A carbon tax by any other name

From Canadians for Affordable Energy

It turns out that the story circulating last week from The Toronto Star that the Liberals were considering a “rebranding” of their Carbon Taxation program was true. On Wednesday the Liberals announced that the previously known “Climate Action Incentive Payment,” will now be referred to as the “Canada Carbon Rebate.” This was done “in an attempt to tackle what it calls confusion and misconceptions about the scheme.”

According to Liberal Minister Seamus O’Regan “If we can speak the language that people speak, because people say the words ‘carbon,’ they say the words, ‘rebate,’ right? And if we can speak that language, that’s important, so people understand what’s going on here.”

The Liberals seem to actually believe that the problem Canadians have with the carbon tax, and their growing support for Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives to “Axe the Tax,” has simply been a matter of Canadians not “understand[ing] what is going on.”

The implication, of course, is that Canadians aren’t really struggling to pay their bills, feed their families and heat their homes right now. That their lives haven’t gotten more expensive overall as the cost of fuel has risen steadily.

That they’re just confused by poor branding — probably some high-priced marketing firm’s fault, really — and that once Trudeau & Co. find the right words, people will finally be happy to pay the tax, and be grateful to get some of their money back, since doing so will — somehow — save the planet.

Which is ridiculous.

It’s worth pointing out that this isn’t even the first time Trudeau’s carbon tax has been rebranded. You might recall that prior to 2018, the scheme was referred to as “carbon pricing” or simply the “carbon tax.” If you look back at Hansard records — the records of Parliamentary debate — you can see that in October 2018, Liberal MPs began referring to the scheme as a ‘price on pollution.’ Of course, calling carbon dioxide, a gas on which all life on earth depends, “pollution” was an obvious attempt to justify taxing Canadians for it.

But no matter what they call the thing, they are determined not to let it go.

Recent polls have indicated that the carbon tax is losing support from Canadians. A Nanos poll showed nearly half of Canadians think the carbon tax is ineffective; another poll indicates most Canadians want it reduced or killed altogether.

So why are the Liberals clinging so desperately to this tax that Canadians don’t support? Going so far as to rebrand, reframe, recommunicate rather than scrap it?

I might start to sound like a broken record here, but the only way to understand the context of the carbon tax, the second carbon tax (the Clean Fuel Standard,) an emissions cap, electric vehicle mandates and on and on, is to recognize that they are all components of the insane Net-Zero-by-2050 scheme dreamed up by Justin Trudeau and his UN and World Economic Forum cronies.

A carbon tax is simply one of the pillars of their Net Zero Agenda which they contend will enable Canada to achieve this nebulous goal of Net Zero emissions by 2050.

Though apparently to achieve it, the tax will need to get progressively more punishing. On April 1 the carbon tax goes up another $15, to $80 per ton, and will continue to rise yearly until it hits $170 a ton in 2030. Canadians are already feeling the pinch and it is hard to imagine it getting worse. But Liberals aren’t concerned with the struggles of everyday people and that is the reality. This has become a communications issue to them, not an existential one.

As to the new name itself, the Trudeau Liberals love to pay lip service to their rebate scheme and claim that Canadians are getting back more than they pay. But as we well know even the Independent Parliamentary Budget Officer found that, contrary to what their talking point, a substantial majority of households are paying more in carbon taxes than they get back.

Their communications plan too is so unhinged that they are pitching the carbon tax as an affordability measure designed to help struggling Canadians. Of course this begs the question: If Canadians are getting back more than they pay in carbon taxes, why take the money in the first place?

The rubber is hitting the road and Canadians have had enough. No matter what it’s called, the carbon tax has made our lives worse.

That will continue to be true, no matter what they call it.

Dan McTeague is President of Canadians for Affordable Energy

Related Topics:#CanadaCarbonRebate #CanadiansForAffordableEnergy #CarbonTaxByAnyOtherName #DanMcTeague #JustinTrudeau #SeamusO'Regan

Up Next

Bill Banning Oil and Gas Ads Won’t Pass, and Rightfully So

Don't Miss

U.S. halt on LNG exports presents new opportunity for Canada

Todayville

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

Canada’s supply management system is failing consumers

Economy / 11 hours ago

Trump opens door to Iranian oil exports

Canadian Energy Centre / 12 hours ago

Alberta oil sands legacy tailings down 40 per cent since 2015

Economy

Trump opens door to Iranian oil exports

Published on July 3, 2025

Todayville

This article supplied by Troy Media.

By Rashid Husain Syed

U.S. President Donald Trump’s chaotic foreign policy is unravelling years of pressure on Iran and fuelling a surge of Iranian oil into global markets. His recent pivot to allow China to buy Iranian crude, despite previously trying to crush those exports, marks a sharp shift from strategic pressure to transactional diplomacy.

This unpredictability isn’t just confusing allies—it’s transforming global oil flows. One day, Trump vetoes an Israeli plan to assassinate Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei. Days later, he calls for Iran’s unconditional surrender. After announcing a ceasefire between Iran, Israel and the United States, Trump praises both sides then lashes out at them the next day.

The biggest shock came when Trump posted on Truth Social that “China can now continue to purchase Oil from Iran. Hopefully, they will be purchasing plenty from the U.S., also.” The statement reversed the “maximum pressure” campaign he reinstated in February, which aimed to drive Iran’s oil exports to zero. The campaign reimposes sanctions on Tehran, threatening penalties on any country or company buying Iranian crude,
with the goal of crippling Iran’s economy and nuclear ambitions.

This wasn’t foreign policy—it was deal-making. Trump is brokering calm in the Middle East not for strategy, but to boost American oil sales to China. And in the process, he’s giving Iran room to move.

The effects of this shift in U.S. policy are already visible in trade data. Chinese imports of Iranian crude hit record levels in June. Ship-tracking firm Vortexa reported more than 1.8 million barrels per day imported between June 1 and 20. Kpler data, covering June 1 to 27, showed a 1.46 million bpd average, nearly 500,000 more than in May.

Much of the supply came from discounted May loadings destined for China’s independent refineries—the so-called “teapots”—stocking up ahead of peak summer demand. After hostilities broke out between Iran and Israel on June 12, Iran ramped up exports even further, increasing daily crude shipments by 44 per cent within a week.

Iran is under heavy U.S. sanctions, and its oil is typically sold at a discount, especially to China, the world’s largest oil importer. These discounted barrels undercut other exporters, including U.S. allies and global producers like Canada, reducing global prices and shifting power dynamics in the energy market.

All of this happened with full knowledge of the U.S. administration. Analysts now expect Iranian crude to continue flowing freely, as long as Trump sees strategic or economic value in it—though that position could reverse without warning.

Complicating matters is progress toward a U.S.-China trade deal. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told reporters that an agreement reached in May has now been finalized. China later confirmed the understanding. Trump’s oil concession may be part of that broader détente, but it comes at the cost of any consistent pressure on Iran.

Meanwhile, despite Trump’s claims of obliterating Iran’s nuclear program, early reports suggest U.S. strikes merely delayed Tehran’s capabilities by a few months. The public posture of strength contrasts with a quieter reality: Iranian oil is once again flooding global markets.

With OPEC+ also boosting output monthly, there is no shortage of crude on the horizon. In fact, oversupply may once again define the market—and Trump’s erratic diplomacy is helping drive it.

For Canadian producers, especially in Alberta, the return of cheap Iranian oil can mean downward pressure on global prices and stiffer competition in key markets. And with global energy supply increasingly shaped by impulsive political decisions, Canada’s energy sector remains vulnerable to forces far beyond its borders.

This is the new reality: unpredictability at the top is shaping the oil market more than any cartel or conflict. And for now, Iran is winning.

Toronto-based Rashid Husain Syed is a highly regarded analyst specializing in energy and politics, particularly in the Middle East. In addition to his contributions to local and international newspapers, Rashid frequently lends his expertise as a speaker at global conferences. Organizations such as the Department of Energy in Washington and the International Energy Agency in Paris have sought his insights on global energy matters.

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.

Canadian Energy Centre

Alberta oil sands legacy tailings down 40 per cent since 2015

Published on July 3, 2025

Todayville

Wapisiw Lookout, reclaimed site of the oil sands industry’s first tailings pond, which started in 1967. The area was restored to a solid surface in 2010 and now functions as a 220-acre watershed. Photo courtesy Suncor Energy

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By CEC Research

Mines demonstrate significant strides through technological innovation

Tailings are a byproduct of mining operations around the world.

In Alberta’s oil sands, tailings are a fluid mixture of water, sand, silt, clay and residual bitumen generated during the extraction process.

Engineered basins or “tailings ponds” store the material and help oil sands mining projects recycle water, reducing the amount withdrawn from the Athabasca River.

In 2023, 79 per cent of the water used for oil sands mining was recycled, according to the latest data from the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER).

Decades of operations, rising production and federal regulations prohibiting the release of process-affected water have contributed to a significant accumulation of oil sands fluid tailings.

The Mining Association of Canada describes that:

“Like many other industrial processes, the oil sands mining process requires water.

However, while many other types of mines in Canada like copper, nickel, gold, iron ore and diamond mines are allowed to release water (effluent) to an aquatic environment provided that it meets stringent regulatory requirements, there are no such regulations for oil sands mines.

Instead, these mines have had to retain most of the water used in their processes, and significant amounts of accumulated precipitation, since the mines began operating.”

Despite this ongoing challenge, oil sands mining operators have made significant strides in reducing fluid tailings through technological innovation.

This is demonstrated by reductions in “legacy fluid tailings” since 2015.

Legacy Fluid Tailings vs. New Fluid Tailings

As part of implementing the Tailings Management Framework introduced in March 2015, the AER released Directive 085: Fluid Tailings Management for Oil Sands Mining Projects in July 2016.

Directive 085 introduced new criteria for the measurement and closure of “legacy fluid tailings” separate from those applied to “new fluid tailings.”

Legacy fluid tailings are defined as those deposited in storage before January 1, 2015, while new fluid tailings are those deposited in storage after January 1, 2015.

The new rules specified that new fluid tailings must be ready to reclaim ten years after the end of a mine’s life, while legacy fluid tailings must be ready to reclaim by the end of a mine’s life.

Total Oil Sands Legacy Fluid Tailings

Alberta’s oil sands mining sector decreased total legacy fluid tailings by approximately 40 per cent between 2015 and 2024, according to the latest company reporting to the AER.

Total legacy fluid tailings in 2024 were approximately 623 million cubic metres, down from about one billion cubic metres in 2015.

The reductions are led by the sector’s longest-running projects: Suncor Energy’s Base Mine (opened in 1967), Syncrude’s Mildred Lake Mine (opened in 1978), and Syncrude’s Aurora North Mine (opened in 2001). All are now operated by Suncor Energy.

The Horizon Mine, operated by Canadian Natural Resources (opened in 2009) also reports a significant reduction in legacy fluid tailings.

The Muskeg River Mine (opened in 2002) and Jackpine Mine (opened in 2010) had modest changes in legacy fluid tailings over the period. Both are now operated by Canadian Natural Resources.

Imperial Oil’s Kearl Mine (opened in 2013) and Suncor Energy’s Fort Hills Mine (opened in 2018) have no reported legacy fluid tailings.

Suncor Energy Base Mine

Between 2015 and 2024, Suncor Energy’s Base Mine reduced legacy fluid tailings by approximately 98 per cent, from 293 million cubic metres to 6 million cubic metres.

Syncrude Mildred Lake Mine

Between 2015 and 2024, Syncrude’s Mildred Lake Mine reduced legacy fluid tailings by approximately 15 per cent, from 457 million cubic metres to 389 million cubic metres.

Syncrude Aurora North Mine

Between 2015 and 2024, Syncrude’s Aurora North Mine reduced legacy fluid tailings by approximately 25 per cent, from 102 million cubic metres to 77 million cubic metres.

Canadian Natural Resources Horizon Mine

Between 2015 and 2024, Canadian Natural Resources’ Horizon Mine reduced legacy fluid tailings by approximately 36 per cent, from 66 million cubic metres to 42 million cubic metres.

Total Oil Sands Fluid Tailings

Reducing legacy fluid tailings has helped slow the overall growth of fluid tailings across the oil sands sector.

Without efforts to reduce legacy fluid tailings, the total oil sands fluid tailings footprint today would be approximately 1.6 billion cubic metres.

The current fluid tailings volume stands at approximately 1.2 billion cubic metres, up from roughly 1.1 billion in 2015.