Uncategorized
A Matter of Fact: The IEA’s updated net zero scenario is still unrealistic
From the Canadian Energy Centre
By Deborah JaremkoCanada can lead the world with reliable, affordable energy supply and clean technology as countries work to reduce emissions
The International Energy Agency (IEA) has updated its net zero scenario, pushing for governments to implement more aggressive climate policies on the energy industry.
The IEA itself acknowledges the scenario is “a pathway, but not the only one” for the energy sector to reduce emissions to net zero by 2050.
The agency acknowledges the world is not on this trajectory, but the Government of Canada uses the net zero scenario as the basis for policies like its proposed oil and gas emissions cap, which will hurt Canadians without environmental gain.
“We’re the fourth-largest oil producing country, and we’re the only ones that are saying oil and gas is not here to stay. That’s a huge roadblock for all of us,” Gurpreet Lail, CEO of Enserva, the national trade organization representing energy service and supply companies, told the Globe and Mail during the World Petroleum Congress last week.
Canada can lead the world with reliable, affordable energy supply and clean technology as countries work to reduce emissions. But the sector needs to be allowed to thrive rather than being phased out while it is needed.
Here are the facts.
Fact: The IEA net zero scenario is not a forecast
The IEA’s updated net zero scenario envisions that the world does not need any new coal, oil and natural gas projects. By 2030, it imagines world oil demand will drop by 23 per cent, natural gas demand by 18 per cent, and coal demand by 44 per cent.
It’s difficult to see how this could actually come about, given that even with accelerating investment in low carbon energy resources the world’s consumption of oil, gas and coal is as high or higher than it has ever been. And rising.
The IEA reports both oil and coal demand are at record levels. The agency itself projects the world’s total energy consumption – which increased by 15 per cent over the last decade – will increase by a further 24 per cent by 2050.
On the world’s current trajectory, the IEA says oil, gas and coal will still account for 62 per cent of world energy supply in 2050, compared to 78 per cent in 2021.
“There’s no evidence that oil demand is going to peak any time soon,” Arjun Murti, former partner with Goldman Sachs, said at the recent Global Business Forum in Banff.
“Oil is not in its sunset phase.”
Fact: The IEA net zero scenario is unrealistic
The IEA’s net zero scenario includes components that are unrealistic.
For example, it says electricity transmission and distribution grids need to expand by around two million kilometres each year to 2030. But it also acknowledges that today, building these grids can take more than a decade, putting that scale and timeline already out of reach.
The net zero scenario also hinges on a “unified effort in which governments put tensions aside and find ways to work together.” But the IEA also acknowledges the world today is “a complex and low-trust geopolitical environment.”
Consider that Russia is trying to boost trade with Asia as economic ties with the West shrivel over Moscow’s actions in Ukraine, according to Reuters News. In just one example, state-owned Gazprom plans to start gas deliveries to China through the Power of Siberia pipeline in 2025 and expand that service in 2030 with Power of Siberia-2.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine accentuated the world’s reversal away from the concept of globalization, where everyone benefits from the global economy, leading energy analyst and Pulitzer Prize-winning author Daniel Yergin said on a recent ARC Energy Ideas podcast.
“The era of globalization was what I call the WTO consensus: we’re all in this global economy together. In China, hundreds of millions of people come out of poverty. India enters the global economy, standards of living go up and you get really impressive economic performance,” Yergin said.
“Well, that era is ending and it’s heading pretty fast now as we move into this new era of great power competition, which hopefully does not become great power confrontation.”
Energy is at the heart of the “new map,” as Yergin calls it.
Responsibly produced, reliable energy from Canada can benefit world energy security while helping reduce emissions. That is why it is essential the sector is not phased out through government policy.
Fact: Canadian energy and clean technology can help reduce world emissions
One of the fastest and most effective ways to reduce emissions is to switch from coal-fired power to power generated from natural gas, traded globally as LNG.
Consider that between 2005 and 2019, emissions from the U.S power sector dropped by 32 per cent because of coal-to-gas switching, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Natural gas from the LNG Canada project alone could reduce emissions in Asia by up to 90 million tonnes annually, or the equivalent of shutting down up to 60 Asian coal plants, the project says.
That’s a reduction of more than the entire emissions of the province of British Columbia, which were 64 million tonnes in 2022.
Expanding Canada’s LNG exports to Asia could reduce emissions by 188 million tonnes per year, or the annual equivalent of taking all internal combustion engine vehicles off Canadian roads, according to a 2022 study by Wood Mackenzie.
One of the reasons LNG from Canada has a lower emissions intensity than LNG from other jurisdictions is the success producers have seen reducing methane emissions. It’s an opportunity for technology exports.
The IEA views cutting methane emissions from oil and gas as a critical component of achieving climate targets.
The latest data shows that oil and gas producers in Alberta decreased methane emissions by 44 per cent between 2014 and 2021, a 10 per cent drop from 2020. The sector is expected to surpass the target of reducing methane emissions by 45 per cent by 2025.
“I don’t know of any other jurisdiction that is as far forward in terms of its methane management as Canada,” says Allan Fogwill, chief operating officer of Petroleum Technology Alliance Canada.
“There’s nothing to suggest we couldn’t have similar impacts in the United States, the Middle East, or former Soviet countries that also are involved in oil and natural gas production.”
Fact: Canada’s carbon capture and storage leadership can benefit the world
The IEA says “rapid progress” is required to deploy more carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) projects to reduce emissions.
This is another area where Canada’s energy sector can take the lead.
Since 2000, CCS projects in Saskatchewan and Alberta have removed more than 47 million tonnes of emissions, or the equivalent of taking more than 10 million cars off the road. This work has helped inform development of major CCS projects globally including Northern Lights in Norway.
Canada has five of the world’s 30 commercial CCS facilities, accounting for about 15 per cent of global CCS capacity even though Canada generates less than two per cent of global CO2 emissions, according to the Global CCS Knowledge Centre.
Among CCS projects under development in Canada is one of the largest in the world, proposed by the Pathways Alliance of oil sands producers.
The first phase of the Pathways CCS project will connect 14 oil sands facilities to a CO2 storage hub in northern Alberta. The target is to reduce emissions from operations by 22 megatonnes by 2030 on the way to net zero in 2050.
Fact: Oil and gas still needed in IEA net zero scenario
Even in the IEA’s net zero scenario, in 2050 about 14 per cent of world energy needs are still supplied by oil and gas.
This includes non-combustion uses like petrochemical feedstock and asphalt, which crude from Canada’s oil sands is particularly well suited to supply. Researchers with Queen’s University recently found that asphalt from Alberta’s oil sands can extend pavement lifespan by 30 to 50 per cent.
The world needs more Canadian oil and gas, not less.
Uncategorized
Taxpayers Federation calling on BC Government to scrap failed Carbon Tax
From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
By Carson Binda
BC Government promised carbon tax would reduce CO2 by 33%. It has done nothing.
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on the British Columbia government to scrap the carbon tax as new data shows the province’s carbon emissions have continued to rise, despite the oldest carbon tax in the country.
“The carbon tax isn’t reducing carbon emissions like the politicians promised,” said Carson Binda, B.C. Director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. “Premier David Eby needs to axe the tax now to save British Columbians money.”
Emissions data from the provincial government shows that British Columbia’s emissions have risen since the introduction of a carbon tax.
Total emissions in 2007, the last year without a provincial carbon tax, stood at 65.5 MtCO2e, while 2022 emissions data shows an increase to 65.6 MtCO2e.
When the carbon tax was introduced, the B.C. government pledged that it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 33 per cent.
The Eby government plans to increase the B.C. carbon tax again on April 1, 2025. After that increase, the carbon tax will add 21 cents to the cost of a litre of natural gas, 25 cents per litre of diesel and 18 cents per cubic meter of natural gas.
“The carbon tax has cost British Columbians a lot of money, but it hasn’t helped the environment as promised,” Binda said. “Eby has a simple choice: scrap the carbon tax before April 1, or force British Columbians to pay even more to heat our homes and drive to work.”
If a family fills up the minivan once per week for a year, the carbon tax will cost them $728. The carbon tax on natural gas will add $435 to the average family’s home heating bills in the 12 months after the April 1 carbon tax hike.
Other provinces, like Saskatchewan, have unilaterally stopped collecting the carbon tax on essentials like home heating and have not faced consequences from Ottawa.
“British Columbians need real relief from the costs of the provincial carbon tax,” Binda said. “Eby needs to stop waiting for permission from the leaderless federal government and scrap the tax on British Columbians.”
Uncategorized
The problem with deficits and debt
From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill and Jake Fuss
This fiscal year (2024/25), the federal government and eight out of 10 provinces project a budget deficit, meaning they’re spending more than collecting in revenues. Unfortunately, this trend isn’t new. Many Canadian governments—including the federal government—have routinely ran deficits over the last decade.
But why should Canadians care? If you listen to some politicians (and even some economists), they say deficits—and the debt they produce—are no big deal. But in reality, the consequences of government debt are real and land squarely on everyday Canadians.
Budget deficits, which occur when the government spends more than it collects in revenue over the fiscal year, fuel debt accumulation. For example, since 2015, the federal government’s large and persistent deficits have more than doubled total federal debt, which will reach a projected $2.2 trillion this fiscal year. That has real world consequences. Here are a few of them:
Diverted Program Spending: Just as Canadians must pay interest on their own mortgages or car loans, taxpayers must pay interest on government debt. Each dollar spent paying interest is a dollar diverted from public programs such as health care and education, or potential tax relief. This fiscal year, federal debt interest costs will reach $53.7 billion or $1,301 per Canadian. And that number doesn’t include provincial government debt interest, which varies by province. In Ontario, for example, debt interest costs are projected to be $12.7 billion or $789 per Ontarian.
Higher Taxes in the Future: When governments run deficits, they’re borrowing to pay for today’s spending. But eventually someone (i.e. future generations of Canadians) must pay for this borrowing in the form of higher taxes. For example, if you’re a 16-year-old Canadian in 2025, you’ll pay an estimated $29,663 over your lifetime in additional personal income taxes (that you would otherwise not pay) due to Canada’s ballooning federal debt. By comparison, a 65-year-old will pay an estimated $2,433. Younger Canadians clearly bear a disproportionately large share of the government debt being accumulated currently.
Risks of rising interest rates: When governments run deficits, they increase demand for borrowing. In other words, governments compete with individuals, families and businesses for the savings available for borrowing. In response, interest rates rise, and subsequently, so does the cost of servicing government debt. Of course, the private sector also must pay these higher interest rates, which can reduce the level of private investment in the economy. In other words, private investment that would have occurred no longer does because of higher interest rates, which reduces overall economic growth—the foundation for job-creation and prosperity. Not surprisingly, as government debt has increased, business investment has declined—specifically, business investment per worker fell from $18,363 in 2014 to $14,687 in 2021 (inflation-adjusted).
Risk of Inflation: When governments increase spending, particularly with borrowed money, they add more money to the economy, which can fuel inflation. According to a 2023 report from Scotiabank, government spending contributed significantly to higher interest rates in Canada, accounting for an estimated 42 per cent of the increase in the Bank of Canada’s rate since the first quarter of 2022. As a result, many Canadians have seen the costs of their borrowing—mortgages, car loans, lines of credit—soar in recent years.
Recession Risks: The accumulation of deficits and debt, which do not enhance productivity in the economy, weaken the government’s ability to deal with future challenges including economic downturns because the government has less fiscal capacity available to take on more debt. That’s because during a recession, government spending automatically increases and government revenues decrease, even before policymakers react with any specific measures. For example, as unemployment rises, employment insurance (EI) payments automatically increase, while revenues for EI decrease. Therefore, when a downturn or recession hits, and the government wants to spend even more money beyond these automatic programs, it must go further into debt.
Government debt comes with major consequences for Canadians. To alleviate the pain of government debt on Canadians, our policymakers should work to balance their budgets in 2025.
-
Artificial Intelligence2 days ago
Canadian Court Upholds Ban on Clearview AI’s Unconsented Facial Data Collection
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Biden Pardons His Brother Jim And Other Family Members Just Moments Before Trump’s Swearing-In
-
Business2 days ago
TikTok Restores Service After US Shutdown Amid Trump Deal
-
Business1 day ago
UK lawmaker threatens to use Online Safety Act to censor social media platforms
-
International2 days ago
Biden preemptively pardons Fauci, Cheney, Milley on way out
-
Business2 days ago
Carney says as PM he would replace the Carbon Tax with something ‘more effective’
-
International1 day ago
Trump orders U.S. withdrawal from World Health Organization
-
Business2 days ago
Freeland and Carney owe Canadians clear answer on carbon taxes