Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Energy

Federal Greenwash law: guilty until proven innocent

Published

1 year ago

8 minute read

From Resource Works

“Under this new law, you’re guilty unless you prove your innocence to some back-room bureaucratic body. That’s simply not a Canadian concept.”

In its latest display of environmental correctness, the federal government passed a new anti-greenwashing law that requires individuals or organizations making claims or promises about the climate benefits of products or processes to prove their truth.

Such “truth,” the law stipulates, must be proven to the satisfaction of a federal bureaucracy — by way of “an adequate and proper test” or “adequate and proper substantiation in accordance with internationally recognized methodology.”

However, those tests and methodologies have not been defined or announced, remaining hopelessly vague. A federal bureaucrat is now empowered under the law to review such climate statements and claims, and to compel court proceedings if they deem them not to meet the ambiguous criteria.

It’s clear the law (Bill C-59, amendments to the Competition Act) would apply to companies claiming, for example, that their production processes or new technologies will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, the Competition Bureau conveniently will not have to prove that the claims are false or misleading. The new law instead requires the accused company or agency to prove their innocence.

The penalties can be severe, with fines of up to $10 million ($15 million for repeat offenders) or as much as three times the benefit derived from the misrepresentation. If that benefit cannot be reasonably determined, the penalty could be up to three percent of the company’s annual worldwide gross revenues.

Canada is thus following the green correctness of the European Parliament, which now requires “proof” of claims of a neutral, reduced, or positive impact on the environment when a producer reduces or offsets emissions.

The European Union’s move followed a study by the European Commission, which found more than half  of green claims were vague, misleading, or unfounded, with 40% being “completely unsubstantiated.”

Industry in Canada has been quick to protest Bill C-59, and it’s not just the oil and natural gas sector raising concerns. Industries ranging from automotive to mining to manufacturing are also challenging the new law.

Dennis Darby, CEO of the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters Association, called the changes “quite heavy-handed” and said his member companies worry about potential legal challenges over any environmental claims they make about emissions-reducing technologies.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) also protested: “These amendments effectively silence discussion around climate and environmental policy for political gains, while promoting the voices of those most opposed to Canada’s oil and natural gas sector.

“The federal government’s approach to these amendments has introduced a new level of complexity and risk for those looking to invest in Canada. The amendments to the Competition Act will make it more difficult for proponents to speak to Canadians and gain public support for their projects, particularly for those focused on reducing emissions.”

CAPP argued in a submission to the Competition Bureau: “The effect of this legislation is to silence the energy industry and those that support it, in an effort to clear the field of debate and promote the voices of those most opposed to Canada’s energy industry.

“Implementing a vague law with exceptionally high penalties, without consultation, and with an outsized impact on the country’s largest industries, is both anti-democratic and anti-business.”

Will the new Canadian law also apply (as CAPP says it should) to climate campaigners and green groups who claim that a company, product, or process damages the global climate?

One green group recently attacked liquefied natural gas (LNG) developments in British Columbia using (among other things) a photoshopped image of a smoke-emitting oil and gas facility in Iran. Could that be prosecuted under the new law? It should be, but who knows?

Will the new reverse-onus law apply in practice to government departments, ministries, and ministers? Again, who knows?

The federal Canada Energy Regulator, for example, made a number of green statements in a recent  Market Snapshot about LNG in BC:

  • “LNG Canada is actively working on electrifying certain processes, especially for the proposed Phase 2. This shift will reduce reliance on fossil fuels and help lower the carbon intensity of LNG production.”
  • “Woodfibre LNG will use electric motors powered by renewable electricity from B.C. Hydro, making the project one of the lowest-emission LNG export facilities in the world.”
  • “The proposed Cedar LNG facility will also be powered by renewable electricity from B.C. Hydro and will be one of the lowest-emission LNG facilities in the world.”
  • “The proposed Ksi Lisims LNG facility would have one of the lowest carbon intensities of large-scale LNG export projects in the world, utilizing several technologies to reduce carbon emissions, including renewable hydropower from the B.C. electricity grid.”
  • “The Tilbury LNG facility is powered by renewable hydroelectricity, which means it can produce LNG that is nearly 30 percent less carbon-intensive than the global average.”

Does the Canada Energy Regulator now have to “prove” all those statements?

And what about Prime Minister Trudeau himself? The First Nations LNG Alliance (which has said the law could be used as one more tool to discourage Indigenous partnerships and investment in energy projects) asked if the law would apply to the prime minister.

“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau hailed the go-ahead decision by the Cedar LNG project, majority-owned by the Haisla First Nation in B.C. He said it will be ‘the world’s lowest carbon footprint LNG facility.’ So does the prime minister now have to ‘prove’ that Cedar LNG is the world’s lowest carbon footprint LNG facility?”

Regardless, under this new law, you’re guilty unless you prove your innocence to some back-room bureaucratic body. That’s simply not a Canadian concept, nor a Liberal one. This new law needs to be changed or repealed.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
International / 3 hours ago

“It’s Not Freedom — It’s the First Step Toward Freedom”

Haultain Research / 3 hours ago

Trying to Defend Maduro’s Legitimacy

International / 5 hours ago

U.S. Claims Western Hemispheric Domination, Denies Russia Security Interests On Its Own Border

Energy

The U.S. Just Removed a Dictator and Canada is Collateral Damage

Published on January 3, 2026

By

Kelsi Sheren

Kelsi Sheren

Early this morning, the United States says it carried out a ground raid supported by air strikes inside Venezuela, reportedly involving elite U.S. forces, including Delta Force, and removed Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores from the country.

President Donald Trump confirmed the operation publicly and stated that the United States intends to “run Venezuela” during a transition period, explicitly including control over the country’s oil sector. That single statement should alarm Canada far more than any diplomatic condemnation ever could.

Kelsi Sheren is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

While this move may be justified on moral or strategic grounds for the U.S., it is unequivocally bad news for Canada, really really bad. Canada’s energy position just weakened significantly and now Canada’s leverage with the United States has always rested on one simple fact: the U.S. needed Canadian oil.

Not liked it. Needed it.

Canada became Washington’s largest and most reliable foreign energy supplier not because it was cheap, fast, or efficient but because alternatives were unstable, sanctioned, or politically toxic. Venezuela was one of those alternatives.

It isn’t anymore.

If the U.S. succeeds in stabilizing Venezuelan oil production under its influence, Canada loses something it cannot easily replace and wish it did sooner, strategic indispensability. When your biggest customer gains options, your negotiating power not only shrinks, it completely disappears.

Venezuelan crude is largely heavy oil, the same category as much of Canada’s oil sands production. Many U.S. refineries, especially along the Gulf Coast, are designed to process heavy crude. For years, sanctions and mismanagement kept Venezuelan barrels off the market. Canadian heavy helped fill that gap. That advantage just cracked open. If Venezuelan supply re-enters global markets under U.S. oversight, Canadian oil faces more competition, downward pressure on prices, wider discounts for heavy crude and reduced urgency for new Canadian infrastructure. Urgency that Mark Carney refused to see was needed.

Canada’s oil is already expensive to extract and transport. It is already burdened by regulatory delays, pipeline bottlenecks, and political hostility at home. Now it faces a rival with larger reserves, lower production costs, shorter shipping routes and U.S. strategic backing

That is not a fair fight, but the liberals put us in this position and only have themselves to blame. Ottawa officially has no cards left to play. Canada’s response options are beyond limited and that’s the real problem.

Ottawa cannot meaningfully condemn the U.S. without risking trade and defence relations. It cannot influence Venezuelan reconstruction. It cannot outcompete Venezuelan oil on cost and it has spent years undermining its own energy sector in the name of climate virtue signalling. This is just the snake eating it’s tail and now realizing its proper fucked.

Canada is watching a major shift in global energy power from the sidelines, with no leverage and no contingency plan. This is the cost of mistaking morality for strategy. This is the cost of an ego gone unchecked.

Canada likes to tell itself that being stable, ethical, and predictable guarantees relevance. It doesn’t, Canada isn’t even in the game anymore it just hasn’t realized it. It only works when your partner has no better options.

The U.S. did not remove a communist dictator in Venezuela to protect Canadian interests. It did it to secure American interests energy, influence, and control. Thats what a real leader does, puts it’s country and it’s citizens first.

Canada’s reliability is now a nice bonus, not a necessity. That shift will show up quietly in trade negotiations, in infrastructure decisions and how quickly Canadian concerns get brushed aside. No dramatic break. Just less attention. Less urgency. Less patience and soon enough Canada won’t be invited to the table to even begin the conversation. Canada has just been down graded to the kids table.

This moment didn’t begin today. It began when Canada failed to build pipelines, ego drove away energy investment, allowed its regulatory system to become a chokehold and treated its largest export sector as an embarrassment.

While Ottawa debated optics, the U.S. planned for contingencies. Today was one of them.

The removal of a communist dictator in Venezuela may be a massive victory for it’s citizen and a strategic win for the United States but for Canada, it is a warning shot. Canada just became more optional in a world that punishes irrelevance quickly and quietly.

Being polite won’t save us. Being virtuous won’t save us.

Only being necessary ever did and today, Canada no longer became necessary.

KELSI SHEREN

– – – – – – – – – – – –

One Time Donation! – Paypal – https://paypal.me/brassandunity

Buy me a coffee! – https://buymeacoffee.com/kelsisheren

Let’s connect!

Youtube – https://www.youtube.com/@thekelsisherenperspective

Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/thekelsisherenperspective?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet&igsh=ZDNlZDc0MzIxNw%3D%3D

X: https://x.com/KelsiBurns

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kelsie_sheren/

Substack: https://substack.com/@kelsisheren

TikTok – https://x.com/KelsiBurns

Continue Reading

Alberta

The Canadian Energy Centre’s biggest stories of 2025

Published on December 30, 2025

By

From the Canadian Energy Centre

Canada’s energy landscape changed significantly in 2025, with mounting U.S. economic pressures reinforcing the central role oil and gas can play in safeguarding the country’s independence.

Here are the Canadian Energy Centre’s top five most-viewed stories of the year.

5. Alberta’s massive oil and gas reserves keep growing – here’s why

The Northern Lights, aurora borealis, make an appearance over pumpjacks near Cremona, Alta., Thursday, Oct. 10, 2024. CP Images photo

Analysis commissioned this spring by the Alberta Energy Regulator increased the province’s natural gas reserves by more than 400 per cent, bumping Canada into the global top 10.

Even with record production, Alberta’s oil reserves – already fourth in the world – also increased by seven billion barrels.

According to McDaniel & Associates, which conducted the report, these reserves are likely to become increasingly important as global demand continues to rise and there is limited production growth from other sources, including the United States.

4. Canada’s pipeline builders ready to get to work

Photo courtesy Coastal GasLink

Canada could be on the cusp of a “golden age” for building major energy projects, said Kevin O’Donnell, executive director of the Mississauga, Ont.-based Pipe Line Contractors Association of Canada.

That eagerness is shared by the Edmonton-based Progressive Contractors Association of Canada (PCA), which launched a “Let’s Get Building” advocacy campaign urging all Canadian politicians to focus on getting major projects built.

“The sooner these nation-building projects get underway, the sooner Canadians reap the rewards through new trading partnerships, good jobs and a more stable economy,” said PCA chief executive Paul de Jong.

3. New Canadian oil and gas pipelines a $38 billion missed opportunity, says Montreal Economic Institute

Steel pipe in storage for the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion in 2022. Photo courtesy Trans Mountain Corporation

In March, a report by the Montreal Economic Institute (MEI) underscored the economic opportunity of Canada building new pipeline export capacity.

MEI found that if the proposed Energy East and Gazoduq/GNL Quebec projects had been built, Canada would have been able to export $38 billion worth of oil and gas to non-U.S. destinations in 2024.

“We would be able to have more prosperity for Canada, more revenue for governments because they collect royalties that go to government programs,” said MEI senior policy analyst Gabriel Giguère.

“I believe everybody’s winning with these kinds of infrastructure projects.”

2. Keyera ‘Canadianizes’ natural gas liquids with $5.15 billion acquisition

Keyera Corp.’s natural gas liquids facilities in Fort Saskatchewan, Alta. Photo courtesy Keyera Corp.

In June, Keyera Corp. announced a $5.15 billion deal to acquire the majority of Plains American Pipelines LLP’s Canadian natural gas liquids (NGL) business, creating a cross-Canada NGL corridor that includes a storage hub in Sarnia, Ontario.

The acquisition will connect NGLs from the growing Montney and Duvernay plays in Alberta and B.C. to markets in central Canada and the eastern U.S. seaboard.

“Having a Canadian source for natural gas would be our preference,” said Sarnia mayor Mike Bradley.

“We see Keyera’s acquisition as strengthening our region as an energy hub.”

1. Explained: Why Canadian oil is so important to the United States

Enbridge’s Cheecham Terminal near Fort McMurray, Alberta is a key oil storage hub that moves light and heavy crude along the Enbridge network. Photo courtesy Enbridge

The United States has become the world’s largest oil producer, but its reliance on oil imports from Canada has never been higher.

Many refineries in the United States are specifically designed to process heavy oil, primarily in the U.S. Midwest and U.S. Gulf Coast.

According to the Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission, the top five U.S. refineries running the most Alberta crude are:

  • Marathon Petroleum, Robinson, Illinois (100% Alberta crude)
  • Exxon Mobil, Joliet, Illinois (96% Alberta crude)
  • CHS Inc., Laurel, Montana (95% Alberta crude)
  • Phillips 66, Billings, Montana (92% Alberta crude)
  • Citgo, Lemont, Illinois (78% Alberta crude)
Continue Reading

Trending

X