Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Canadian Energy Centre

These three Indigenous women are leading the future of Canadian LNG

Published

10 minute read

Crystal Smith, chief councillor of the Haisla Nation, Karen Ogen, CEO of the First Nations LNG Alliance, and Eva Clayton, president of the Nisga’a Nation.

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Deborah Jaremko

‘By being owners in these projects, we can meaningfully contribute to a cleaner and more just world’

Three female Indigenous leaders in British Columbia are leading the future of Canadian LNG. 

Eva Clayton is president of the Nisga’a Nation, a joint venture partner in the proposed Ksi Lisims LNG project. Karen Ogen, former elected chief of the Wet’suwet’en First Nation, is CEO of the First Nations LNG Alliance. And Crystal Smith is elected chief of the Haisla Nation, majority owner of the proposed Cedar LNG project, which is in the final stages of preparing for the green light to proceed.  

“By being owners in these projects, we can meaningfully contribute to a cleaner and more just world,” said Smith, who was first elected chief of the coastal nation in 2017, during the B.C. Natural Resources Forum earlier this year.  

“From an Indigenous perspective, we’re continuously taught to take care of our environment, to take care of our land, and to take only what is required. To think in a global context, I truly believe that in supporting the LNG industry, we are in fact doing that.” 

Click here to view the full panel session with Clayton, Ogen and Smith, moderated by Shannon Joseph, chair of Energy for a Secure Future.  

Eva Clayton, back left, President of the Nisga’a Lisims Government (joint venture owner of the proposed Ksi Lisims LNG project), Crystal Smith, back right, Haisla Nation Chief Councillor (joint venture owner of proposed Cedar LNG project), and Karen Ogen, front right, CEO of the First Nations LNG Alliance pose for a photograph on the HaiSea Wamis zero-emission tugboat outside the LNG2023 conference, in Vancouver, B.C., Monday, July 10, 2023. CP Images photo

The global liquefied natural gas industry is rising in importance as emerging economies in Asia look to move away from coal-fired power and European nations reduce reliance on Russia

In 2023, LNG demand reached a record 404 million tonnes, according to Shell’s latest industry outlook. Over the next two decades it is expected to rise by nearly 70 per cent, reaching 685 million tonnes by 2040.  

Canada’s first LNG export terminal – located on Haisla territory – is nearing completion and preparing for startup next year.  

Smith said the nation has seen great benefits from its support of the LNG Canada project, but owning Cedar LNG with partner Pembina Pipeline Corporation takes the opportunity to a new level. 

“We have a bigger vision that provides better education, better health care, better justice, and a better future for our people,” she said.  

“We can train our people with the skills needed to secure well-paying, family supporting jobs on Cedar LNG and other projects. We can build critical community infrastructure like our new health center and our youth center in Haisla territory.” 

Smith said LNG is helping fund programs that reconnect Haisla people with their culture and language, “a language that virtually disappeared with my generation.”  

“We are reigniting our potential through culture and language. And that is perhaps the most powerful thing of all. When I think of my daughter speaking Haisla with my grandchildren, that is what drives me each and every day.” 

To the north in the Nass Valley, near B.C.’s border with Alaska, Clayton said the Nisga’a Nation is also using its partnerships in LNG to reconnect with language and culture.  

The community owns Ksi Lisims along with Rockies LNG (a coalition of Canadian natural gas producers) and Texas-based developer Western LNG. 

Construction of the LNG Canada export terminal is now more than 90 per cent complete. Photo courtesy LNG Canada

“The cultural benefits for the Nisga’a Nation will only be more enhanced as we move forward with the project,” said Clayton, who was first elected president of the community in 2016.  

“There are ongoing programs that are in place so that our people and our young people will continue to speak the language. What I’ve noticed is that many of our elders that have been teaching this language are aging out. And so now we see a new generation of young people coming up to speak the language and teach language.” 

In B.C.’s central interior, the Wet’suwet’en Nation is facing a loss of culture and language, Ogen said. It’s a situation that can be helped with the economic opportunities of LNG. 

“We’re at a place in our community since the pandemic where we have maybe one or two fluent speakers left. That’s really not good news,” said Ogen, who served as chief from 2010 to 2016.  

“We want to be able to promote our language in our community and continue promoting our culture in our community because we have very few people in my generation that have traditional names.” 

Partnering in development projects like the recently completed Coastal GasLink pipeline (which will supply natural gas to the LNG Canada terminal as well as Cedar LNG) helps communities with access to clean drinking water, housing, health, wellness and education, Ogen said.  

She helped found the First Nations LNG Alliance in 2015 with the goal to educate communities about the potential benefits of development.  

As construction on Coastal GasLink winds down, crews are working to cleanup and reclaim the land. Clay and topsoil removed during construction has been stored on site and will now be used to contour the land to its previous shape to re-establish original drainage patterns. Photo courtesy Coastal GasLink

“I’ve learned a lot in this job. Being a girl from the rez, being a social worker, and then getting into this field, it’s something I didn’t aspire to. But for me, I’m passionate about it because of what it means to our people on the ground,” she said.  

Ogen has shared that message internationally, including during a trade mission to China last fall. The smog from burning coal in Beijing heightened her conviction about the benefits of Canadian LNG in Asia, she said.  

“We were given a presentation on how China still wants B.C.’s natural resources; they still want our LNG,” Ogen said.  

“B.C. and Canada need to hear those loud messages because we’re at an economic opportunity that’ll help us address the greenhouse gas emissions globally.” 

Clayton said she has heard the same thing.  

“The messaging that I get from the international world is that they need our LNG. The Germans, Japanese, all of them are wondering why they’re not getting gas from their allies. We have a responsibility as Canadians to help the world get off of coal,” she said. 

“We are working together for the benefit of our children. These major projects, every decision that we make is for the future of our children, the future of Canada, the world really when you think about the kind of industry we’re getting into, LNG.” 

Rendering courtesy Cedar LNG

Smith’s Cedar LNG could be the first Indigenous-led project in the world. Pembina Pipeline plans to spend up to $300 million advancing it to a final investment decision by mid-year.  

“Every time I hear about it, I literally start shaking and getting goosebumps. I’ll have many sleepless nights from now until that decision is made,” Smith said.  

“Our nation has had the ability to benefit from LNG development in our territory, but let’s not let it be the last.  

“There are so many other LNG projects with indigenous leadership in B.C. that have the potential to make a significant impact on the future of Indigenous people and also help fight climate change.” 

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

Canadian Energy Centre

Ignoring the global picture and making Canadians poorer: Energy and economic leaders on Ottawa’s oil and gas emissions cap

Published on

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Deborah Jaremko

The federal government’s draft rules to cap emissions – and by credible analysis, production – from Canada’s oil and gas sector will make Canadians poorer, won’t reduce world emissions, and are a “slap in the face” to Indigenous communities.

That’s the view of several leaders in energy and the economy calling out the negative consequences of Ottawa’s new regulations, which were announced on November 4.

Here’s a selection of what they have to say.

Goldy Hyder, CEO, Business Council of Canada

“At a time when Canada’s economy is stalling, imposing an oil and gas emissions cap will only make Canadians poorer. Strong climate action requires a strong economy. This cap will leave us with neither.”

Deborah Yedlin, CEO, Calgary Chamber of Commerce

“Canada would stand as the only country in the world to move forward with a self-imposed emissions cap.

“Given that our economic growth numbers have been underwhelming–and our per-person productivity lags that of the United States by $20,000, one would expect the government to be more focused on supporting sectors that are critical to economic growth rather than passing legislation that will compromise investment and hamper our growth prospects.

“…If the Canadian government wants to reduce emissions, it should follow the private sector’s lead – and strong track record – and withdraw the emissions cap.”

Stephen Buffalo, CEO, Indian Resources Council of Canada

“Over the past four decades, Canadian governments urged and promoted Indigenous peoples to engage in the natural resource economy. We were anxious to break our dependence on government and, even more, to exercise our treaty and Indigenous rights to build our own economies. We jumped in with far more enthusiasm and commitment than most Canadians appreciate.

“And now, in a bid to make Canada look ecologically virtuous on the world stage, the Liberal government imposed further restrictions on the oil and gas sector. This is happening as Indigenous engagement, employment and equity investment are growing and at a time when our communities have had their first taste of real and sustainable prosperity since the newcomers killed off all the buffalo. Thanks for nothing.”

Trevor Tombe, professor of economics, University of Calgary School of Public Policy

“[The emissions cap] is a wedge issue that’s going to be especially popular in Quebec. And I don’t think the [federal government’s] thinking goes much further than that.”

Kendall Dilling, president, Pathways Alliance

A decrease in Canadian production has no impact on global demand – meaning another country’s oil will simply fill the void and the intended impact of the emissions cap is negated at a global level.

“An emissions cap gives industry less – not more – of the certainty needed to make long-term investments that create jobs, economic growth and tax revenues for all levels of government. It simply makes Canada less competitive.”

Michael Belenkie, CEO, Advantage Energy

“Canada’s emissions profile is not unusual. What’s unusual about Canada and our emissions is we seem to be the only exporting nation of the world that is willing to self-immolate. All we’re doing is we’re shutting ourselves down at our own expense and watching global emissions increase.”

Kevin Krausert, CEO and co-founder, Avatar Innovations

“The emissions cap risks delaying – if not derailing – a whole suite of emissions-reduction technology projects. The reason is simple: it has added yet another layer of uncertainty and complexity on already skinny investment decisions by weakening the most effective mechanism Canada has in place.

“…After nearly 15 years of experimenting in a complicated regulatory system, we’ve finally landed on one of the most globally effective and fungible carbon markets in the world in Alberta, called TIER.

“What the federal emissions cap has done is introduce uncertainty about the future of TIER. That’s because the cap has its own newly created cap-and-trade system. It takes TIER’s 15 years of experience and market knowledge and either duplicates functioning markets or creates a whole new market that may take another 15 years to get right.”

Dennis Darby, CEO, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters

“The federal government’s announcement of a cap and trade on oil and gas emissions threatens Canada’s energy trade, economic interests, and national unity.

Adam Legge, president, Business Council of Alberta

“The oil and gas emissions cap is a discriminatory and divisive policy proposal—the epitome of bad public policy. It will likely cap Canadian prosperity—billions of dollars and tens of thousands of jobs lost for no benefit, and the burden will be borne largely in one region and one sector.”

Lisa Baiton, CEO, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers

“The result would be lower production, lower exports, fewer jobs, lower GDP and lower revenues to governments to fund critical infrastructure and social programs on which Canadians rely.”

Statement, Canadian Association of Energy Contractors

“The Trudeau government does not care about Canadian blue-collar, middle-class energy workers who rely on the industry to support their families. It does not care about small, medium and Indigenous energy service businesses that operate in rural and remote communities across Western Canada. And it certainly does not care about supporting our allies who are desperate for oil and gas from sources other than regimes such as Russia or Iran.”

Peter Tertzakian, executive director, ARC Energy Research Institute

“Focusing on a single sector while ignoring others is problematic because each tonne of emissions has the same impact on climate change, regardless of its source. It makes little sense to impose potentially higher economic burdens on one economic sector when you could reduce emissions elsewhere at a lower cost.”

Shannon Joseph, chair, Energy for a Secure Future

“Canada continues to pursue its climate policy in a vacuum, ignoring the big picture of global emissions. This places at risk our international interests, tens of thousands of good paying jobs and important progress on reconciliation.”

Adam Sweet, director for Western Canada, Clean Prosperity

“Layering on a new cap-and-trade system for oil and gas producers adds uncertainty and regulatory complexity that risks undermining investment in emissions reductions just as we’re getting close to landing significant new decarbonization projects here in Alberta.”

Continue Reading

Alberta

For second year in a row, Alberta oil and gas companies spend more than required on cleanup

Published on

From the Canadian Energy Center

By Grady Semmens

$923 million spent cleaning up inactive wells, sites and pipelines in 2023

As a business owner, Ryan Smith values few things more than predictability when it comes to the oil and gas market and the demand for his company’s services.

That’s why knowing that next year in Alberta, the regulator requires at least $750 million worth of work cleaning up inactive oil and gas wells and other legacy energy infrastructure is tremendously helpful for the CEO of Calgary-based 360 Engineering & Environmental Consulting.

“Having a minimum spend in place for the province makes the market more predictable and consistent, which in turn helps our clients and our business plan for the future, which is a good thing,” says Smith, whose company has completed more than 5,000 site closure activities in Canada and internationally since 2015.

“Site closure has really emerged as a growth market over the last decade, especially in Western Canada where the regulatory systems for oil and gas are more advanced than anywhere else we are exposed to. It is an integral part of the energy lifecycle, and if it is done well it adds a lot of value to the industry.”

The Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) introduced an industry-wide minimum “closure” spending requirement in 2022, part of Alberta’s Inventory Reduction Program to accelerate the remediation of inactive oil and gas wells, facilities and pipelines across the province.

The mandatory quota determines the minimum level of work a company must conduct primarily to decommission and reclaim a proportion of its inactive inventory.

Inactive wells are defined as those that have not been used for six months or a year, depending on what they are being used for. When a company decides that they will not reactivate an inactive well they decommission it through a process called abandonment.

A well is considered successfully abandoned after it is cleaned, plugged with cement, cut to a minimum of one meter below the surface and covered with a vented cap. After abandonment comes remediation and reclamation, where the land around the well is returned to the equivalent of its original state.

The first two years under the new rules saw Alberta’s energy industry significantly exceed the minimum closure requirements.

In 2022, companies spent more than $696 million, about 65 per cent more than the initial threshold of $422 million. The AER increased the minimum spend to $700 million in 2023, which producers surpassed by 22 per cent with total expenditures of $923 million.

The 2024 minimum remains at $700 million, while in July the regulator announced that the minimum spend for 2025 was raised to $750 million.

This closure work does not include remediation of oil sands mining sites, which is handled under the Mine Financial Security Program, nor does it include the closure of orphan wells (wells without a legal owner) managed by the industry-funded Orphan Well Association.

Gurpreet Lail, CEO of Enserva, an industry association representing energy service companies, suppliers and manufacturers, says there was an initial rush of closure work when the quotas were first put in place, but activity has since become more even as companies develop long-term closure plans.

“A lot of the low-lying fruit has been taken care of, so now companies are working on more complex closure files that take more time and more money,” Lail says.

Facility owners say that Alberta’s rules provide direction for planning closure and remediation work, which in the past may have been put on hold due to the ups and downs of the oil and gas market.

“When commodity prices are up, everyone is focused on drilling more wells and when prices are down, budgets are strained for doing work that doesn’t bring in revenue. Having a minimum spend makes sure closure work happens every year and ensures there is longer-term progress,” says Deborah Borthwick, asset retirement coordinator for Birchcliff Energy, an oil and natural gas producer focused in Alberta.

Over the last few years, Birchcliff has budgeted more than $3 million for annual facility closure work, far above its required minimum spend.

The company completed 11 well abandonments and decommissioned 23 facilities and pipelines in 2022, according to its latest environmental, social and governance report.

Borthwick says having the closure quota for 2025 already set has allowed it to plan ahead and line up the necessary service companies well in advance for next year’s remediation work.

Continue Reading

Trending

X