<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Energy on Bifurcations</title><link>https://bifurcations.org/en/tags/energy/</link><description>Recent content in Energy on Bifurcations</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-CA</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2026 00:00:00 -0400</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://bifurcations.org/en/tags/energy/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>What If Energy Were Used First to Rebuild Territory?</title><link>https://bifurcations.org/en/texts/rebuilding-territory/</link><pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2026 00:00:00 -0400</pubDate><guid>https://bifurcations.org/en/texts/rebuilding-territory/</guid><description>&lt;p>In Quebec, the question is not new. The agreement reached under Duplessis with the Iron Ore Company on the North Shore remains etched in collective memory as a symbol of resources ceded for very low royalties—often summarized in public debate as the equivalent of roughly one cent per tonne.&lt;sup id="fnref:1">&lt;a href="#fn:1" class="footnote-ref" role="doc-noteref">1&lt;/a>&lt;/sup>&lt;/p>
&lt;p>This memory is not merely historical. It continues to shape how we think about natural resources, energy and regional development. For a long time, much of Quebec’s territory was organized around a simple sequence: extract, transport, export. Ore, timber, hydroelectricity, aluminum and seafood left the regions by rail, through ports, over high-voltage lines or under large supply contracts.&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>