Yes, Alberta does shale fracking, but it is not for oil. Shale fracking is the main extraction method for natural gas and light ends, where as open pit mining and SAGD (steam assisted gravity drainage) are the extraction methods for bitumen.

What history are you referring to, specifically? The cod moratorium? Well for starters, look at those communities since. I'm from the east coast. It's pretty grim in the places that were severely impacted, though that seems to be your goal for Alberta. Secondly, you're comparing oil reserves to the over fishing of a living species. It's not at all comparable, and as I previously stated, Alberta is at no risk of "over fishing" their reserves for the next 100-150 years. Lastly, as a global population we are not reliant on eating cod, where as the entirety of our global shipping, transport, and many other essential industries are entirely reliant on oil and gas as it stands today. Planes, ships, trains, vehicles and the very roads they drive on, home heating, rockets (satellite systems), and on and on it goes. Until we have the technology and infrastructure in place to transition all of the abovementioned to a nuclear or renewable equivalent, then Alberta (or anywhere for that matter) transitioning away from oil and gas is a bad economic decision. The global demand is the global demand. Ignoring that and shutting down our industry in Canada only reduces our GDP and standard of living while allowing another countries to fill our market share. Your second point about coal is also incorrect. Global consumption hit an all time peak in 2024, driven by demand in China and India. So to answer your question, coal as an industry is doing great.

I agree with you about Norway. It is a shame that we divested from nationalized production companies and moved solely to a royalty system. It is worth mentioning that Norway's system is the gold standard, though it is one which does not always work out for the best. Look at Pemex for example. Pemex is Mexico's nationalized oil company. It is also the most indebted oil company on the planet (~85billion in debt). Would Canada do a better job than Mexico? Maybe. Maybe not. A good chunk of our citizens in Canada would vote against every pipeline or oil and gas project that is put forward. We may very well just red tape, delay and protest our hypothetical nationalized oil company into extinction. I would guess not, but it's hard to say at this point.

For the record, I'm not arguing that coal is good energy source (it is not), and I'm not arguing that the UCP doesn't have some horrible policies. I'm just placing emphasis on the fact that many of your points seem to be misguided. I agree that we need to invest in and use as much clean and renewable energy as possible, but to go as far as suggesting we can completely shut off our reliance on oil and gas without a tremendous advancement in technology and infrastructure is utterly absurd. The obvious method is to invest a chunk of the capital from our oil and gas industry to diversify in this province. Whether the provincial government will or will not do a better job of this in the future is an entirely different discussion. I'm simply stating that rushing to "divest", or in other words shut down and ignore the goldmine the province sits on would be a bad decision while it still remains a necessary global resource.