Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Energy

Canada’s Most Impactful Energy Issues in 2024

Published

17 minute read

From EnergyNow.ca

By Deidra Garyk

It feels like we are in the beginning of a cultural, social, and political disruption. The fear of saying the wrong thing and being cancelled is subsiding, resulting in robust debate about important topics. Public pushback against climate alarmism and energy misinformation is getting louder as more and more people join in the discussion.

I have enjoyed watching the increased skepticism and distrust towards “the settled Science” and the agreed upon narratives in favour of open, genuine, inquisitive conversations with a focus on practicable solutions. People are fed up with niche topics taking up a disproportionate amount of airtime in place of issues that are relevant to the majority of the country.

These are a few of the energy topics that I feel were most impactful for the year, with many having a lasting impact into 2025 and beyond.

SHIFTING POLITICAL WINDS

As Canada implements more and more regulatory hurdles for the oil and gas industry, the US re-elected pro-business, pro-oil, political outsider Donald Trump in a ‘uge win, with the majority of counties shifting from blue (Democrat) to red (Republican).

He isn’t even sworn in, and Trump is lighting things up via social media decrees. Using Truth Social, he announced that a 25 percent tariff will be placed on all goods coming from Canada and Mexico unless their respective borders are addressed to his satisfaction.

This will affect all Canadian businesses, not the least being those in the oil patch since 4 million barrels of oil per day go to the US, along with 7.9 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas. 77 percent of Canadian exports enter the US market; therefore, a 25 percent tariff is another obstacle affecting Canadian businesses’ competitiveness, which are already faced with various regulatory and taxation hurdles from Canadian governments, such as the carbon tax that increases each year.

Expect to see a shake-up in the Department of Energy and the narrative around climate and energy with the nomination of Chris Wright, CEO of Liberty Energy, for US Secretary of Energy. Chris has been a bold, unapologetic, pragmatic energy realist who cares about balancing environmental responsibility with resource development to help supply the world with reliable, affordable energy. His principled leadership has elevated him to one of the highest offices in the US.

Chris Wright is not afraid to go against the crowd. Liberty successfully challenged the SEC’s climate reporting rules and were instrumental in getting them halted. You can listen to his clarity of thought as he testifies on the rules before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Financial Services Committee (Chris’ testimony starts at 53:58).

As the first energy secretary to come from the energy sector, I anticipate that the government’s energy messaging and policy is going to shift away from climate alarmism to one of balance and open-mindedness. I hope he staffs the Department with people who understand energy and are not focused on misguided ideology. The ripple effects will be felt around the globe, and now is the time to embrace people’s scepticism and exhaustion with the constant drumbeat of fear about the use of hydrocarbons.

Much like the massive political shift voted in by the Americans, Canadians are also ready for a change. Prime Minister Trudeau and his Liberal party continue to lag in the polls, indicating voters’ displeasure with their policies. Poll aggregator 338Canada predicts a resounding majority for the federal Conservatives. Will we begin to see better energy policy after the next election?

RENEWABLES’ REALITY AND COOLING CLIMATE CLUBS

As a further demonstration of the shifting social and political winds, the net zero climate movement has seen major companies quell their public support for associated initiatives. The appetite for costly net zero commitments from voters who are struggling to pay their bills is waning, and politicians are hearing about it.

Many Republican-led states have pushed back on anti-hydrocarbon, net zero financing, and that has influenced how companies behave, starting with an exodus from Mark Carney’s net zero allianceGFANZ (Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero). The Net-Zero Insurance Alliance (NZIA), a subset of GFANZ, has lost about half of its members since March 2023. Climate initiatives, like Climate Action 100+ and the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) are also losing members who are concerned about the consequences of their affiliation with anti-hydrocarbon groups who attempt to influence how businesses conduct their operations, sometimes through coercive involuntary membership and social shaming.

The energy transition continues to face opposition. In summer 2023, the Alberta government placed a temporary, six-month moratorium on renewable energy – wind and solar – projects in an attempt to balance development with agricultural and social concerns. The condemnation from environmental groups and the Alberta NDP was swift and loud, but not always truthful. On the other side were landowners who were concerned about the consequences of the projects on their communities. A documentary, Generation Green, by filmmaker Heidi McKillop, documents the push-pull of renewable project development in Alberta.

The new rules include development limits on certain agricultural lands, protection of viewscapes using buffer zones, and a requirement for an upfront bond to pay for future reclamation costs. Landowners and associations have praised the changes for addressing concerns and being balanced.

January’s polar vortex reconfirmed people’s willingness to rethink some large-scale industrial wind and solar installations. The extreme cold resulted in alerts warning of potential rotating blackouts, reminding Albertans about the need for reliable, affordable, on-demand energy.

At the same time that Canadians are questioning the reliability of our grids, the government went all in on their bet on the adoption of electric vehicles, generously giving EV battery makers billions of taxpayer-funded subsidies to set up shop in Canada. However, plans have hit speed bumps (pun intended).

Sweden’s Northvolt, the recipient of $7.3 billion in loans, equity stakes, and subsidies from Canada, recently filed for bankruptcy protection in the US. The company says this will not affect its Canadian plant, which is being used as collateral to secure bailout financing in the US.  Meanwhile, other plants have been delayed. It seems like this may not have been a good “investment” for taxpayers.

Not that the Liberal government has been cautious with our money. Sustainable Development Technology Canada, colloquially referred to as the green slush fund, violated government funding rules and breached conflict-of-interest and ethics laws by improperly giving away millions of dollars. The scandal is so bad that the RCMP are investigating whether or not there was criminal wrongdoing; however, the government has been at a standstill for weeks because the Liberals refuse to hand over documents to help with the investigation.

COP29, THE FINANCE COP(S)

The COP conflab in Baku, Azerbaijan, in November didn’t skip a beat, seemingly ignorant of the shifting support for costly environmental action predicated on alarmism. Its 65,000 delegates waxed lyrical about the need to transfer funds from developed nations who are allegedly responsible for climate change to developing nations who are disproportionately victimized by changing weather conditions. What was dubbed “the New Collective Quantified Goal” (NCQG) on climate finance, governments tripled their handouts to US$300 billion annually by 2035, and got commits from public and private entities to increase that funding to US$1.3 trillion per year by 2035.

No one likes spending other people’s money quite like Minister Steven Guilbeault. You can find a daily outline of Canada’s COP commitments here.

We should have a new environment minister in time for COP30 in Brazil. And thankfully so, my wallet can’t take much more!

REGULATORY RAT’S NEST

In June, with the passage of Bill C-59, the Canadian Competition Act was amended with expanded provisions to address greenwashing complaints, including excessively punitive charges for breaking the new rules. The gag order has silenced oil and gas companies. Many, such as the Pathways Alliance of the six biggest oilsands producers, took down their websites immediately after the changes were announced. Others took down their ESG reports and environmental statements.

Even though oil and gas is likely to be disproportionately targeted and penalized, this Bill is agnostic; complaints can be made against all industries, and the unelected, unaccountable bureaucracy will decide who will and will not be investigated.

The fines are material.  $750,000 for an individual’s first offence and $10 million per misrepresentation for a company’s first offense, up to 3% of annual worldwide gross revenues. Analysis from one of the Big Four consulting firms uncovered approximately one potential misrepresentation per page of an ESG report; some reports run close to 100 pages, so the consequences of a fine are impactful, hence the swift reaction from companies.

While business leaders navigate the landmines created by C-59, mandatory sustainability (i.e. ESG) reporting standards are expected to be rolled out next year, with the latest draft issued in the next week or two. The Canadian securities regulator has said they are focused on climate as the first reporting topic. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to expect the Canadian standards will be expanded as the international standards broaden to include biodiversity and human capital, and possibly “just transition”.

In addition to the requirements for publicly traded companies, the feds’ announced mandatory climate reporting for all large, Canadian incorporated companies, including private. Corporations will be forced to publicly disclose their environmental performance while also being hamstrung by the greenwashing changes.

If you feel like an Olympian high jumper, it may be because companies have to be to meet ever higher regulatory requirements set by our federal government. Just when companies think they’ve cleared the bar by voluntarily cutting emissions from production, the feds raise it one foot higher.

November 4 brought the long-awaited draft emissions cap for the oil and gas industry, targeting a 35 percent emissions reduction below 2019 levels by 2030. To say the industry is annoyed is an understatement, and rightfully so.

You can’t keep a good industry down, though! The Canadian Association of Energy Contractors (CAOEC) is forecasting drilling growth in 2025, meaning the industry and its jobs are maintaining a positive trajectory. There’s continued optimism in the patch thanks to increased egress capacity following the start-up of TMX and the near completion of LNG Canada. The CAOEC 2025 forecast anticipates a total of 6,604 wells drilled, a 5.2% increase in rig operating hours, and total jobs (direct and indirect) of 41,800 – all up from 2024. This is good for workers, families, communities, and the economy.

PIPELINE EGRESS PROGRESS

The long-delayed, over-cost Trans Mountain Expansion Project (TMX) became operational on May 1, 2024, proving that we can still build things in Canada. The pipeline allows for the transportation of up to 890,000 barrels per day of oil to the west coast, which has helped narrow the differential of Western Canada Select crude. Congrats to everyone who worked on the project!

Another project of significant national importance is the 670 kilometre Coastal GasLink (CGL), the first pipeline built to the west coast in 70 years. Although the historical pipeline was completed ahead of schedule in late 2023, its completion affected the drilling and development plans of companies this year as we wait for the start up of the LNG Canada facility in 2025. CGL is another reason for optimism.

PERSONAL HIGHLIGHTS AND MILESTONES

2024 marks 20 years in the patch for me. I’ve had the opportunity to work alongside many astute, industrious, innovative folks who have integrity and heart for their work and co-workers. I thank each of you for shaping my career.

In February, I moderated EnergyNow’s event The Road Ahead: Alberta Energy 2024 with Minister of Energy and Minerals Brian Jean and distinguished energy analyst Dave Yager. We sold out the Petroleum Club ballroom and filled the room with lively discussion and camaraderie.

I then had the honour of moderating the sold-out luncheon panel at the 2024 Lloydminster Heavy Oil Show in September, featuring Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe. They graciously answered my questions, including one on the Keystone Pipeline – the new “hot topic”.

Premier Smith predicted that a change in US government could see the project resurrected. The Republicans took control of the White House, the Senate, and the House, so we will see if the Premier gets her wish. You can listen to her full answer here and a shorter clip here.

As we close off another fortunate year, I wish all the best for 2025.


Deidra Garyk is the Founder and President of Equipois:ability Advisory, a consulting firm specializing in sustainability solutions. Over 20 years in the Canadian energy sector, Deidra held key roles, where she focused on a broad range of initiatives, from sustainability reporting to fostering collaboration among industry stakeholders through her work in joint venture contracts.

Outside of her professional commitments, Deidra is an energy advocate and a recognized thought leader. She is passionate about promoting balanced, fact-based discussions on energy policy, and sustainability. Through her research, writing, and public speaking, Deidra seeks to advance a more informed and pragmatic dialogue on the future of energy.

Economy

Here’s how First Nations can access a reliable source of revenue

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By John Ibbitson

According to Pierre Poilievre, a Conservative government would permit First Nations to directly receive tax revenues from resource development on their ancestral territories. Political leaders of all parties should commit to such direct taxation. Because time is short.

Faced with the prospect of tariffs and other hostile American actions, Canada must build new energy infrastructure, mine critical minerals and diversify trade.

First Nations participation is critical to these plans. But too often, proposed infrastructure and resource projects on their territories become mired in lengthy negotiations that benefit only bureaucrats and lawyers. The First Nations Resource Charge (FNRC), a brainchild of the First Nations Tax Commission, could help cut through some of that red tape.

Currently, First Nations, the federal government and businesses negotiate agreements through a variety of mechanisms that establish the financial, environmental and cultural terms for a proposed development. As part of any agreement, Ottawa collects tax revenue from the project, then remits a portion of that revenue to the First Nation. The process is bureaucratic, time-consuming and paternalistic.

Under one version of the proposed charge, the First Nation would directly collect a portion of the federal corporate tax from the developer. The federal government, in turn, would issue the corporation an equivalent tax credit.

In effect, Ottawa would transfer tax points to First Nations.

“The Resource Charge doesn’t mean we won’t say no to bad projects where the costs to us are too high,” said Chief Darren Blaney of B.C’s Homalco First Nation, when the Conservatives first laid out the proposal last year. “It could mean, however, that good projects happen faster. This is what we all want.”

Poilievre referenced the proposed tax transfer in his Feb. 15 rally when he vowed to remove regulatory obstacles to fast-track resource development projects.

“We will incentivize Indigenous leaders to support these projects by letting companies pay a share of their federal corporate taxes to local First Nations,” he declared. “I want the First Nations people of Canada to be the richest people in the world.”

The First Nations Tax Commission first came up with the idea. Poilievre’s federal Conservatives are the first political party to embrace it. But there’s no reason why support for resource charges could not be bipartisan.

Mark Carney, the frontrunning candidate to succeed Justin Trudeau as Liberal Leader and prime minister, has vowed to use “all of the powers of the federal government… to accelerate the major projects that we need.” Supporting the FNRC would further that goal.

That said, resistance has already emerged.

“Most Indigenous leaders would see right through (what Poilievre said) because we’ve been around that corner a few times,” Dawn Martin-Hill, professor emeritus of Indigenous Studies at McMaster University, told the Canadian Press. “Selling your soul to have what other Canadians have, which is access to clean drinking water coming out of your tap, is highly problematic.”

But Prof. Martin-Hill inadvertently makes the case for the FNRC. Municipal governments raise funds by taxing the property of individuals and businesses and using the revenue to, among other things, provide clean drinking water. A First Nation that taxed a business operating on its territory, and used the revenue to provide clean drinking water for people on reserve, would simply be doing what governments are supposed to do.

Existing agreements, though cumbersome, have brought major new revenues to some reserves. The FNRC could increase revenues and First Nations autonomy.

Given the complexities of the tax code, and the limited administrative capacity of some First Nations, some agreements might see the federal government continuing to collect taxes and then remitting the First Nation’s portion to that government. The goal would be to ensure that revenues streams are transparent, predictable and support the greatest possible autonomy for each First Nation.

Any government committed to implementing the FNRC should convene a working group of First Nations leaders, private-sector executives and government officials to work out a framework agreement.

If the Conservatives win the next election, the working group could be part of a task force on tax reform that Poilievre said he intends to establish.

The FNRC would be voluntary. Communities could opt in or opt out. Provincial governments might also participate, sharing a portion of their taxes with First Nations.

If it works, a First Nations Resource Charge could speed the approval of lumber, mining, pipelines and other resource-related projects on the traditional lands of First Nations. It could provide reserves with stable and autonomous funding.

It’s an idea worth trying, regardless of which party forms the next government.

John Ibbitson

Continue Reading

Energy

Trial underway in energy company’s lawsuit against Greenpeace

Published on

From The Center Square

A trial is underway in North Dakota in a lawsuit against Greenpeace over its support for protests of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

Filed by Texas-based Energy Transfer, the lawsuit alleges Greenpeace in 2016 engaged in or supported unlawful behavior by protesters of the pipeline, while also spreading false claims about it. Greenpeace, according to Energy Transfer, spread falsehoods about the pipeline and conspired to escalate what were small, peaceful protests illegal activity that halted the project in 2016.

Energy Transfer – which is seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in damages – claims the alleged actions caused more than $100 million in financial difficulties for the pipeline.

Greenpeace denies any wrongdoing, arguing the case is about Americans’ First Amendments rights to free speech and to peacefully protest, and about corporations trying to silence critics.

Energy Transfer told The Center Square that its lawsuit “is about recovering damages for the harm Greenpeace caused” the company.

“It is not about free speech,” Energy Transfer said in an emailed statement to The Center Square. “Their organizing, funding, and encouraging the unlawful destruction of property and dissemination of misinformation goes well beyond the exercise of free speech. We look forward to proving our case and we trust the North Dakota legal system to do that.”

Last week, Greenpeace filed for a change of venue, claiming that the environmental group may not get a fair trial in Morton County, where the trial is being held.

“The Greenpeace defendants have said from the start of this case that it should be heard away from where the events happened,” said Daniel Simons, senior legal counsel for Greenpeace, in another statement emailed to The Center Square. “After three motions for a venue change were refused, we now feel compelled to ask the Supreme Court of North Dakota to relieve the local community from the burden of this case and ensure the fairness of the trial cannot be questioned.”

The pipeline was completed in 2017 after several months of delays.

Greenpeace has voiced concerns about the environmental impacts that the Dakota Access Pipeline will have in areas where it is installed. Energy Transfer/Dakota Access Pipeline says that, among other things, safety is its top priority and that it is committed to being a good neighbor, business partner, and valued member of local communities that the energy company says will benefit economically.

Continue Reading

Trending

X