Court Ellingson , Nagwan Al-Guneid , Ric McIver , Lizette Tejada , Eric Bouchard , Kathleen Ganley , Gurinder Brar , Tanya Fir , Rebecca Schultz , Matt Jones , Luanne Metz , Mike Ellis , Jackie Lovely , Joseph Schow , Todd Loewen , Chantelle de Jonge , Justin Wright , Andrew Boitchenko , Nate Horner , Peggy Wright , Nicole Goehring , David Shepherd , Sharif Haji , Gurtej Singh Brar , Sarah Hoffman , Janis Irwin , Heather Sweet , Lorne Dach , Jasvir Deol , Christina Gray , David Eggen , Lori Sigurdson , Jodi Calahoo Stonehouse , Rhiannon Hoyle , Nathan Ip , Naheed Nenshi , Brooks Arcand-Paul , Rakhi Pancholi , Brian Jean , Tany Yao , Jackie Armstrong-Homeniuk , Nolan Dyck , Ron Wiebe , "R.J. Sigurdson" , Devin Dreeshan , Shane Getson , Jennifer Johnson , Brandon Lunty , Scott Sinclair , Nathan Neudorf , Rob Miyashiro , Chelsea Petrovic , Rick Wilson , Muhammad Yaseen , Dale Nally , Tara Sawyer , Dan Williams , Adrianna LaGrange , Jason Stephan , Jason Nixon , Kyle Kasawski , Searle Turton , Marie Renaud , Garth Rowswell , Grant Hunter , Nate Glubish , Martin Long

Prime Minister Mark Carney, Justice Ministers, Premier, and my MLA for Calgary-Bow

I am writing as a deeply-alarmed Albertan concerned by the UCP's clear move to gerrymander this province's electoral map ahead of the 2027 election while the clock is ticking.The 2025-2026 Electoral Boundaries Commission (ABEBC) issued a final report recommending a net gain of two new seats, one in Calgary and one for Edmonton, to accommodate population growth, and consolidate two rural ridings. The commission chair, Dallas Miller, a retired judge appointed by Danielle Smith's own cabinet, joined with the UCP and NDP-appointed commissioners supported their majority report unanimously.Suddenly, the two UCP-appointed commissioners decided it wasn't good enough, and issued “the minority report”. I personally opposed it, with a few other RecallNicolaides.ca community members, in the January Calgary public hearing. We outlined the clear attempts by my MLA Demetrios Nicolaides and neighbouring MLA, Rajan Sawhney, to gerrymander Calgary-Bow while he was being recalled.Their minority report would slice Alberta's cities into a pizza pie "urban" ridings, deliberately diluting NDP urban support across the province, eerily similar to Greg Abbott's model efforts this year in Texas. The commission chair himself warned that the minority report's approach is likely unconstitutional, running afoul of Section 3 of the Charter, which protects the right to meaningful representation. The majority report noted that the minority's recommendations appear "motivated by other considerations" rather than effective representation and sternly remarked that "our friends south of the border may have a term for this type of redistricting." https://www.assembly.ab.ca/docs/default-source/about-documents/legislative-assembly-office/other-reports/ebcfinalreport.pdfYes, it’s called gerrymandering!What makes this even more concerning is Justice Minister Mickey Amery's reversal. Before the final report was released, Amery had repeatedly stated that the government does and will not draw the boundaries and that he would respect the independent process. Once he saw that the report didn't suit the UCP's interests, he announced that "all options are on the table". As Opposition Leader Nenshi put it, "anything short of implementing the majority report in its entirety is election rigging," and he's absolutely right.The integrity of the process used to determine electoral districts is foundational to representative democracy. Any partisan interference poisons the legitimacy of the electoral outcomes. This raises the very real possibility that district boundaries will be drawn to guarantee a result on voting day rather than reflect the will of Albertans.Minority reports from government-appointed commissioners complete with alternative maps are unprecedented in Alberta electoral history. What the UCP is doing is a page ripped out of the authoritarian playbook. Canadians, and Albertans, have watched this play out south of the border, and we said that it cannot happen here. But now it is, under the UCP government.I demand:1. The majority report must be implemented in full. No cherry-picking, no incorporation of the minority maps, and no hybrid compromise that rewards bad-faith participation.2. Minister Amery must publicly commit to honouring the independent process he promised to respect before the report was released.3. The Legislative Assembly must not be weaponized to override an independent commission's findings for partisan gain.Albertans are not ignorant, we know what gerrymandering looks like and we know what a blatant power grab looks like. We will remember, at the ballot box and in the ridings that you are so eager to redraw, who stood up for democracy and who is trying to actively dismantle it.

Sincerely,

Jenny Yeremiy, P. Geoph

Calgary-Bow, Alberta, Canada Resident

Hat tip to someone on Facebook I’m happy to give credit to for this fabulous summary for our leaders!

When Public Education is under attack, What Do You Do? Stand Up, Fight Back!

To unpack the Government of Alberta’s latest assault on Public Education and what to do about it. I am joined by: Heather Quinn, the President of the Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) for Edmonton Public Local 37; Jay Prockter, an Edmonton Public School Teacher and district representative for Edmonton and Fort McMurray with the ATA; Trisha Estabrooks of Friends of Medicare, Former School Board Trustee and Journalist; and Brad LaFortune, the Executive Director at Public Interest Alberta.

Enjoy this fabulous conversation with Heather, Jay, Brad, and Trisha, thank you four for all you do. Read more about it from Good Trouble on Substack here:

Join Markham Hislop and I, next Friday, April 24th at the Montgomery Community Association in Calgary from 6-8 pm. Markham will update us on the global electric revolution by sharing his discussions and analysis with experts in Energy and Geopolitics. I will share my expertise in oil and gas development and restoration efforts right here in Alberta. This will be a great night, please share this event with your friends!

Reminder: if you were a volunteer for Recall Nicolaides, message me so I may add you to my guest list! AB Resistance has issued pins for you, as thanks, too.

The annual Public Interest Alberta (pialberta.org) “Common Purpose, Collective Action” conference is in Edmonton on Friday, May 8th and Saturday, May 9th at the Barnett House in Edmonton to discuss all collective action taken in the publics’ interest in Alberta and how we can find the links between us to strengthen our efforts. I will be be there, you should be there, too!

I just had another fabulous conversation with Charlie Angus / The Resistance about Kevin O’Leary’s “Wonder Valley” project proposed in Alberta. The project will:

* Add 7-12 million homes in terms of power usage while Alberta has the highest energy costs of all provinces

* Use more than a Sylvan Lake amount of water annually, while the agriculture sector is limited to 1/4 of this amount.

* Provides the USA access to our information via the Cloud Act.

* Benefits United Arab Emirates (UAE) investors… meanwhile, their revenue has been halted by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

* A federal impact assessment must be required, the agriculture sector cannot afford this water draw, nor can the environment.

Contact the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, request a Federal Impact Assessment be done on this project and any project planned in Alberta. It is clear Alberta is not being governed or regulated well here.

Correction: I said the US emissions are off by 7 per cent. I meant they’re off by 7 times. Here’s a study led out of McGill University on the subject from last year: Sevenfold Underestimation of Methane Emissions from Non-producing Oil and Gas Wells in Canada.

#cdnpoli #abpoli #AIsurveillance #cloudact

This episode examines Alberta’s draft South Athabasca sub-regional land use plan and its implications for woodland caribou, water, biodiversity, Indigenous rights, and long-term regional sustainability. Program director Tara Russell of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS) Northern Alberta explains that sub-regional plans were originally conceived to manage competing industrial and recreational uses on public lands in ways that would recover endangered and threatened caribou populations by meeting well-established habitat thresholds, including at least 65% undisturbed habitat and sufficient mature forest within each range. She notes that all 15 woodland caribou populations in northern Alberta are threatened and that most home ranges now have over 90% disturbance, leaving less than 5% undisturbed habitat.

TAKE ACTION BY APRIL 9, 2026!

Use the Public Engagement Guide | 2026 Created by CPAWS Northern Alberta, Alberta Wilderness Association, The Alberta Chapter of the Wildlife Society and Nature Alberta to stop the eviction of caribou TODAY!

Tara describes how the new South Athabasca plan overrides the earlier Cold Lake sub-regional plan and the unreleased Wandering River plan, despite years of multi-stakeholder work that had produced precedent-setting approaches such as clear habitat targets and timelines. Their analysis, captured in a public engagement guide produced with several conservation organizations, concludes that the draft plan removes caribou recovery as an explicit objective, fails to commit to restoring critical habitat to the 65% undisturbed threshold required under the federal Species at Risk Act, and provides no transparent assessment of how its measures will affect caribou or other species at risk.

The discussion highlights that the sub-region is already heavily impacted by forestry, in situ oil sands, conventional oil and gas, roads, seismic lines, and recreation, yet the plan is structured around an explicit goal of doubling oil and gas development without robust mechanisms to reduce cumulative disturbance or address water use and contamination, including tailings. Proposed improvements—such as limiting primary roads, adjusting riparian buffers, setting road-density and disturbance parameters, and restoring “unproductive” infrastructure—are undermined by broad exemptions for in situ project areas and existing operations, vague definitions, lack of incentives or enforcement, and thresholds that are not tied to ecological needs.

In forestry, the plan introduces long-term harvest deferrals in high-value caribou habitat, which Russell views as a positive step, but these apply only to logging and not to other industrial activities, and the harvest schedule appears to keep disturbance above what caribou can tolerate for at least the first 40 years, with no clear explanation of how habitat targets will be met. Access management and recreation provisions similarly lack ecological grounding and enforcement: road-density targets are not linked to caribou needs, in situ project areas are exempt from access rules, and off-highway vehicle restrictions are limited to a single area despite broader impacts on wildlife and waterways.

The plan’s proposed conservation area within the Cold Lake Air Weapons Range, envisioned as Indigenous-led, is welcomed in principle but criticized as it would still allow renewal and potential expansion of oil and gas activities and appears to be managed under rules similar to adjacent “go zones,” with no clear prioritization of species at risk. Russell stresses the need for meaningful Indigenous leadership across all nations whose territories overlap the sub-region and for conservation designations that genuinely safeguard caribou and boreal ecosystems.

Economically, Tara explains that a strategy centered on short-term industrial expansion at the cost of species loss, degraded forests, and damaged waterways cannot support long-term regional prosperity and may contravene federal Species at Risk Act obligations, especially after Alberta’s Section 11 conservation agreement with Canada expired in October without its commitments being met. Tara and I warn that continuing on this path risks ecological collapse, threatens downstream watersheds including the Northwest Territories, and accelerates climate and biodiversity crises, particularly if oil production and associated water contamination are doubled.

The episode concludes by framing the South Athabasca plan as one of up to 11 sub-regional plans expected under the current provincial mandate, cautioning that if similar approaches are replicated across Alberta, the result could be the expedited loss of woodland caribou (and trout species, I must add) and widespread degradation of boreal ecosystems. Tara and I emphasize the importance of public participation in the ongoing consultation (closing April 9) and encourage use of the engagement guide developed by CPAWS and partners to push for land-use planning that genuinely centers ecological limits, Indigenous rights, and long-term watershed and community health.

This episode features disability advocate Zachary Weeks, who was born with cerebral palsy in Edmonton and has long worked as a spokesperson on accessibility and social justice issues, consulting on major public developments and challenging ableism and discrimination. Zachary describes his unexpected path into advocacy, shifting from training as a funeral director to volunteering with a nonprofit after facing exclusion from the funeral industry, where his potential as an advocate was recognized. The conversation centers on Alberta’s lack of provincial accessibility legislation—making it one of only two provinces without such a law—and the development of a comprehensive Accessibility Act led by MLA Marie Renaud in collaboration with people with disabilities, lawyers, nonprofits, and business groups, including the Alberta Chambers of Commerce. He explains that the proposed act aimed to embed accessibility across employment, housing, transportation, justice, healthcare, the built environment, and digital services, including accessible websites and government communications. Zach criticizes the UCP government for striking down the bill over objections to the definition of disability and concerns about “overreach” by a committee of people with lived experience, despite extensive consultations and cross-sector support.

The discussion then turns to income support reforms, contrasting the long-standing Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped (AISH) with the new Alberta Disability Assistance Program (ADAP). Weeks warns that thousands of recipients will be moved from AISH to ADAP under an assumption that many can work, despite the difficulty of qualifying for AISH and the reality that most recipients are unable to work. He highlights that ADAP will reduce monthly income from $1,940 to $1,740 after a temporary $200 transition top-up and will lower the amount people can earn before clawbacks from about $1,100 under AISH to $700, after an initial proposal as low as $300–$350. Zack argues that these changes, combined with clawbacks of the $200 federal Canada Disability Benefit, effectively balance the provincial budget on the backs of people with disabilities and undermine their ability to secure and maintain employment, especially in the absence of robust accessibility measures.

The conversation also addresses broader systemic issues, including inadequate consultation with the disability community—where government “town halls” lacked even basic accessibility features like captioning—and a political climate that increasingly targets disabled people, seniors, and immigrants. Weeks and I connect these policy choices to early childhood cuts such as reduced Program Unit Funding (PUF) funding, framing them as part of a “race to the bottom” that harms current and future generations. We further explore the complexities of Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID), with Weeks emphasizing personal autonomy, the need for strong safeguards, and the ethical tension created when people facing chronic pain and poverty are simultaneously stripped of supports and confronted with rising costs and housing insecurity.

Throughout, Zachary stresses that everyone is “temporarily able-bodied” and that disability cuts across all identities, making accessibility and income security issues that should matter to all Albertans. He calls for cross-community solidarity—across faith groups, LGBTQ+ communities, Indigenous peoples, and others—and encourages listeners to share knowledge, build alliances, and support efforts to secure meaningful accessibility legislation in Alberta. You can find Zachary at ZacharyWeeks.ca, his social media links are all there!

Mark your calendar, Calgary!

Markham Hislop is coming to town on Friday, April 24th, JOIN US from 6 to 8 pm at the Montgomery Community Association. As explained in this preview episode on Energi.Media, he and I will have a dual podcast discussion about the energy transition and water restoration needs in Alberta. The event is LIVE on Eventbrite, please get your tickets. If you are a member of the Recall Nicolaides team, please reach out to me directly if you’d like to attend. You are wanted there and AB Resistance has provided me with a small token of their appreciation for all the work you did. I just met with a handful of Recall leads and the exhaustion is real. Please reach out to anyone you know who was heavily involved in recall efforts and give them an extra word of thanks, they deserve it.

Forever Canadian Updates

I had the privilege of meeting Thomas Lukaszuk in Calgary Tuesday afternoon. Thomas is planning to commit another spring and summer to the “Unity Bus” to raise awareness and to get-out-the-vote for the October 19, 2026 referendum on separation and other heinous objectives. He will be hitting every town and city across the province. Thomas explained it is not a coincidence that the separatist petition announced they have their numbers this week as it is expected the petition signature collecting will be stopped by the courts to rightly support Indigenous rights. Please go to Forever-Canadian.ca to join this vital phase two effort.

If you haven’t already, check out my conversation with him on Charlie Angus’s Meidas Canada titled: ALBERTANS FIGHT MAGA & DEFEND CANADA.

Water Not Coal

Become a canvasser with the WaterNotCoal campaign underway. The pace seems to have picked up again, perhaps in light of further legislative changes to both the recall and citizen petition initiatives. The Alberta Government created a two-year black out period around the election and are allowing the MLA or justice minister, respectively, the ability to appoint a scrutineer. Go to waternotcoal.ca to get involved. I am working on a couple WaterNotCoal conversations for The Gravity Well, stay tuned!

The Coalition for Responsible Energy (C4RE)

I have been working with a group called the coalition for responsible energy, you can find us by searching cleanupyourmess.ca. We have a few town halls planned in:

* Provost on Wednesday, April 22, at the Provost Recreation and Cultural Center, doors open at 6 pm.

* Airdrie on Wednesday, April 29th at Inspire Airdrie from 7-8:30 pm, and

* Calgary at the Bowness Seniors’ Center on Saturday, May 9 from 2-3:30 pm.

Common Purpose, Collective Action

Public Interest Alberta: Common Purpose, Collective Action Conference in Edmonton, May 8-9. They want more Calgary people! I will be there presenting on a participatory democracy effort. Charlie Angus is a keynote speaker at it.

MARK YOUR CALENDAR: May 29th Alberta Day of Action!

The goal is to have 1,000,000 Albertans on the street that day. This effort is being led by the Alberta Federation of Labour, please go to: Fight Back Now! - Alberta Federation of Labour, subscribe to spread the word and organize. It’s gonna be quite something! I have an interview planned with a representative at the Alberta Federation of Labour soon.

Seb Kennedy, an energy journalist turned market analyst, has transitioned from covering renewables to focusing on natural gas and LNG, launching Energy Flux to provide insights into these markets.

This discussion highlights the volatility in the LNG market, exacerbated by geopolitical events such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the US attacks on Iran leading to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, he shows the significant supply disruptions to oil gas and global commodities, including fertilizers and other non-energy goods, which could lead to broader economic consequences.

The conversation further explores the challenges and opportunities for LNG investment in North America, particularly in Canada, where the potential for windfall profits is weighed against the risks of long-term market volatility and technical issues at existing facilities. Seb emphasizes the importance of reducing reliance on natural gas by investing in renewable energy and infrastructure to enhance energy security and resilience. The conversation concludes with a call for strategic investments to mitigate exposure to commodity cycles and support a transition to more sustainable energy sources.

For more insights, Seb can be followed through the Energy Flux newsletter, LinkedIn, Bluesky and other digital platforms.

Updates from me

I am Jenny, broadcasting from Calgary, Alberta. I’m a geophysicist turned oil and gas liability expert turned podcast host and public activist. I’m here to create a better story for Alberta than one of pollution and populism by breaking through the propaganda machine. Please remember to like and subscribe to The Gravity Well, your doing so helps boost the voices and views of these stellar people and important issues.

Recall updates

Mark your calendar, Calgary-Bow! Markham Hislop is coming to town on Friday, April 24th. He and I will have a dual podcast discussion about the energy transition and the phase 2 project for Recall Nicolaides campaign. I will create and share an Eventbrite for this event ASAP! I am working with the other recall leads to collaborate on this as well as some water focused friends. Remember to go to OperationTotalRecall.ca to support the recall campaigns still underway.

Forever Canadian on Charlie Angus

My Meidas Canada—Thomas Lukaszuk interview is out. It’s called ALBERTANS FIGHT MAGA & DEFEND CANADA. The best part, in my humble opinion, is around 19 mins in where Thomas explains the absolute impossibility of Alberta independence: physically, economically, and practically. Yes Thomas, our only market would be the USA and we would be absorbed by them instantaneously.

Sign up for their newsletter to get involved at forever-canadian.ca!

Water Not Coal

Become a canvasser with the WaterNotCoal.ca campaign which is underway. I am working on a couple Water Not Coal podcast conversations and am very much enjoying meeting the people who are going out of their way to sign at my home.

The Coalition for Responsible Energy (C4RE)

I have been working with a group called the coalition for responsible energy, you can find us by searching cleanupyourmess.ca… The Rural Municipalities Association conference is underway in Edmonton right now. There is a lot of media coverage on oil and gas site clean up happening from Real Talk with Ryan Jespersen to Markham Hislop to The New York Times.

C4RE members are planning a few town halls in Provost, Calgary-Northwest and in Airdrie. Stay tuned for the dates and details!

Common Purpose, Collective Action

Public Interest Alberta: Common Purpose, Collective Action Conference in Edmonton, May 8-9.

MARK YOUR CALENDAR: May 29th Alberta Day of Action!

The goal is to have 1,000,000 Albertans on the street that day. This effort is being led by the Alberta Federation of Labour, please go to: Fight Back Now! - Alberta Federation of Labour, subscribe to spread the word and organize. It’s gonna be quite something!

Michelle Robinson (Red Thunderwoman) of Native Calgarian Podcast joins me on The Gravity Well to discuss the meaning of treaties and the opportunity for all Albertans to embrace their meaning to repair them. The Treaty 6, 7, and 8 Chiefs are leading the country and the world in upholding international agreements. Alberta is home to leadership of many forms, those who aim to uphold the treaties are operating in the best interests of everyone, Indigenous and settler people alike. Michelle reminds us the treaties were signed with the crown, not the Canadian government. They are the highest level of authority on the land, above Canadian laws.

Much more to learn and discover while we seek to uphold the agreements of our ancestors. A area of education and growth for me, I am excited to explore more.

Updates from me:

Good afternoon, I am Jenny Yeremiy, I’m broadcasting from Calgary, Alberta. I’m a geophysicist turned oil and gas liability expert turned podcast host and public activist. Defined by Mark Dorin: a person who stands up for citizen and indigenous rights and public safety then damn right I’m an activist. I’m here to create a better story for Alberta than one of pollution and populism by breaking through propaganda. We would not be living in this tumultuous time without it. Please remember to like and subscribe to The Gravity Well, your doing so helps boost the voices and views of these stellar people and important issues.

Recall updates

There are 4 recalls of interest rounding down: Recall Mickey in Calgary Cross; Recall Jackie in Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville; Recall Justin Wright in Cypress-Medicine Hat; Recall Wiebe in Grande Prairie-Wapiti. Thank you again to everyone who stood up against this unconstitutional government!

Recall Nicolaides is working on some data analysis for you, look to our socials for them! That’s @RecallNicolaides Shout out to all my recall Nico-laides, thanks Aimee for pointing this pun out! To get involved in phase two of the recall efforts, subscribe to Recall Nicolaides for now.

PLEASE go to OperationTotalRecall.ca to support the final 4 campaigns. Also, BOOST their social media posts!

The Gravity Well updates

Last week, you got a glimpse into my Calgary Citizens on Climate Change group, as Bob Sandford presented to us in it. Check out the episode titled Reclaiming Alberta from Water Bankruptcy. And I had a fabulous conversation with Wesam Cooley of Calgary Peoples’ Assembly, please check it out. We discuss the illegal and unconstitutional war against Iran in Reclaim the Middle East from US-Israel Domination. This illegal aggression is changing the global economic system dramatically . New limits are being exposed, fertilizer travels from that area and has been choked off. This will impact producers in North America. Wow! I am chatting with Seb Kennedy of Energy Flux on Monday about the changes to the oil and gas volumes before and after February 28th. That is going to be great.

I also just concluded a joint podcast with Michelle Robinson of Native Calgarian Podcast. I hope to share it with you on Tuesday next week.

Forever Canadian & Charlie Angus’ Meidas Canada

Phase two of the forever-canadian.ca is underway. Thomas Lukaszuk—former MLA, Minister and Deputy Minister for Edmonton-Castle Downs from 2001-2015, where I grew up—is now focused on re-activating, educating, and ultimately voting down Smith’s 9 referendum questions. Thomas and I had a stellar conversation on Meidas Canada, I am looking forward to watching it myself. Hoping it might be out tomorrow: Sunday, March 15.

I am supporting the leader of the Calgary Forever Canadian volunteer effort, Janel’s been an organizing mentor, I am super grateful for her leadership. Sign up for the newsletter to get involved at forever-canadian.ca! I’m excited to see how this project grows!

Water Not Coal

Become a canvasser with the WaterNotCoal.ca petition is underway. I have been bringing it around with me and now have a permanent signing location in Cougar Ridge, you can find it on WaterNotCoal.ca I am very much enjoying meeting the people who are going out of their way to sign, I met a wonderful couple from Drumheller on Thursday night. A shout out to Andrew and Jody, it was such a pleasure to meet you!

The Coalition for Responsible Energy (C4RE)

I have been working with a group called the coalition for responsible energy, you can find us by searching cleanupyourmess.ca. Mark Dorin has been increasing awareness in a big way lately. Firstly, Avi Lewis came to meet with Mark about the Reclamation Boom that Alberta is being held back from. Thank you to Avi for taking the time to understand the risks and opportunities for Albertans and Canadians in this space.

In addition, Mark is making landowners aware of their right to address messes on their lands. Check out his conversation with Markham Hislop on Energi Media from yesterday.

Common Purpose, Collective Action

I am co-presenting an Alberta Participatory Water Democracy (PWD) project with Colin Smith. It is directly related to Robert Sandford’s address to my Calgary Citizens on Climate Change (4C) group last week. Which I will get to in just a moment.

Charlie Angus is a keynote speaker, and I am thrilled to be co-hosting a plenary, at the Public Interest Alberta: Common Purpose, Collective Action Conference in Edmonton, May 8-9.

MARK YOUR CALENDAR: May 29th Alberta Day of Action!

The goal is to have 1,000,000 Albertans on the street that day. This effort is being led by the Alberta Federation of Labour, please go to: Fight Back Now! - Alberta Federation of Labour, subscribe to spread the word and organize. It’s gonna be quite something!

Jody MacPherson – AI Data Centers

Jody MacPherson, a journalist with a background in the oil and gas industry, is currently engaged in investigative reporting on AI data centers and their connection to oil and gas production in Alberta. Her work focuses on the Wonder Valley Project, a proposed $70 billion AI data center in the Grand Prairie area, and the Olds project, which is progressing rapidly. These data centers are linked to the government’s strategy to double oil and gas production, raising concerns about their environmental impact, particularly regarding water and energy usage.

The projects have faced scrutiny over their approval processes and the lack of transparency, especially concerning water permits and indigenous consultation. Local communities have organized to express their concerns, particularly about the environmental and social impacts of these developments. Jody’s investigation also touches on broader issues of data sovereignty and the role of large American tech companies in these projects.

Jody’s work is supported by donations through the energy mix and her Substack, where she provides additional insights into her investigations. She continues to explore the implications of these data centers, including their potential benefits and the challenges they pose to local communities and the environment.

Excellent investigative reporting you won’t want to miss! If you’re interested in following them or the issue you can do so on Facebook search: Old’s Community Transparency Project.

Jody’s coverage of this issue:

Hidden Wonder Valley series: https://www.theenergymix.com/hidden-wonder-valley/

Latest on Olds:

https://www.theenergymix.com/developer-presses-ahead-with-mega-gas-plant-after-alberta-regulator-rejects-deficient-plan/

Latest on Wonder Valley:

https://www.theenergymix.com/alberta-municipality-bets-tens-of-millions-on-wonder-valley-data-c

More coverage on AI data sovereignty here (Canada is mentioned near the end):

https://www.theenergymix.com/openai-calls-for-100-gw-of-new-power-each-year-to-secure-ai-dominance/

The Energy Mix donations page: https://www.theenergymix.com/donate/

Subscribe to Jody’s Substack newsletter:

Send Jody news tips on Signal at: JodyMacPherson.64.

Her social media links here: https://about.me/jodymacpherson.

Caffeinate her to keep up with her grandson: https://buymeacoffee.com/jodymacpherson.

Wesam Cooley rejoins The Gravity Well (see Season 1, Episode 20 and Season 2, Episode 7) podcast to delve into the complexities of Middle Eastern geopolitics, including the ongoing conflicts involving Iran, Israel, and the United States, and the broader implications for global stability. The discussion also touched on the role of media in shaping public perception and the strategic responses of nations like Iran in the face of external pressures.

Note: some audio issues occur when Wesam shares important information around the University of Calgary student protests. Here’s what Wesam was hoping to share:

“The broader progressive movement in Alberta has allies in the anti-imperialist struggle and it’s important that we work together as allies. The movement against the genocide in Gaza is the best example of a mass movement in a critical historical moment that could have been so much more impactful, even on politics in Alberta, if it had received full support across the progressive spectrum.

The Calgary Palestine movement has been battling police and state repression and defending protest rights that will affect the civil liberties of all of us. The most important of these battles relates to the police/provincial scandal around the crackdown on the University of Calgary encampment. You’ll remember that in May 2024 a group of students established an encampment at the U of C protesting the University’s complicity in the genocide, and the Calgary Police came in with tear gas and batons and violently dispersed them, putting several people in hospital. That police action was so controversial that it got referred to an ASIRT investigation, but the whole thing ended up getting covered up and ASIRT in the end declined to investigate. A later FOIP request revealed that a conversation had taken place between then-Calgary Police Chief Mark Neufeld and Safety Minister Mike Ellis where Ellis assured Neufeld that there would be no substantive investigation by ASIRT into the issue. We have it on record that Ellis and Neufeld essentially decided the result of ASIRT’s investigation before any investigation had even taken place. This was reported by Jeremy Appel at the time.

In other words, we uncovered smoking gun evidence that the Smith government directly participated in an outright cover-up of what was likely the worst case of police misconduct and violence against peaceful protesters in Calgary’s history. If that had received any real attention from progressives in this province, it might have dealt a serious blow to Smith and her cronies. (Who knows, it might have been enough to even take down her government? Neufeld himself ended up resigning, for reasons that weren’t stated publicly but were most likely related to this, since the Police Commission used his resignation as an excuse to not look into this issue any further.)

So when I say you have allies in the anti-imperialist movement that you aren’t utilizing, I’m not saying it in some general or sentimental way. I mean what might have been the best opportunity progressives may ever get to actually take down the Smith government is slipping through their fingers because most (white) progressives in this province still see Palestine as an “alien” issue and aren’t willing to stand with us. And they do that not only to Palestine’s detriment, but to their own as well. We’re still here, still fighting the same fight you are, and this issue is still out there if anyone wants to pick it up and help us try to blow the Smith government wide open with it.

But it will require progressives to actually ally with the Palestine movement. And it seems to me that there are some “progressives” in this country who would rather see us all become Yankees than take a stand in support of Palestine.”

The podcast encourages listeners to engage with these issues critically and to participate in actions that support peace and justice, both locally and globally. Here are some ways to take action:

Actions for Peace

Palestine, Lebanon, and Iran Rally Sunday, March 8, 3 pm at Calgary City Hall.

Withdraw Canadian troops from region assisting US/Israeli aggression on Iran

Write your federal representatives here: https://actionnetwork.org/letters/withdraw-canadian-soldiers-assisting-us-aggression-on-iran.

Daily Phone Pledge

Call your MP before March 11, 2026 to confirm they are voting “Yes” to Bill C-233 to close loopholes for weapons to Israel. Use: https://armsembargonow.ca/phonepledge/ as your guide.

Tell Carney: Oppose Illegal Attacks on Iran

Join Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) in emailing Prime Minister Carney and Foreign Minister Anand to demand that they retract their support for illegal US-Israeli attacks on Iran and impose sanctions on Israel. Go to: https://www.cjpme.org/carney_iran.

Recall updates

The recall campaigns are down to 6: Nate Glubish in Strathcona-Sherwood Park; Recall Mickey in Calgary Cross; Recall Jackie in Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville; Recall Justin Wright in Cypress-Medicine Hat; Recall Wiebe in Grande Prairie-Wapiti; and saving the best for last Recall Danielle Smith in Brooks-Medicine Hat). Remember to tell your Brooks-Medicine Hat friends to call: 587-448-8911. It’s truly a 9-11 situation here in Alberta.

PLEASE go to OperationTotalRecall.ca to sign and support the final 6 campaigns.

Podcast updates

I had a fabulous conversation with Mary Stuart of Desmog regarding our premier’s addresses from May of 2025 and Feb 2026. Desmog is a global news organization focused on cutting through the climate misinformation machine. Yesterday, I posted an episode with the address that Robert Sandford offered my Calgary Citizens on Climate Change group called Reclaiming Alberta from Global Water Bankruptcy.

Forever Canadian

Phase two of the forever-canadian.ca is about to be start, the goal is to educate, activate, and ultimately get Albertans out to vote down Smith’s 9 referendum questions on October 19, 2026. Go to Forever-Canadian.ca to join in.

Water Not Coal

The WaterNotCoal.ca petition is underway. It’s very well organized and great community spirit around it! Go to WaterNotCoal.ca to join.

MARK YOUR CALENDAR ALBERTA: May 29th Alberta Day of Action!

The goal is to have 1,000,000 Albertans on the street that day. This effort is being led by the Alberta Federation of Labour, please go to: Fight Back Now! - Alberta Federation of Labour, subscribe to spread the word and organize. It’s gonna be quite an accomplishment.

After I provide updates (see below) on the growing grassroots movement in Alberta, this episode features a discussion led by Robert Sandford, a senior government relations liaison for the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health, focusing on the global water crisis and its implications for Alberta. The speaker highlights the concept of “Global Water Bankruptcy,” a term used to describe the unsustainable overuse of water resources, which is becoming a critical issue even in water-rich regions like Canada. The report co-authored by Bob and released by the UN emphasizes the need for Alberta to acknowledge its water management failures and to protect its natural water-generating capital to avoid severe consequences.

The discussion also touches on the broader implications of climate change, with references to recent scientific findings predicting accelerated global warming and its potential impacts on water resources and weather patterns. Bob criticizes the current Alberta government’s policies, which are seen as neglecting environmental concerns in favor of industrial growth, and calls for a shift in focus towards sustainable water management and democratic engagement.

Additionally, the conversation explores the interconnectedness of water security with food security and economic stability, stressing the importance of collaborative efforts to address these challenges. Bob advocates for a reframing of the sustainability narrative, arguing that the term has been diluted and misused, and emphasizes the need for honest acknowledgment of environmental realities to drive meaningful change.

Bob concludes with a call to action for Alberta to lead by example in addressing water and climate issues, suggesting that this could also serve as a catalyst for broader democratic renewal in the region.

Updates from me:

Good afternoon, I am Jenny Yeremiy, I’m broadcasting from Calgary, Alberta. I’m a geophysicist turned oil and gas liability expert turned podcast host and public activist. I’m here to create a better story for Alberta than one of pollution and populism by breaking through propaganda. We would not be living in this tumultuous time without it. Please remember to like and subscribe to The Gravity Well, your doing so helps boost the voices and views of these important issues.

Recall updates

OK, first let me update you on the recalls. The recalls are down to 6: Recall Fir in Calgary-Peigan; Recall Peter Singh in Calgary-East; our Healthcare Minister and MLA for Red Deer North, Recall Lagrange are complete;

Nate Glubish in Strathcona-Sherwood Park; Recall Mickey in Calgary Cross; Recall Jackie in Fort Sask-Vegreville; Recall Justin Wright in Cypress-Medicine Hat; Recall Wiebe in Grande Prairie-Wapiti; and saving the best for last Recall Danielle Smith in Brooks-Medicine Hat). Remember to tell your Brooks-Medicine Hat friends to call: 587-448-8911. It’s truly a 9-11 situation here in Alberta as our government now looks to mount more than $100 billion in debt.

PLEASE go to OperationTotalRecall.ca to support the final 6 campaigns. It’s getting harder with the aggression from the separatist agenda. Lots of women are leading these efforts. I am so grateful to everyone who took the leap with me. Our community is 30,000 people strong, and growing! You can check out my interview with Radio Canada about the recall outcomes in the substack post which will accompany this episode.

Podcast updates

I had a fabulous conversation with Mary Stuart of Desmog, please check it out. Desmog is a global news organization focused on cutting through the climate misinformation machine. Desmog’s founder, Geoff Dembicki, is an Albertan and the author of The Petroleum Papers, which is being made into a series, btw. The book outlines the climate misinformation machine centered out of Alberta since the mid-90s using organizations like the Canadian Taxpayer Federation, founded by none other than Jason Kenney. When you consider his influence on our province please understand that he started in 1995 not 2019.

Remember, I have the pleasure of speaking with Charlie Angus on Meidas Canada. Please check out the few episodes I’ve done with him already, the latest being one on Danielle Smith’s address to the nation, titled: RECLAIM ALBERTA - DANIELLE SMITH IS LOSING IT.

We speak about Danielle Smith’s addresses and the many grassroots movement in Alberta! Like… Forever Canadian.

Forever Canadian

Phase two of Forever Canadian is about to be start with a new partner the Association canadienne-française de l’Alberta (ACFA). Thomas Lucaszuk and the Forever-Canadian.ca campaign team are now focused on activating, educating, and ultimately voting down Smith’s nine referendum questions. I am supporting the leader of the Calgary effort, Janel’s been an organizing mentor to me. Sign up for their newsletter to get involved!

Water Not Coal

Become a canvasser with the WaterNotCoal.ca petition is underway. I have been bringing it around with me and now have a permanent signing location at the Calgary Waldorf School in Cougar Ridge. I’ve already had 3 people sign and TWO offer to get me a local lineup! Tons of fun, get involved. It’s very well organized! Again, go to WaterNotCoal.ca

Common Purpose, Collective Action

I am co-presenting an Alberta Participatory Water Democracy (PWD) project with Colin Smith. It is directly related to Robert Sandford’s address to my Calgary Citizens on Climate Change (4C) group last week. Which I will get to in just a moment.

Charlie Angus is a keynote speaker, and I am thrilled to be co-hosting a plenary, at the Public Interest Alberta: Common Purpose, Collective Action Conference in Edmonton, May 8-9.

MARK YOUR CALENDAR: May 29th Alberta Day of Action!

The goal is to have 1,000,000 Albertans on the street that day. This effort is being led by the Alberta Federation of Labour, please go to: Fight Back Now! - Alberta Federation of Labour, subscribe to spread the word and organize. It’s gonna be quite something!

Bob Sandford–Global Water Bankruptcy

OK! Now onto Bob Sandford, I am so grateful to my friend James for introducing me to Bob Sandford. I first came into contact with James and Bob on World Water Day in 2024. He and Kevin Van Tighem presented together at a World Water Day Virtual Event in 2024. Highly recommend you listen to it, especially in light of Bob’s Global Water Bankruptcy report released in January.

Bob is the Senior Government Relations Liaison for the Global Climate Emergency Response team within the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment, and Health, joined the Calgary Citizens on Climate Change (4C) meeting last week to explain how the Global Water Bankruptcy impacts water decision-making in Alberta.

This is the first glimpse into both the new reality, sustainability has failed, climate emergency talk has failed, we are now aiming to avoid water bankruptcy. I am super excited and ready for the mountain of work and opposition that is ahead of us. It will be up to you, dear listener, to convince the public to care about this.

Before I share Bob’s presentation, I wish to offer my regret and disappointment to the people of Iran and the broader gulf region. The illegal and unconstitutional war against Iran will have drastically detrimental impacts on the global economy, the ecology, and of course supply chain for both food and water. Tune in again today at 5 pm MT/7 pm ET, I will be rejoined by Wesam Khalid to discuss this in detail. There is a LOT to unpack as I haven’t spoken with Wesam since May of 2025 before the 12-day war which we were told ended in World Peace. Not so much!

I am proud to share this discussion with Bob and look forward to continued discussions with him. Please listen to the end for Bob’s heartfelt compelling call-to-action. Have a great rest of your day everyone.

In this episode of The Gravity Well podcast with Jenny Yeremiy, Mary Stuart of Desmog Canada joins me to break down Premier Danielle Smith's addresses to the province from May 2025 and February 2026. DeSmog is a global organization working to clear PR pollution blocking climate action, including in Canada. Get your updates on grassroots movements in Alberta, focused on environmental activism and social justice. I update you on recall petitions against separatist movements against unjust government actions, such as the use of the notwithstanding clause by the justice minister, MLA for Calgary-Cross, Mickey Amery. Visit recallmickey.ca to upend him. Have your friends in Brooks-Medicine Hat text or call 587-448-8911 to remove Danielle Smith from her seat. Go to OperationTotalRecall.ca to support a recall campaign near you. Join waternotcoal.ca to gather signatures to stop coal mining in the Eastern Slopes. Or, if you aren’t a part of the Forever-Canada.ca already, join it to learn how to ensure the Alberta Government’s referendum is met with an informed Alberta public.

Take Action

Use this post to write to the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board (contact@cppib.com), let them know you oppose funding genocide and ecocide (via fossil fuel expansion).

In this episode of The Gravity Well with Jenny Yeremiy, I give the week’s highlights in Alberta politics before sharing my in-person interview with Dr. Younes Alila of the Department of Forestry and Environment at the University of British Columbia. I remind you to sign your recall petition, you can find your Member of the Legislative Assembly at operationtotalrecall.ca.

The episode also highlights the importance of public education, the teachers’ strike, and the role of teachers in political engagement. I emphasizes the need for collective action against government policies and the significance of using scientific evidence and indigenous knowledge in decision-making. The podcast is available on YouTube and other streaming platforms, I encourage you to like and subscribe to spread awareness of the valuable work being done in Alberta and beyond. Younes’s interview starts at ~24:30.

The Gravity Well Updates

I had three stellar conversations recently. First, with Mikayla Resists who’s been attending and sharing separatist signing locations and events to call out the misleading and treason. Andy Sytsema walked us through what Project 2025 is and what it would mean for Alberta if we were to fall to the USA. And Grande Prairie teacher, and former chair for the Alberta Teachers’ Association’s central bargaining committee, Peter MacKay on what teachers have done and continue to do to reclaim Public Education in Alberta. Please listen to those conversations.

What we do in the resistance matters, it’s already making a difference. As Peter MacKay reminded me, the teacher’s strike prevented an early election in the 2025. The polls were suggesting Smith’s Government of Alberta was set to gain even higher popular support last fall. Those polls did not factor in the overwhelming public support for the teacher’s strike. They tried hard to villainize teachers but failed. Well done teachers. It is the time to be political, and you have rose to the occasion!

Remember, Alberta needs a better story than one of treason and tyrants. I am proud to share the people, places, and plans to Reclaim Alberta. Join your nearest OperationTotalRecall.ca team or join The Gravity Well community.

Minister Nicolaides Lashes out at City News

Calgary-Bow MLA, Demetrios Nicolaides is upset with himself over his decision to fly the Alberta flag on Mount Kilamanjaro.

As Tania Vanderland asks in this the City News article which set Nicolaides off, “It is curious to see him use this platform to raise the Alberta flag,” she says. “And it is also curious that he chose to do that as well on this Mount Kilimanjaro trip, which is a different issue that he was trying to raise awareness around.”

The recall petition for Nicolaides failed to reach the required benchmark of 16,500 signatures by nearly 10,000. It was the first of 26 launched against members of the legislature in the final months of 2025. Twenty-four are against members of Smith’s caucus, including herself. Two are against members of the Alberta NDP.

However, Vanderland says the failed recall bid wasn’t a total loss, as it led to political engagement.

As for the flag, she wants to know why Nicolaides chose the one he did and feels, given he is a provincial minister, it is an appropriate question.

“Why didn’t he raise a Canadian flag?” she asks. “Or was it necessary at all to use that platform and that moment to raise a flag? You know, I understand the trip was about his sister.””

I appreciate Tania’s curiosity but Nicolaides feels quite differently. A letter (photo below) from his office explains he will make no further statements on the matter with CityNews. That they need to remove the story and apologize. Oh my!

It’s important to note that recent changes made to family violence legislation in Alberta have increased the likelihood for more violent behavior by cutting the family violence death review committee.

Remember, Minister Nicolaides and MLA Angela Pitt pay no mind to the more than 8,700 Albertans who formally expressed their objection to them as representatives of their constituencies.

Many recalls are wrapping up this weekend, do your best to give them a final boost at OperationTotalRecall.ca.

Take Action

Alberta is Canada, Canada is Alberta Rally

Attend your local rally for Alberta in Canada tomorrow, Saturday, February 21. I will be in Lethbridge on Sunday to sign the People’s Petition against Neudorf as he faked his own recall campaign.

Let’s bombard the CPPIB meeting

I will be at the BMO Center on Monday, Feb 23rd at 6 pm. The Edmonton event is on Wednesday, February 25. The link to register for either is here: https://www.cppinvestments.com/public-meetings/.

There’s a better story to be told by you for Alberta and Canada.

In this episode of The Gravity Well, I focus on the crisis in public education with guest Peter McKay, the former chair of the central bargaining committee for the Alberta Teachers’ Association and a Grand Prairie Middle School teacher and advocate. The conversation highlights the systematic underfunding of public education in Alberta, which has led to larger class sizes and insufficient resources for disabilities and immigrant students. The podcast also addressed the Alberta government's use of the notwithstanding clause to bypass negotiations with teachers, which has led to a lack of enforceable class size and composition conditions. The episode concluded with a call for teachers to become or remain politically active and engaged, emphasizing the need for grassroots efforts to address the challenges facing public education and other public services.

The teachers’ strike has changed the direction of the political conversation in Alberta and Canada, let’s keep the conversation going. A fabulous conversation you won’t want to miss!

This episode begins with highlights from my collaboration with Charlie Angus / The Resistance in the “Reclaim Alberta” feature. In the latest episode:

Charlie and Jenny address concerns about foreign interference and misinformation by the fossil fuel industry. Charlie highlights the importance of grassroots efforts to pushback against the impact of deregulation on the oil and gas industry. It is evident the resistance is growing.

Andy Sytsema of Taking Alberta Forward, an online presence and community Andy built to pushback against “Take Back Alberta" misinformation. Andy shares a background in the oil and gas industry who calls for transparency and integrity in government and advocates for universal public healthcare, education, social services, and the environment. He researches and writes online often about issues that matter to Albertans, in this episode he shares information around Project 25: its connection to Christian nationalism and executive overreach in Alberta’s politics.

The podcast also covers various recall campaigns in Alberta, encouraging public participation and highlighting the importance of democracy activism. The conversation concludes with a call to action for a rally celebrating Alberta and Canada, emphasizing unity and community engagement on February 21, from 10 am to noon. I will be at the rally at Calgary City Hall.

This weeks’ action

Use this EcoJustice letter writing tool to send an email to your MLA calling for a public inquiry into the $130 billion oil and gas liabilities not dealt with. Demand a public inquiry to keep Alberta’s Polluter Pays principle alive. Add: “No More Pipelines” until the liabilities are funded.

Expect a canned reply from your MLA like I received from Demetrios Nicolaides:

Dear Ms. Yeremiy,

Thank you for taking the time to write and share your concerns regarding Alberta’s Mature Asset Strategy and the management of historic oil and gas liabilities. I appreciate your perspective on this important issue.

Managing inactive oil and gas wells is a challenge faced by energy-producing regions worldwide, and Alberta is committed to addressing it responsibly. Our government’s approach is guided by the polluter-pays principle, ensuring that companies—not taxpayers—are responsible for cleaning up their sites.

Since introducing the Liability Management Framework in 2020, Alberta has made progress. The number of inactive wells has decreased by nearly 20%, from 97,000 to 78,000 as of December 2024. Industry is also meeting and exceeding annual closure spending requirements, investing hundreds of millions of dollars into cleanup efforts. For example, in 2023, companies spent $769 million on closure work—10% above the required amount.

The Mature Asset Strategy builds on this progress. It was developed after consultations with municipalities, landowners, and industry to ensure a balanced approach. Key recommendations include:

* Preventing insolvent operators from continuing operations

* Ensuring municipal taxes and landowner leases are paid

* Accelerating the closure of non-commercial wellsites

* Supporting the polluter-pays principle without relying on public funds

Our goal is to protect taxpayers, uphold environmental standards, and maintain Alberta’s reputation as a responsible energy producer while supporting economic growth and good-paying jobs.

Thank you again for sharing your views. Your input is valued as we continue working to ensure Alberta’s energy sector remains strong and accountable.

Regards,

Demetrios Nicolaides

MLA, Calgary-Bow

How should I respond?