From EnergyNow.Ca

By Susan McArthur

Canada is now among the top 10 countries with natural gas reserves. It’s time to take advantage of that

Canadians are starting to understand the Americans ate our breakfast, lunch and dinner when it comes to selling liquefied natural gas (LNG) on the global market while simultaneously undermining our national security.

They are finally waking up to the importance of the urgent request by oil and gas CEOs to all federal party leaders calling for the removal of legislation and regulation impeding and capping the development of our resources.

The LNG story in the United States is one of unprecedented growth, according to a recent Atlantic Council report by Daniel Yergin and Madeline Jowdy. Ten years ago, the U.S. did not export a single tonne of LNG. Today, U.S. exports account for 25 per cent of the global market and have contributed US$400 billion to its gross domestic product (GDP) over the past decade.

The U.S. is now the world’s largest LNG supplier, edging out Qatar and Australia, and according to Yergin and Jowdy, its export market is on track to contribute US$1.3 trillion to U.S. GDP by 2040 and create an average of 500,000 jobs annually.

Last week, Alberta announced a sixfold increase in its proven natural gas reserves to 130 trillion cubic feet (tcf). The new figures push Canada into the top 10 countries with natural gas reserves.

Unfortunately, notwithstanding this vast resource, Canada didn’t even make it to the LNG party and the Americans have been laughing all the way to the bank at Canada’s expense. Our decade-long anti-pipeline and natural resource agenda has cost us dearly and Donald Trump’s trade tariffs are a stake to the heart.

As the world grapples with global warming, natural gas is the perfect transition fuel. It generates half the CO2 emissions of coal, provides needed grid backup for intermittent renewable wind and solar power, and it is relatively easy to commission.

Canada has extensive natural gas reserves, but these reserves are less valuable if we can’t get them to offshore markets where countries will pay a premium for energy generation. Canadian gas is abundant, but, given our smaller market, typically trades at a discount to U.S. gas and a massive discount to European and Asian markets.

The capital-intensive nature of LNG facilities requires long-term supply contracts. Generally, 20-year supply contracts with creditworthy counterparties are required to secure the financing required to build gas infrastructure and liquefaction plants.

For example, as part of a larger strategic deal, Houston-based LNG company NextDecade Corp. signed a 20-year offtake agreement to supply 5.4 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) to French multinational TotalEnergies SE.

As the market grows and matures, the spot market is gaining share, but term contracts continue to represent most of the market. This is a problem for Canada as it tries to break into the market, as much of current and future demand is already committed.

More than half the current LNG market demand, or 225 mtpa, is under contract until 2040, according to Shell PLC’s LNG outlook report for 2024. A further 100 mtpa is contracted to 2045. Shell recently revised its LNG market growth forecast upward to 700 mtpa by 2040 and it estimates the LNG supply currently in operation or under construction already accounts for about 525 mtpa, or almost 75 per cent of the estimated market in 2040.

Even if Canada secured 100 per cent of the available market share (impossible), this represents a fraction of the 130 trillion cubic feet of reserves in Alberta and an infinitesimal amount of Canada’s natural gas reserve.

If Canada wants to sell its LNG to the global market, it needs to be at the starting line now. Canada has seven LNG export projects in various stages of development. They are all in British Columbia. The capacity of these export plants is 50 mtpa and the capital cost is estimated to be $110 billion.

After significant delays and cost overruns, our first export facility, LNG Canada’s 14 mtpa Phase 1 in Kitimat, is set to ship its first cargo to Asia later this year. Phase 2, representing a further 14 mtpa, is still awaiting a final investment decision. The Cedar LNG, Ksi Lisims LNG and Woodfibre LNG projects are licensed, at various stages of development and represent a further 17 mtpa.

Canada’s LNG exports today are a drop in the bucket compared to both our potential and the 88 mtpa exported by the U.S. in 2024. We have one project completed and, if history repeats itself and Canada doesn’t get its act together, the runway for the remaining licensed projects will be long, painful and costly.

Financing large capital projects requires predictability with respect to timing and cost. This is also a problem for Canada. As the oil and gas CEOs have pointed out, LNG market players have lost trust in Canada as an investible jurisdiction for these projects.

In the face of Trump’s trade war, Canadians have become pipeline evangelists. Wishful thinking and political talking points won’t be enough if we repeat our decade of own goals on this file. We have literally left billions on the table.

Governments should fast-track all licensed projects, limit special interest distractions and provide the required muscle and financial support to get these projects up and running as soon as possible.

From Churchill, Man., to Quebec to the Maritimes to British Columbia, we should be making plans for LNG terminals and the required pipeline infrastructure to get this valuable and clean resource to market. And Canadians should pray we haven’t totally missed the market.

Susan McArthur is a former venture capital investor, investment banker and current corporate director. She has previously served on a chemical logistics and oil service board.

From the Fraser Institute

By Jake Fuss and Alex Whalen

Canadian air travel can be summed up in a few words—poor service, high ticket prices and little choice. And as a federal election looms, Canadians should understand that bad federal policy is to blame.

According to the International Air Transport Association, Canada ranks 101st out of 116 countries for the cost of air travel. And customer complaints against Canadian airlines have grown more than sixfold between fiscal years 2018/19 and 2022/23.

Why are ticket prices so high?

For starters, taxes and fees (imposed by governments and airports) comprise a large portion (25 to 35 per cent) of airfare costs in Canada. For example, “airport improvement” fees average $32.20 per departing passenger at Canada’s largest airports compared to $6.47 in the United States and $16.38 in Australia. For air traffic control (ATC), airlines pay charges based on distance, geography and other factors, and these costs are passed to consumers. In one illustrative example, to fly a Boeing 777 in Canada, airlines must pay an estimated $802 in ATC fees compared to between $192 and $478 in the United States and $493 in Mexico (all figures in Canadian dollars).

Moreover, Canadians pay between $9.46 and $34.42 per ticket in “security” fees, more than Americans (C$7.65) and Australians (C$4.80). Canada’s “landing” fees—charged by the airports based on the weight of the plane—are among the highest in the world and 35 to 75 per cent higher than at U.S. airports.

Our high fees originate in part due to Canada’s flawed airport ownership structure. The federal government owns the land where Canada’s major airports are built, and leases it back to not-for-profit airport authorities that pay rent—up to 12 per cent of airport revenue—to Ottawa. The airports impose fees on passengers to recoup this revenue.

But while fees help increase costs for airfare in Canada, another culprit is the lack of competition among airlines. Crucially, the federal government prevents foreign airlines from operating domestic routes within Canada’s borders, which severely limits choice and competition. While the government allows a foreign airline such as Lufthansa to fly from Frankfurt to Toronto, it prevents Lufthansa from flying passengers from Toronto to another Canadian city. As a result, there’s little competitive pressure for Canadian airlines to lower their prices for air travel within Canada’s borders.

The European Union, in contrast, removed such restrictions for member-states. The result? More competition including from new low-cost carriers such as Ryanair, a 34 per cent decline in ticket prices, more cross-border routes, and greater flight frequencies. The entry of new low-cost carriers alone helped lower airfares by 20 per cent.

Given the sorry state of air travel in Canada, our new study identifies four ways the federal government can improve competitiveness and lower airfare.

First, the government should reduce taxes and fees to be more in line with other countries. Second, the government should negotiate deals with other countries including the United States to allow foreign airlines to operate within Canada in exchange for Canadian airlines operating in those countries, which would help both Canadian consumers and Canadian airlines. Indeed, according to a 2016 report from the federal government, restrictions on foreign airlines increase air travel costs for Canadians and have outlived their usefulness. The report recommended Canada work towards an “open common market for air services” with peer countries. The key is reciprocity—if U.S. airlines, for example, are allowed access to the Canadian domestic air travel market, Canadian airlines must also have access to the U.S. market.

Third, the federal government should follow in the footsteps of Europe, Australia and New Zealand, and sell its remaining interests in airport leases and allow for-profit organizations to own and operate airports in Canada.

Lastly, the government should reduce the regulatory burden on the airline industry while maintaining strong safety standards. On this front, Canada can emulate the successful deregulation effort undertaken in the United States in the late 1970s and 1980s when widespread reform helped produce more competition, more consumer choice, lower fares and safety improvements.

Canadians will likely head to polls sometime this spring. If the next federal government wants to help improve air travel service quality, increase consumer choice and lower airfares, it should reform Canada’s antiquated airline policies.

Jake Fuss

Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute

Alex Whalen

Director, Atlantic Canada Prosperity, Fraser Institute