Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Energy

Why Canada Must Double Down on Energy Production

Published

6 minute read

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Lee Harding

Must we cancel fossil fuels to save the earth? No.

James Warren, adjunct professor of environmental sociology at the University of Regina said so in a recent paper for the Johnson Shoyama School of Public Policy, a joint effort by his university and the University of Saskatchewan. The title says it all: “Maximizing Canadian oil production and exports over the medium-term could help reduce CO2 emissions for the long-term.”

The professor admits on the face of it, his argument sounds like a “drink your way to sobriety solution.” However, he does make the defensible and factual case, pointing to Canadian oil reserves and a Scandinavian example.

Decades ago, Norway imitated the 1970’s Heritage Fund in Alberta that set aside a designated portion of the government’s petroleum revenues for an investment fund. Unlike Alberta, Norway stuck to that approach. Today, those investments are being used to develop clean energy and offer incentives to buy electric vehicles.

Norway’s two largest oil companies, Aker BP and Equinor ASA have committed $19 billion USD to develop fields in the North and Norwegian Seas. They argue that without this production, Norway would never be able to afford a green transition.

The same could be said for Canada. Warren laid out stats since 2010 that showed Canada’s oil exports contribute an average of 4.7% of the national GDP. Yet, this noteworthy amount is not nearly what it could be.

Had Trans Mountain, Northern Gateway, and Energy East pipelines been up and running at full capacity from 2015 to 2022, Warren estimates Canada would have seen $292 billion Canadian in additional export revenues. Onerous regulations, not diminished demand, are responsible for Canada’s squandered opportunities, Warren argues this must change.

So much more could be said. Southeast Asia still relies heavily on coal-fired power for its emerging industrialization, a source with twice the carbon emission intensity as natural gas. If lower global emissions are the goal, Canadian oil and natural gas exports offer less carbon-intensive options.

China’s greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) are more than four times what they were in 1990, during which the U.S. has seen its emissions drop. By now, China is responsible for 30% of global emissions, and the U.S. just 11%. Nevertheless, China built 95% of the world’s new coal-fired power plants in 2023. It aims for carbon neutrality by 2060, not 2050, like the rest of the world.

As of 2023, Canada contributes 1.4 percent of global GHGs, the tenth most in the world and the 15th highest per capita. Given its development and resource-based economy, this should be viewed as an impressively low amount, all spread out over a geographically diverse area and cold climate.

This stat also reveals a glaring reality: if Canada was destroyed, and every animal and human died, all industry and vehicles stopped, and every furnace and fire ceased to burn, 98.6% of global greenhouse gas emissions would remain. So for whom, or to what end, should Canada kneecap its energy production and the industry it fuels?

The only ones served by a world of minimal production is a global aristocracy whose hegemony would no longer be threatened by the accumulated wealth and influence of a growing middle class. That aristocracy is the real beneficiary of prevailing climate change narratives on what is happening in our weather, why it is happening, and how best to handle it.

Remember, another warming period occurred 1000 years ago. The Medieval Warming Period took place between 750 and 1350 AD and was warmest from 950 to 1045, affecting Europe, North America, and the North Atlantic. By some estimates, average summer temperatures in England and Central Europe were 0.7-1.4 degrees higher than now.

Was that warming due to SUVs or other man-made activity? No. Did that world collapse in a series of floods, fires, earthquakes, and hurricanes? No, not in Europe at least. Crop yields grew, new cities emerged, alpine tree lines rose, and the European population more than doubled.

If the world warms again, Canada could be a big winner. In May of 2018, Nature.com published a study by Chinese and Canadian academics entitled, Northward shift of the agricultural climate zone under 21st-Century global climate change. If the band of land useful for crops shifts north, Canada would get an additional 3.1 million square kilometers of farmland by 2099.

Other computer models suggest warming temperatures would cause damaging weather. Their accuracy is debatable, but even if we concede their claims, it does not follow that energy production should drop. We would need more resilient housing to handle the storms and we cannot afford them without a robust economy powered by robust energy production. Solar, wind, and geothermal only go so far.

Whether temperatures are warming or not, Canada should continue tapping into the resources she is blessed with. Wealth is a helpful shelter in the storms of life and is no different for the storms of the planet. Canada is sitting on abundant energy and should not let dubious arguments hold back their development.

Lee Harding is Research Fellow for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

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

Business

Doug Ford needs to ditch the net-zero pipedreams

Published on

CAE Logo Dan McTeague

Congratulations are in order for Doug Ford, newly re-elected in Ontario to his third consecutive majority government. As a proud Ontarian myself, I wish Premier Ford great success, which will ultimately be measured not by how many votes he’s won, but by the quality of the policies he implements and how well he responds to the challenges which arise on his watch.

Of course, the two are related. Bad policy can instigate a crisis. And bad policy in the midst of one often transforms a challenge into a catastrophe. Just one instructive example: Remember that in the wake of the Stock Market Crash of 1929, President Herbert Hoover signed into law the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, which, as John Robson recently observed on Twitter/X, helped turn “a painful short-term correction into an agonizing decade of misery.”

That is a moment in history our American friends would do well to remember just now. Though Donald Trump has been crowing about the economic benefits of tariffs for decades, the historical record tells a different story. And, more importantly for us, no matter how much damage Trump’s tariffs do to the American economy, they will be worse for Canada.

This is a moment in which our country is in desperate need of political leadership. That isn’t going to come from Ottawa, where the Trudeau Liberals and their accomplices in the NDP have shuttered parliament for months so that they can hold a coronation for their fellow Green Elitist, Mark Carney, who is all set to double-down on the disastrous net-zero policies of his predecessor.

So we are going to have to rely, at least in the near term, on our premiers to respond to this crisis. And so far very few of them – the notable exception being Danielle Smith – have shown the kind of ingenuity and resilience we need at this moment.

Ford himself has done everything he can to make himself the face of Canada’s response to the tariff threat. He’s made a great show of removing (already purchased) American-made products from LCBO.’s shelves, he has pledged to put a 25% export tax on energy, and he’s threatened to cut off Ontario’s energy exports to the United States entirely. In defense of the latter, Ford said, “They want to come at us hard, we’re going to come back twice as hard.”

That might sound impressive, but unfortunately Canada lacks the economic capacity to “come back twice as hard.” Years of mismanagement, on the federal, provincial, and even municipal levels, have left us in a terrible position to negotiate with the world’s largest economy. We have taken every opportunity to shoot ourselves in the foot, chasing foolish net-zero pipedreams which have succeeded only in squandering our capital, and smothering the oil and gas industry upon which our prosperity relies.

Justin Trudeau and his cronies deserve a lot of the blame for that, but the Ford government deserves its share as well. Ford long ago drank the net-zero kool-aid. He embraced the so-called “green energy transition” to such an extent that his government renamed its energy ministry the ‘Ministry of Energy and Electrification,’ a nod to the idea that we need to move away from fossil fuels and embrace electrically-powered everything. Neglecting to mention, of course, where that electricity is going to come from. (Hint: it’s not from expensive and inefficient wind and solar projects! Which, by the way, Ford has also invested heavily in.) And, relatedly, he’s stated that he will not be happy until Ontario achieves a 100% zero-carbon electricity grid, moving away from affordable and reliable natural gas as an energy source.

On top of that, Ford has gone “all in” on electric vehicles, teaming up with Trudeau to invest tens-of-billions of taxpayer dollars in a bid to attract EV manufacturing to his province. This investment wasn’t looking so hot before Trump’s election – remember when the Ford Motor Company scrapped their plan to build EVs at their plant in Oakville, Ont, due to “an unexpected slowdown” in demand for battery powered cars? And it has looked much worse since, once Trump got to work repealing the Biden administration’s de facto EV mandate.

Without that mandate, there will be a few hundred million fewer potential EV buyers in the world. People aren’t exactly lining up to buy EVs if they don’t have to. And though Trudeau’s 2035 EV mandate is still in place, even the Canadian market is softer than expected, especially after the federal program subsidizing the purchase of EVs – to the tune of $5,000 a piece – ran out of money and ended abruptly earlier this year.

But despite the changed environment, Ford doubled down on his commitment to EVs during the campaign. His platform read, “A re-elected PC government would continue to make these investments regardless of any decision by the U.S.,” and Ford continually reaffirmed his intention to continue to “invest in the sector.”

This is worse than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It’s closer to setting fire to the few lifeboats the ship actually has.

Ontario’s voters have once again entrusted our province to Doug Ford. But if he doesn’t start taking this crisis seriously – by shoring up the province’s financial situation and increasing our competitiveness by changing course on EVs and kicking net-zero to the curb – he won’t be remembered as the first premier to win three consecutive majorities in over 60 years. Instead he’ll be remembered as the guy who took Ontario past the point of no return.

Dan McTeague is the president of Canadians for Affordable Energy and a former Liberal member of Parliament.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Alberta to unlock new market potential

Published on

Alberta’s government has announced new steps to meaningfully act on the province’s ownership of its oil and gas resources and maximize resource revenue.

Alberta’s government will now collect bitumen royalties in-kind (BRIK) in addition to conventional royalties in-kind (CORIK), allowing the province to obtain the top price for oil resources and positioning Alberta as a potentially significant player in the global oil market.

The Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission (APMC), Alberta’s commercial oil and gas agency, will now be able to combine conventional and bitumen royalty barrels to bring to market significant petroleum volumes that will spur private sector investments. This will give government the ability to seek new deals on Alberta’s energy resources internationally, making the province one of the largest global heavy oil market players and maximizing the return for Albertans.

On March 10, 2025, Premier Danielle Smith met with a global oil and petrochemical multinational to discuss a first-of-its-kind potential transaction that would see the overseas transport and sale of approximately two million barrels per month of Government of Alberta owned heavy oil via the APMC.

“This program gives the province greater say in where we sell our oil. Receiving bitumen royalties in-kind is another tool in our investment toolbox and will give us the opportunity to maximize our resource potential, become one of the most significant players in the heavy oil market and garner more value for Albertans.”

Danielle Smith, Premier of Alberta

“Alberta and Canada have benefited greatly from the innovation and investment of our partners, the companies driving our energy industry. This move will allow us to promote increased pipeline capacity and grow our global markets, which is good for Albertans, for industry, and for global energy security.”

Brian Jean, Minister of Energy and Minerals

Given the significant volume of conventional and bitumen royalty barrels that will become available over time, the APMC will seek agreements with other jurisdictions and industry players to ensure Albertans benefit to the greatest extent possible from the ownership of their natural resources. This will help improve and diversify markets. The transportation of these barrels will help incentivize pipeline capacity growth in support of Alberta’s aspiration to double its oil and gas production.

“APMC will work diligently to seek commercially prudent deals that make sense for Albertans and the Alberta energy industry. The opportunity exists to find transactions that will directly and indirectly secure extra value for Albertans, and the experienced team at APMC is committed to doing just that.”

Adrian Begley, CEO of Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission

Faced with uncertainty around trade and security, Alberta’s government remains focused on diplomacy and continuing to build a resilient and diversified economy that is better positioned to withstand external shocks and ensure long-term prosperity.

Continue Reading

Trending

X