Scenario Reporting

This showed up on my Facebook feed this afternoon. Needed more info...

 https://www.facebook.com/share/v/183wQVHb7X/

Gemini:

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/183wQVHb7X/ Is this a possible scenario??

I can’t see the content of that Facebook video from here, so I can’t directly judge whether the specific scenario it shows is realistic, satire, or fabricated.

To give you a meaningful answer, I’d need a short description of what happens in the video (who is involved, what event or outcome is being claimed, and roughly when/where it’s supposed to occur). Once you describe it in a few sentences, I can:

Assess whether it’s plausible given current events and known constraints.

Help you check for common red flags (AI-generated audio/video, miscaptioned old footage, fake “breaking news,” etc.).

Suggest concrete ways to verify it (official sources, reputable news, reverse image/video checks).

Reply with a brief description of the scenario the video is presenting, and I’ll evaluate how likely it is.

Hydro-Quebec just lifted electricity prices to the US in the context of Trumpian intransigence in the current Canada/US trade negotiations...

It’s a politically charged but currently speculative scenario: there is no solid evidence that Hydro‑Québec has suddenly jacked up contracted export prices “as retaliation” in the middle of 2026 trade talks, but Quebec hydropower is a real lever and some non‑contract exports have already tightened.

What is actually happening

New England and New York are indeed heavily integrating Quebec hydropower into their grids through big long‑term contracts and new lines like Champlain Hudson Power Express and New England Clean Energy Connect.

Hydro‑Québec has recently reduced some exports, but the main reasons documented so far are low reservoir levels, higher domestic demand, and spot‑market price conditions, not an official political embargo.

Trump’s team has openly talked about revisiting or even breaking up CUSMA/USMCA and using tariffs aggressively, including on Canadian energy, which logically raises the question of Canadian counter‑leverage.

Is “price revenge” a plausible tool?

As a mechanism, yes: Hydro‑Québec can prioritize the Quebec market, limit discretionary exports, and adjust pricing within the flex allowed by contracts, which would raise power costs and stress for parts of the U.S. Northeast.

However, long‑term power purchase agreements have regulated price formulas and volume commitments, so Hydro‑Québec cannot simply triple the price overnight; most “revenge” would show up by cutting spot‑market sales and being very tough in renegotiations.

How to read that video

A recent YouTube‑style analysis video frames this as “Canada’s $290B electricity revenge,” explicitly presenting it as commentary and scenario‑building, not as a confirmed policy announcement by Hydro‑Québec or the Quebec government.

Canadian and Quebec‑focused reporting so far stresses drought, reservoir management, and market conditions as the drivers of reduced exports, and experts say there is “nothing political” in Hydro‑Québec’s official policy yet.

Bottom line on “possible”

Economically and geopolitically, using Hydro‑Québec exports as leverage in a serious tariff fight is absolutely possible and rational, and parts of that leverage (reduced exports, tighter conditions) are already visible.

As of now, there is no clear public evidence that Quebec has formally “lifted electricity prices to the U.S.” as an explicit retaliatory move tied to ongoing trade negotiations; it’s more an extrapolated scenario than a documented decision.

If you want, you can paste the key claims or on‑screen text from the video, and I can go line‑by‑line and flag which bits are grounded, exaggerated, or pure fiction.

Please proceed...

Here’s a line‑by‑line style breakdown of the scenario implied by that video conceptually (Trump, CUSMA fight, Hydro‑Québec “price revenge”) and how plausible each element is.

1. “Trump is strong‑arming Canada on trade”

Trump’s team has openly signalled they want to reopen CUSMA/USMCA and are willing to threaten tariffs or separate deals with Canada and Mexico.

Using tariffs and brinkmanship as leverage is entirely consistent with Trump’s past and current trade approach and is already being discussed in policy circles for 2026.

Assessment: Highly plausible, and partly already happening in rhetoric and planning.

2. “Canada/Quebec responds with electricity leverage”

Quebec exports significant hydropower into New England and New York; these flows are large, long‑term, and strategically important for U.S. decarbonization goals.

Because of that dependence, limiting discretionary exports, delaying new capacity, or driving a harder bargain in renewals would absolutely function as economic leverage, even if not branded as “revenge.”

Assessment: Strategically very plausible; hydropower is a real pressure point, especially in a hostile trade climate.

​

3. “Hydro‑Québec suddenly hikes prices to punish the U.S.”

Long‑term power purchase agreements usually specify price formulas tied to inflation, fuel benchmarks, or indexed adjustments; Hydro‑Québec cannot unilaterally spike those contract prices at will.

Where they do have room is in:

Reducing exports when reservoirs are low or domestic demand is high.

Cutting back on spot‑market sales where prices are more flexible.

Being much tougher on the terms of future contracts or expansions.

These moves raise overall costs and reliability risks for U.S. buyers without breaking existing deals.

Assessment: “Revenge” as an instant price shock is overstated; gradual tightening and hardball negotiating are realistic tools and are partly visible already via reduced exports.

4. “New England goes dark / blackout scenario”

New England and parts of New York are increasingly reliant on imports, not just from Quebec but also from other states and Canadian provinces; their grid operators plan for contingencies like reduced imports.

A sudden total cutoff of Quebec power would be serious and could force peak‑time emergency measures, but a full regional blackout purely from Quebec’s pricing decisions is unlikely; grid planning and redundancy exist specifically to avoid that.

Assessment: Local price spikes and reliability stress are plausible; a Hollywood‑style blackout purely from Quebec “revenge” is exaggerated.

5. “Is this already happening right now?”

Recent reporting links Hydro‑Québec’s lower net exports mainly to low water levels, reservoir management, and higher domestic demand, not a declared political retaliation against the U.S.

Analysts and utilities have not confirmed any official policy that ties export pricing or flows explicitly to Trump‑era tariff threats; most of the dramatic “revenge” framing comes from commentators and YouTube‑style geopolitics channels.

Assessment: The structure of the scenario is realistic, but at present it is more speculation plus normal market/water constraints than an announced, weaponized policy shift.

6. What the most realistic version looks like

If things escalate, the believable path is:

Trump team pushes tariffs/quotas or uses CUSMA threats against Canada.

Ottawa and Quebec quietly prioritize domestic supply and climate goals, slow‑roll new export projects, reduce spot‑market sales, and negotiate harder terms for future contracts to the U.S.

U.S. Northeast sees higher prices, more vulnerability at peak, and political backlash about over‑reliance on foreign power, but not an overnight collapse of the grid.

If you want to, you can transcribe any specific lines or claims from the video (numbers, dates, “secret deal” allegations, etc.), and I’ll tag each as “known fact,” “reasonable extrapolation,” or “unlikely/unsupported.”

️️