Squeeze the industry to please his party’s green base or keep output, revenue and high-paying employment flowing?
Talk at the latest climate-change shindig in Dubai has centred around the future of the oil industry and whether countries should pledge to phase out oil and gas production entirely or simply transform the industry in decades to come. Canada always talks a deep-green game at these affairs but are we really ready to nail shut the oil and gas coffin?
Maybe not. In Dubai Canada announced a cap-and-trade approach to oil and gas emissions but argued it won’t actually stop oil and gas production outright. The provinces, who yet again weren’t consulted, may not agree. Besides, promises are one thing. The record is another.
It also emerged in Dubai that the Emirates, seventh largest oil producer, is expecting to increase its production by a million barrels a day (mbd) by 2030. This is not a new trend. According to the U.S. Energy Information Service, the UAE increased production of oil and hydrocarbon liquids like coal oil by 15.3 per cent between 2015 and 2022, from 3.7 mbd to 4.2, fourth-most of all oil-producing economies. That’s much faster than world output, which was up only 3.6 per cent since 2015, reaching 100.1 mbd last year.
The irony — maybe even the hypocrisy — is that three countries in the Americas have increased their petroleum output even more than this Middle Eastern oil sheikhdom has: the U.S., Brazil and, yes, us: Canada.
The Biden administration, which is promising 2030 emissions will be half 2005 levels, has so far failed to stymie oil and gas development. U.S. petroleum and liquids production has soared by 33.9 per cent since 2015, reaching 20.3 mbd in 2022. Two-fifths of the increase has been on Biden’s watch. The U.S., not Saudi Arabia, is now the world’s leading oil producer, accounting for fully 20 per cent of global supply.
The Trudeau government has pledged that 2030 oil and gas emissions will be 42 per cent lower than in 2005. This has led to tensions with the oil- and gas-producing provinces, which are resisting emissions caps for oil, gas and electricity. Ottawa’s opposition to liquefied natural gas sales even as the U.S. and Qatar are making great inroads in the world market has had industry leaders scratching their heads. Even so, since the Liberals came to power in 2015, Canada’s oil and gas production has grown second fastest globally, at 26.7 per cent, to reach 5.6 mbd last year. Much of this growth is due to big investments in the oil sands before 2015 but the production increase has been accommodated by pipeline expansion, with the federally-owned TMX soon to come on stream.
Neither Biden nor Trudeau is attending COP28 but Brazil’s president, Lula de Silva, stormed in at the head of a delegation of 2000 to repeat a pledge to cut 2030 emissions to less than half 2005 levels. Much of reduction results from reforestation, however, not phasing out oil and gas. And, to the surprise of attendees, Lula announced that Brazil will align itself more closely with OPEC. No shock there. Since 2015, Brazil’s oil and gas production has risen by 20 per cent, making it the 8th largest producer in the world at 3.8 mbd last year. It now evidently sees itself as a player.
Besides the U.S. Canada, Brazil and UAE, only Iraq (at 10.4 per cent) and Kazakhstan (at 4.5 per cent) have seen their oil production grow faster than the world average since 2015. The rest have had little growth, with seven countries registering declines, including 22.4 per cent in Mexico and 36.7 per cent in Nigeria, the biggest drop anywhere.
The standstill or even loss in oil and gas production in many oil-producing countries since 2015 is due to several factors. Oil prices dropped by three-fifths after 2014 and the pandemic caused another crash. More recently, Saudi Arabia and Russia have persuaded OPEC+ to constrain production and push prices to over US$80 per barrel — mainly in order to replenish their treasuries. In some places, including Ghana, the U.K. and Norway, old fields are depleting. Elsewhere, but especially in Africa and Mexico, crime and political instability continue to discourage development. Finally, in the face of lagging demand, investors have encouraged companies to distribute profits rather than invest in greenfield oil and gas projects.
But top producers like the U.S. and Canada are not holding back and governments aren’t stopping them. Phase-out is all short-term cost in pursuit of climate gains that won’t be realized for decades, if at all. Nor are politicians willing to eliminate the tax revenues and high-paying jobs the industry generates. With energy security crucial in an increasingly dangerous world, oil-consuming countries are finding that intermittent renewable energy and other high-cost energy sources are no substitute for fossil fuels.
As the federal Liberals sink in the polls, they face a many-ways existential choice. Do they pursue their climate promises and phase out oil and gas? Or do they secure the benefits of oil and gas production for years to come? Or, a third option: do they say one thing but quietly do the other? Is it all, as Shakespeare would say, “much ado about nothing”?
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.
At COP26, Mark Carney also said that he thinks “we have both far far too many fossil fuels in the world” and “as much as half of oil reserves, proven oil reserves need to stay in the ground” climate goals.
Mark Carney claims that he supports Canada’s oil and gas industry and wants to see Canada export more of our natural resources. But Carney is yet again lying.
If Carney was sincere, he would immediately commit to the full repeal of the Liberals’ C-69, the ‘No More Pipelines’ Act, C-48, the West Coast Tanker Ban, and the production cap. Instead he doubled down on capping Canadian energy production.
But it’s not just that, Mark Carney has a clear history of opposing Canadian energy and infrastructure projects in favour of his radical anti-energy ideology and his goal of shutting down Canadian energy production.
When asked by Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre at an Industry Committee meeting, if he supported Justin Trudeau’s decision to veto the Northern Gateway pipeline, Mark Carney said “given both environmental and commercial reasons … I think it’s the right decision.”
Then, just six months later at COP26, Mark Carney also said that he thinks “we have both far far too many fossil fuels in the world” and “as much as half of oil reserves, proven oil reserves need to stay in the ground” climate goals.
If this wasn’t enough Mark Carney has now teamed up with Trudeau’s radical anti-energy ministers to finish off Canada’s energy sector, a goal that he has outlined while attending a World Economic Forum event in Davos.
Starting with the radical, self-proclaimed socialist, Steven Guilbeault, who’s history of anti-energy and infrastructure policies is all too familiar to Canadians.
Mark Carney has enabled Steven Guilbeault to do even more damage by promoting him to his Quebec Lieutenant, giving him three new ministerial responsibilities so he can continue his climate crusade against Canadian energy and infrastructure projects.
Canadians remember when Guilbeault said that “I disagree with the [Trans Mountain] pipeline” and that “Canada shouldn’t be investing in new infrastructure for fossil fuels.”
They also remember when he proudly proclaimed that “Our government has made the decision to stop investing in new road infrastructure.” All from a minister who shamed Canadians for owning cars.
Then there is the pipeline hating Jonathan Wilkinson, who Carney appointed as Canada’s Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Recently, Wilkinson wrote a scathing letter to Canada’s energy leaders for their opposition to the Carney-Trudeau Liberals production cap on Canadian oil and gas.
Despite Canadian industries being subject to unjustified tariffs from the United States, Jonathan Wilkinson recently told reporters that “Everybody’s sort of running around saying, ‘Oh my God, we need a new pipeline, we need a new pipeline.’ The question is, well, why do we need a new pipeline?”
Finally, there is Carney’s new Minister of Environment and Climate Change Terry Duguid. Duguid has doubled down on Mark Carney’s climate radicalism by stating that “a Mark Carney government will maintain the cap on emissions from the production of oil and gas”.
From 2015 to 2021 Carney-Trudeau environmental and anti-industry policies have cancelled over $176 billion in Canadian energy projects, with many more being cancelled afterwards. That means $176 billion worth of jobs and powerful paycheques have been blocked from Canadians so Mark Carney and his Ministers can impose their radical net zero ideology.
“We’re focusing on the opportunity that Canada has, perhaps even the obligation”
It was not a call he wanted to make.
In October 2017, Kevin O’Donnell, then chief financial officer of Nisku, Alta.-based Banister Pipelines, got final word that the $16-billion Energy East pipeline was cancelled.
It was his job to pass the news down the line to reach workers who were already in the field.
“We had a crew that was working along the current TC Energy line that was ready for conversion up in Thunder Bay,” said O’Donnell, who is now executive director of the Mississauga, Ont.-based Pipe Line Contractors Association of Canada (PLCAC).
“I took the call, and they said abandon right now. Button up and abandon right now.
“It was truly surreal. It’s tough to tell your foreman, who then tells their lead hands and then you inform the unions that those three or four or five million man-hours that you expected are not going to come to fruition,” he said.
Workers guide a piece of pipe along the Trans Mountain expansion route. Photograph courtesy Trans Mountain Corporation
“They’ve got to find lesser-paying jobs where they’re not honing their craft in the pipeline sector. You’re not making the money; you’re not getting the health and dental coverage that you were getting before.”
O’Donnell estimates that PLCAC represents about 500,000 workers across Canada through the unions it works with.
With the recent completion of the Trans Mountain expansion and Coastal GasLink pipelines – and no big projects like them coming on the books – many are once again out of a job, he said.
It’s frustrating given that this could be what he called a “golden age” for building major energy infrastructure in Canada.
Together, more than 62,000 people were hired to build the Trans Mountain expansion and Coastal GasLink projects, according to company reports.
O’Donnell is particularly interested in a project like Energy East, which would link oil produced in Alberta to consumers in Eastern and Atlantic Canada, then international markets in the offshore beyond.
“I think Energy East or something similar has to happen for millions of reasons,” he said.
“The world’s demanding it. We’ve got the craft [workers], we’ve got the iron ore and we’ve got the steel. We’re talking about a nation where the workers in every province could benefit. They’re ready to build it.”
The “Golden Weld” marked mechanical completion of construction of the Trans Mountain Expansion Project on April 11, 2024. Photo courtesy Trans Mountain Corporation
That eagerness is shared by the Progressive Contractors Association of Canada (PCA), which represents about 170 construction and maintenance employers across the country.
The PCA’s newly launched “Let’s Get Building” advocacy campaign urges all parties in the Canadian federal election run to focus on getting major projects built.
“We’re focusing on the opportunity that Canada has, perhaps even the obligation,” said PCA chief executive Paul de Jong.
“Most of the companies are quite busy irrespective of the pipeline issue right now. But looking at the long term, there’s predictability and long-term strategy that they see missing.”
Top of mind is Ottawa’s Impact Assessment Act (IAA), he said, the federal law that assesses major national projects like pipelines and highways.
In 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada found that the IAA broke the rules of the Canadian constitution.
Construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline. Photograph courtesy Coastal GasLink
The court found unconstitutional components including federal overreach into the decision of whether a project requires an impact assessment and whether a project gets final approval to proceed.
Ottawa amended the act in the spring of 2024, but Alberta’s government found the changes didn’t fix the issues and in November launched a new legal challenge against it.
“We’d like to see the next federal administration substantially revisit the Impact Assessment Act,” de Jong said.
“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.”
