04/01/2026
I’ve been doing a bit of reading this morning on Saskatchewan’s energy plans, and honestly, it’s left me with more questions than answers.
We’re being told that expanding coal plants is the “cheapest option,” but I came across analysis from Brett Dolter, an economist at the University of Regina, who raises concerns that the long-term costs — including environmental impacts and future regulations — aren’t fully being included in that picture.
At the same time, there’s about $2.6 billion being discussed for coal-related infrastructure that may only be used for a limited time before federal rules phase it out. That raises real questions for me about long-term planning and how public money is being used.
When I step back, it also connects to other government projects people have raised concerns about — where early expectations didn’t quite match what happened in reality, including things like the AIMS payroll system issues and ongoing debates around the Global Transportation Hub. Different projects, but similar questions about transparency and planning.
In this energy discussion, there’s also concern about consistency. The Saskatchewan Industrial Energy Consumers Association (SIECA) has said that shifting energy policy makes long-term planning harder for industry. And at the same time, climate change is something we’re seeing more directly now, including increased wildfire activity in Saskatchewan and across Canada. It makes me wonder why that piece isn’t more clearly built into these decisions. SIECA has also noted that “significant fluctuations in energy policy create uncertainty, which is not conducive to attracting or retaining investment.”
That’s where things start to feel a bit contradictory. The government talks about attracting business and investment, but industry groups are also saying that uncertainty in policy can make that harder.
On a personal level, I recently looked at my SaskPower and SaskEnergy equalized payment update, and the increase I saw was around 33%. That felt very different from what’s often communicated publicly, and I know many households are feeling that pressure too.
At this point, I don’t feel like I have answers — just more questions. I’m trying to understand more about how public money gets spent, how long-term value is judged, and what information is actually being used in these decisions.
My next read will likely be Eric Cline’s Squandered, as I try to better understand how large-scale resources are managed and how long-term outcomes are evaluated.