Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Alberta

The Alberta energy transition you haven’t heard about

Published

11 minute read

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Deborah Jaremko

Horizontal drilling technology and more investment in oil production have fundamentally changed the industry

There’s extensive discussion today about energy transition and transformation. Its primary focus is a transition from fossil fuels to lower-carbon energy sources.

But in Alberta, a fundamental but different energy transition has already taken place, and its ripple effects stretch into businesses and communities across the province.

The shift has affected the full spectrum of oil and gas activity: where production happens, how it’s done, who does it and what type of energy is produced.

Oil and gas development in Alberta today largely happens in different places and uses different technologies than 20 years ago. As a result, the companies that support activity and the communities where operations happen have had to change.

Regional Shift

For the first decade of this century, in terms of numbers of wells, most drilling activity happened in central and southeast Alberta, with companies primarily using vertical wells to target conventional shallow natural gas deposits.

In 2005, producers drilled more than 8,000 natural gas wells in these areas, according to Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) records.

But then, three things happened. The price of natural gas declined, the price of oil went up and new horizontal drilling technology unlocked vast energy resources that were previously uneconomic to produce.

By 2015, the amount of natural gas wells companies drilled in central and southeast Alberta was just 256. In 2023, the number dropped to only 50. Over approximately 20 years, activity dropped by 99 per cent.

Where did the investment capital go? The oil sands and heavy oil reserves of Alberta’s northeast and shale plays, including the Montney and Duvernay, in the province’s foothills and northwest.

Nearly 60 per cent of activity outside of the oil-rich northeast occurred in central and southeast Alberta in 2005. By 2023, overall oil and gas drilling in those regions had dropped by 30 per cent, while at the same time increasing by 159 per cent in the foothills and northwest.

“The migration of activity from central and southern Alberta to other regions of the province has been significant,” says David Yager, a longtime oil and gas service company executive who now works as a special advisor to Alberta Premier Danielle Smith.

“For decades there were vibrant oil service communities in places like Medicine Hat, Taber, Brooks, Drumheller and Red Deer,” he says.

“These [oil service communities] have contracted materially with the new service centres growing in places like Lloydminster, Bonnyville, Rocky Mountain House, Edson, Whitecourt, Fox Creek and Grande Prairie.”

Fewer Wells and Fewer Rigs

Extended-reach horizontal drilling compared to shallow, vertical drilling enables more oil and gas production from fewer wells.

Outside the oil sands, in 2005, producers in Alberta drilled 17,300 wells. In 2023, that dropped to just 3,700 wells, according to AER data.

Despite that massive nearly 80 per cent decrease in wells drilled, total production of oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids outside of the oil sands is essentially the same today as it was in 2005.

Last year, non-oil sands production was 3.1 million barrels of oil equivalent (boe) per day, compared to 3.4 million boe per day in 2005–but from about 13,600 fewer new wells.

Innovation from drilling and energy services companies has been a major factor in achieving these impressive results, says Mark Scholz, CEO of the Canadian Association of Energy Contractors. But there’s been a downside.

Yager notes that much of the drilling and service equipment employed on conventional oil and gas development is not suited for unconventional resource exploitation.

Scholz says the productivity improvements resulted in an oversupply of rigs, especially rigs with limited depth ratings and limited capability for “pad” drilling, where multiple wells are drilled the same area on the surface.

Rigs have been required to drill significantly deeper wellbores than in the traditional shallow gas market, he says.

“This has resulted in rig decommissioning or relocations and a tactical effort to upgrade engines, mud pumps, walking systems and pipe-handling technology to meet evolving customer demands,” he says.

“You need not go beyond the reductions in Canada’s drilling rig fleet to understand the impact of these operational innovations. Twenty years ago, there were 950 drilling rigs; today, we have 350, a 65 per cent reduction. [And] further contractions are likely in the near term.”

Scholz says, “collaboration and partnerships between producers and contractors were necessary to make this transition successful, but the rig fleet has evolved into a much deeper, technologically advanced fleet.”

A Higher Cost of Entry

Yager says that along with growth in the oil sands, replacing thousands of new vertical shallow gas wells with fewer, high-volume extended-reach horizontal wells has made it more challenging for smaller companies to participate.

“The barriers to entry in terms of capital required have changed tremendously. At one time a new shallow gas well could be drilled and put on stream for $150,000. Today’s wells in unconventional plays cost from $3 million to $8 million each,” he says.

“This has materially changed the exploration and production companies developing the resource, and the type of oilfield services equipment employed. An industry that was once dominated by multiple smaller players is increasingly consolidating into fewer, larger entities. This has unintended consequences that are not well understood by the public.”

More Oil (Sands), Less Gas

Higher oil prices and horizontal drilling helped change Alberta from a natural gas hotbed to a global oil powerhouse.

In the oil sands, horizontal wells enabled a key technology called steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD), which went into commercial service in 2001 to allow for a massive expansion of what is referred to as in situ oil sands production.

In 2005, mining dominated oil sands production, at about 625,000 barrels per day compared to 440,000 barrels per day from in situ projects. In situ oil sands production exceeded mining for the first time in 2013, at 1.1 million barrels per day compared to 975,000 barrels per day from mining.

Today the oil sands production split is nearly half and half. Last year, in situ projects–primarily SAGD–produced approximately 1.8 million barrels per day, compared to about 1.7 million barrels per day from mining.

Natural gas used to exceed oil production in Alberta. In 2005, natural gas provided 54 per cent of the province’s total oil and gas supply. Nearly two decades later, oil accounts for 60 per cent compared to 29 per cent from natural gas. The remaining approximately 11 per cent of production is natural gas liquids like propane, butane and ethane.

Alberta’s non-renewable resource revenue reflects the shift in activity to more oil sands and less natural gas.

In 2005, Alberta received $8.4 billion in natural gas royalties and $950 million from the oil sands. In 2023, the oil sands led by a wide margin, providing $16.9 billion in royalties compared to $3.6 billion from natural gas.

Innovation and Emerging Resources

As Alberta’s oil and gas industry continues to evolve, another shift is happening as investments increase into emissions reduction technologies like carbon capture and storage (CCS) and emerging resources.

Since 2015, CCS projects in Alberta have safely stored more than 14 million tonnes of CO2 that would have otherwise been emitted to the atmosphere. And more CCS capacity is being developed.

Construction is underway on an $8.9-billion new net-zero plant producing polyethylene, the world’s most widely used plastic, that will capture and store CO2 emissions using the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line hub. Two additional CCS projects got the green light to proceed this summer.

Meanwhile, in 2023, producers spent $700 million on emerging resources including hydrogen, geothermal energy, helium and lithium. That’s more than double the $230 million invested in 2020, the first year the AER collected the data.

“Energy service contractors are on the frontlines of Canada’s energy evolution, helping develop new subsurface commodities such as lithium, heat from geothermal and helium,” Scholz says.

“The next level of innovation will be on the emission reduction front, and we see breakthroughs in electrification, batteries, bi-fuel engines and fuel-switching,” he says.

“The same level of collaboration between service providers and operators that we saw in our productivity improvement is required to achieve similar results with emission reduction technologies.”

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

Alberta

Is Canada’s Federation Fair?

Published on

The Audit David Clinton

Contrasting the principle of equalization with the execution

Quebec – as an example – happens to be sitting on its own significant untapped oil and gas reserves. Those potential opportunities include the Utica Shale formation, the Anticosti Island basin, and the Gaspé Peninsula (along with some offshore potential in the Gulf of St. Lawrence).

So Quebec is effectively being paid billions of dollars a year to not exploit their natural resources. That places their ostensibly principled stand against energy resource exploitation in a very different light.

You’ll need to search long and hard to find a Canadian unwilling to help those less fortunate. And, so long as we identify as members of one nation¹, that feeling stretches from coast to coast.

So the basic principle of Canada’s equalization payments – where poorer provinces receive billions of dollars in special federal payments – is easy to understand. But as you can imagine, it’s not easy to apply the principle in a way that’s fair, and the current methodology has arguably lead to a very strange set of incentives.

According to Department of Finance Canada, eligibility for payments is determined based on your province’s fiscal capacity. Fiscal capacity is a measure of the taxes (income, business, property, and consumption) that a province could raise (based on national average rates) along with revenues from natural resources. The idea, I suppose, is that you’re creating a realistic proxy for a province’s higher personal earnings and consumption and, with greater natural resources revenues, a reduced need to increase income tax rates.

But the devil is in the details, and I think there are some questions worth asking:

  • Whichever way you measure fiscal capacity there’ll be both winners and losers, so who gets to decide?
  • Should a province that effectively funds more than its “share” get proportionately greater representation for national policy² – or at least not see its policy preferences consistently overruled by its beneficiary provinces?

The problem, of course, is that the decisions that defined equalization were – because of long-standing political conditions – dominated by the region that ended up receiving the most. Had the formula been the best one possible, there would have been little room to complain. But was it?

For example, attaching so much weight to natural resource revenues is just one of many possible approaches – and far from the most obvious. Consider how the profits from natural resources already mostly show up in higher income and corporate tax revenues (including income tax paid by provincial government workers employed by energy-related ministries)?

And who said that such calculations had to be population-based, which clearly benefits Quebec (nine million residents vs around $5 billion in resource income) over Newfoundland (545,000 people vs $1.6 billion) or Alberta (4.2 million people vs $19 billion). While Alberta’s average market income is 20 percent or so higher than Quebec’s, Quebec’s is quite a bit higher than Newfoundland’s. So why should Newfoundland receive only minimal equalization payments?

To illustrate all that, here’s the most recent payment breakdown when measured per-capita:

Equalization 2025-26 – Government of Canada

For clarification, the latest per-capita payments to poorer provinces ranged from $3,936 to PEI, $1,553 to Quebec, and $36 to Ontario. Only Saskatchewan, Alberta, and BC received nothing.

And here’s how the total equalization payments (in millions of dollars) have played out over the past decade:

Is energy wealth the right differentiating factor because it’s there through simple dumb luck, morally compelling the fortunate provinces to share their fortune? That would be a really difficult argument to make. For one thing because Quebec – as an example – happens to be sitting on its own significant untapped oil and gas reserves. Those potential opportunities include the Utica Shale formation, the Anticosti Island basin, and the Gaspé Peninsula (along with some offshore potential in the Gulf of St. Lawrence).

So Quebec is effectively being paid billions of dollars a year to not exploit their natural resources. That places their ostensibly principled stand against energy resource exploitation in a very different light. Perhaps that stand is correct or perhaps it isn’t. But it’s a stand they probably couldn’t have afforded to take had the equalization calculation been different.

Of course, no formula could possibly please everyone, but punishing the losers with ongoing attacks on the very source of their contributions is guaranteed to inspire resentment. And that could lead to very dark places.

Note: I know this post sounds like it came from a grumpy Albertan. But I assure you that I’ve never even visited the province, instead spending most of my life in Ontario.

1

Which has admittedly been challenging since the former primer minister infamously described us as a post-national state without an identity.

2

This isn’t nearly as crazy as it sounds. After all, there are already formal mechanisms through which Indigenous communities get more than a one-person-one-vote voice.

Subscribe to The Audit.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Big win for Alberta and Canada: Statement from Premier Smith

Published on

Premier Danielle Smith issued the following statement on the April 2, 2025 U.S. tariff announcement:

“Today was an important win for Canada and Alberta, as it appears the United States has decided to uphold the majority of the free trade agreement (CUSMA) between our two nations. It also appears this will continue to be the case until after the Canadian federal election has concluded and the newly elected Canadian government is able to renegotiate CUSMA with the U.S. administration.

“This is precisely what I have been advocating for from the U.S. administration for months.

“It means that the majority of goods sold into the United States from Canada will have no tariffs applied to them, including zero per cent tariffs on energy, minerals, agricultural products, uranium, seafood, potash and host of other Canadian goods.

“There is still work to be done, of course. Unfortunately, tariffs previously announced by the United States on Canadian automobiles, steel and aluminum have not been removed. The efforts of premiers and the federal government should therefore shift towards removing or significantly reducing these remaining tariffs as we go forward and ensuring affected workers across Canada are generously supported until the situation is resolved.

“I again call on all involved in our national advocacy efforts to focus on diplomacy and persuasion while avoiding unnecessary escalation. Clearly, this strategy has been the most effective to this point.

“As it appears the worst of this tariff dispute is behind us (though there is still work to be done), it is my sincere hope that we, as Canadians, can abandon the disastrous policies that have made Canada vulnerable to and overly dependent on the United States, fast-track national resource corridors, get out of the way of provincial resource development and turn our country into an independent economic juggernaut and energy superpower.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X