Energy
Energy policies proposed at Republican and Democrat conventions are worlds apart

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Democrats Are On A Different Planet
As Republicans and Democrats meet at the conventions and propose policies for the next four years, the contrast between Republican and Democrat energy policies could not be greater.
Republicans would speed up oil and natural gas production; eliminate mandates to purchase electric vehicles; get rid of subsidies for renewables; and end dependence on China. Democrats propose to electrify the energy supply, ridding the economy of gasoline-powered vehicles and natural-gas appliances and substituting solar and wind for legacy fuels.
Through a series of executive orders and regulations, President Joe Biden has reduced federal oil and gas leases. America has 373.1 billion barrels of technically recoverable crude oil resources, and 2,973 trillion cubic feet of technically recoverable natural gas resources — an 85-year supply. Expect the next Republican administration to encourage production and use these resources to lower energy prices at home and around the world.
A Republican president would be able to reverse Biden’s executive orders and regulations. Increasing energy production is fourth out of 20 promises in the 2024 Republican Platform, “We will DRILL, BABY, DRILL and we will become Energy Independent, and even Dominant again. The United States has more liquid gold under our feet than any other Nation, and it’s not even close. The Republican Party will harness that potential to power our future.”
A Republican administration would allow a choice in cars. The Republican Party Platform calls for cancelling the mandate for EVs.
The Biden administration is subsidizing electric vehicles through the Inflation Reduction Act. Companies are paid to manufacture these EVs and consumers get tax credits to buy them. The Environmental Protection Agency’s final tailpipe rule would require 70% of new cars sold and 25% or new trucks sold to be battery powered electric or plug-in hybrid by 2032.
The Biden administration has focused on providing wind and solar power through billions in tax credits in the Infrastructure and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act. Either directly or through access to banks and Wall Street investors, it is deciding who is suitable to receive funding for energy projects.
But government control of energy is control of people and the economy. This is one reason why the trend toward nationalization of our energy industry through government mandates, bans on the production and use of oil and natural gas and reorganization of the electric grid is so dangerous.
Under a new Republican administration, rather than slowing down pipeline approval, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission would focus on speeding it up. The Bureau of Land Management would prioritize approving both onshore and offshore drilling permits. The Security and Exchange Commission would no longer look at climate effects of companies’ investments, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency would not look at the climate effects of bank loans.
Democrat energy policies increase dependence on China because China makes nearly 80% of the world’s batteries and is home to 7 out of 10 of the world’s largest solar panel manufacturers, and 7 out of 10 of the world’s largest wind turbine manufacturers. China dominates the critical minerals such as lithium and cobalt required for EVs through its own mines and by purchasing mines in Africa and Latin America.
Trade with China is not free or fair. China can produce lower-cost goods because it subsidizes labor, capital and energy. It uses forced labor from Xinjiang; gives low-interest rate loans to favored companies; and is not bound by the clean energy regulations of the West.
The next administration should use America’s domestic resources and provide tools to assist our allies and deter our adversaries.
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, former deputy assistant secretary for research and technology at the U.S. Department of Transportation, is the director of The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Energy, Climate and Environment.
Alberta
OPEC+ chooses market share over stability, and Canada will pay

This article supplied by Troy Media.
OPEC+ output hike could sink prices, blow an even bigger hole in Alberta’s budget and drag Canada’s economy down with it
OPEC and its allies are flooding the global oil market again, betting that regaining lost market share is worth the risk of triggering a price collapse.
On Sept. 7, eight of its leading members agreed to boost production by 137,000 barrels per day beginning in October. That move, taken more than a year ahead of schedule, marks the start of a second major unwind of previous output cuts, even as warnings of a supply glut grow. OPEC+, a coalition led by Saudi Arabia and Russia, coordinates oil production targets in an effort to influence global pricing.
This isn’t oil politics in a vacuum. It’s a direct blow to Alberta’s finances, and a growing threat to Canada’s economic stability.
Canada’s broader economy depends heavily on a strong oil and gas sector, but no province is more directly reliant on resource royalties than Alberta, where oil revenues fund everything from hospitals to schools.
The province is already forecasting a $6.5-billion deficit by spring. A further slide in oil prices would deepen that gap, threatening everything from vital programs to jobs. Every drop in the benchmark West Texas Intermediate price, currently averaging around US$64, is estimated to wipe out another $750 million in annual revenue.
When Alberta’s finances falter, the ripple effects spread across the country. Equalization transfers from Ottawa to have-not provinces decline. Private investment dries up. Energy-sector jobs vanish not just in Alberta, but in supplier and service industries nationwide. Even the Canadian dollar takes a hit, reflecting reduced confidence in one of the country’s key economic engines. When Alberta stumbles, Canada’s broader economic momentum slows with it.
The timing couldn’t be crueller. October marks the end of the summer driving season, typically a lull for fuel demand. Yet extra supply is about to hit a market already leaning bearish. Oil prices have dropped roughly 15 per cent this year; Brent crude is treading just above US$65, still well beneath April’s lows.
But OPEC+ isn’t alone in raising the taps. Non-OPEC producers in Brazil, Canada, Guyana and Norway are all increasing production. The International Energy Agency warns global supply could exceed demand by as much as 500,000 barrels per day.
The market is bracing for a sustained price war. Alberta is staring down the barrel.
OPEC+ claims it’s playing the long game to reclaim market share. But gambling on long-term gains at the cost of short-term pain is reckless, especially for Alberta. The province faces immediate financial consequences: revenue losses, tougher budget decisions and diminished policy flexibility.
To make matters worse, U.S. forecasts are underwhelming, with an unexpected 2.4-million-barrel build in inventories. U.S. production remains at record highs above 13.5 million barrels per day, and refinery margins are shrinking. The signal is clear: demand isn’t coming back fast enough to absorb growing supply.
OPEC+ may think it’s posturing strategically. But for Canada, starting with Alberta, the fallout is real and immediate. It’s not just a market turn. It’s a warning blast. And the consequences? Jobs lost, public services cut and fiscal strain for months ahead.
Canada can’t direct OPEC. But it can brace for the fallout—and plan accordingly.
Toronto-based Rashid Husain Syed is a highly regarded analyst specializing in energy and politics, particularly in the Middle East. In addition to his contributions to local and international newspapers, Rashid frequently lends his expertise as a speaker at global conferences. Organizations such as the Department of Energy in Washington and the International Energy Agency in Paris have sought his insights on global energy matters.
Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country
Energy
Carney government should undo Trudeau’s damaging energy policies

From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill and Elmira Aliakbari
The Carney government has promised to make Canada the world’s leading “energy superpower,” but so far, the government has failed to reduce regulatory hurdles and uncertainty in energy development. It’s time to reverse the damaging federal policies that have held back Canada’s energy industry for more than a decade.
The long list of Trudeau-era policies includes Bill C-69 (the “no pipelines act”), which introduced subjective criteria including “gender implications” into the evaluation of major energy projects, an oil tanker ban on the west coast that limits energy exports to Asian markets, an arbitrary cap on oil and gas GHG emissions that will require production cuts while most of our international peers ramp up production, and major new regulations for methane emissions in the oil and gas sector, which will increase costs for the industry.
These policies stifle Canada’s energy sector. Investment in the oil and gas sector plummeted over the last decade, from $84.0 billion in 2014 to $37.2 billion in 2023 (inflation adjusted)—a 56 per cent drop.
And that should come as no surprise. According to a 2023 survey of oil and gas investors, 68 per cent of respondents said uncertainty over environmental regulations deters investment in Canada compared to only 41 per cent of respondents for the United States. Moreover, 59 per cent said the cost of regulatory compliance deters investment compared to 42 per cent in the U.S., and 54 per cent said Canada’s regulatory duplication and inconsistencies deter investment compared to only 34 per cent for the U.S. This divergence between Canada and the U.S. in the eyes of investors has likely widened following President Trump’s re-election and his administration’s massive regulatory reforms to strengthen U.S. energy development.
Perhaps it’s also unsurprising, then, that business investment (measured on a per-worker basis, a key indicator of productivity) in Canada has dropped from $18,600 in 2014 to about $14,000 in 2024 (inflation-adjusted) while its continued to increase in the U.S.
Again, these Trudeau-era policies diminish Canada’s competitiveness, deter investment and ultimately hurt the economic wellbeing of Canadians. According to a Deloitte report commissioned by the Alberta government, the federal emissions cap alone may cost the Canadian economy more than $280 billion from 2030 to 2040 resulting in lower wages, job losses and a decline in tax revenue.
The Carney government pledged to turn things around. But rather than reduce regulatory hurdles and uncertainty in energy development, it’s introduced new legislation (which became law in June) that grants the federal cabinet the authority to prioritize and expedite projects it deems to be in the “national interest.” Put differently, the government chose to grant cabinet the power to pick winners and losers based on vague criteria and priorities rather than undoing damaging regulations that would give all businesses the chance to succeed.
It’s been four months since Mark Carney and the Liberal Party won the election. With Parliament set to reconvene this month, it’s time to set a new course and finally undo Trudeau’s damaging energy policies.
-
International1 day ago
Breaking: ‘Catch This Fascist’: Radicalized Utah Suspect Arrested in Charlie Kirk Assassination, Officials Say
-
Crime2 days ago
Former NYPD Inspector Breaks Down How Charlie Kirk’s Shooter Will Be Caught
-
International1 day ago
Charlie Kirk Shooting Suspect Revealed: Here’s What His Ammunition Said
-
Crime18 hours ago
Former NYPD Inspector Shares What Family Of Alleged Charlie Kirk Assassin Feared Before Turning Him In
-
COVID-192 days ago
The Persecution of Canada’s “Other” Freedom Convoy Truckers
-
Crime2 days ago
Surveillance video shows Charlie Kirk’s killer slipping away moments after shooting
-
Crime1 day ago
Arrest made in Charlie Kirk assassination
-
Business1 day ago
Upcoming federal budget likely to increase—not reduce—policy uncertainty