Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Energy

House votes to block China from buying oil from US reserves

Published

3 years ago

5 minute read

By Matthew Daly in Washington

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican-controlled House on Thursday voted to block oil from the country’s emergency stockpile from going to China.

The bill, one of the first introduced by the new GOP majority, would prohibit the Energy Department from selling oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to companies owned or influenced by the Chinese Communist Party. It passed easily, 331-97, with 113 Democrats joining unanimous Republicans in support.

Rep. Cathy McMorris, R-Wash., the new head of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said the bill would help end what she called President Joe Biden’s “abuse of our strategic reserves.”

Biden withdrew 180 million barrels from the strategic reserve last year in a bid to halt rising gasoline prices amid production cuts by OPEC and a ban on Russian oil imports following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. The monthslong sales brought the stockpile to its lowest level since the 1980s. The administration said last month it will start to replenish the reserve now that oil prices have gone down.

McMorris Rodgers accused Biden of using the reserve to “cover up his failed policies” that she said are driving up energy prices and inflation.

“Draining our strategic reserves for political purposes and selling it to China is a significant threat to our national and energy security. This must be stopped,” McMorris Rodgers said.

The measure is the first in a series of GOP proposals aimed at “unleashing American energy production,” McMorris Rodgers said as Republicans seek to boost U.S. production of oil, natural gas and other fossil fuels.

“There’s more to come. This is just the beginning,” she said.

Democrats, including former Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone of New Jersey, said Republicans were trying to fix a problem of their own making. China is among numerous potential adversaries that buy U.S. oil after the GOP-led Congress lifted an export ban in 2015.

“If Republicans were serious about addressing this issue, they would have brought forward a bill that banned all oil exports to China,” Pallone said, adding that sales from the strategic reserve amounted to about 2% of U.S. oil sold to China last year.

“If we truly want to address China using American oil to build its reserves, let’s actually take a serious look at that, rather than skirt around the issue because Republicans are scared of Big Oil’s wrath,” Pallone said.

The current process allows for crude oil sales from the strategic reserve to companies that make the highest offer, which includes U.S. subsidiaries of foreign oil companies, and they could then export that crude oil overseas. Last year, millions of barrels of oil from the U.S. reserves wound up being exported to China, including to a subsidiary of China’s state-run oil company, Sinopec.

The Energy Department said in a statement Thursday that Biden “rightly authorized emergency use” of the strategic reserve, also known as the SPR, to address supply disruptions and “provide relief to American families and refineries when needed the most.”

The Treasury Department estimates that release of oil from the emergency stockpile lowered prices at the pump by up to 40 cents per gallon. Gasoline prices, meanwhile, averaged about $3.27 per gallon on Thursday, down from just over $5 per gallon at their peak in June, according to the AAA auto club.

“By law we are required to select the highest value bid to ensure the best return for taxpayers, and since 2017 the vast majority of oil sold from the reserve is sold to American entities,” the Energy Department said. Over the last five years, less than 3% of oil from the strategic reserve has gone to China, officials said.

The House bill now goes to the Democratic-controlled Senate. Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., has introduced a similar measure.

Related Topics:

Storytelling is in our DNA. We provide credible, compelling multimedia storytelling and services in English and French to help captivate your digital, broadcast and print audiences. As Canada’s national news agency for 100 years, we give Canadians an unbiased news source, driven by truth, accuracy and timeliness.

Follow Author

More from this author
COVID-19 / 1 year ago

Peckford: Hallelujah! Supreme Court of Canada to hear Newfoundland and Labrador charter case

COVID-19 / 2 years ago

Supreme Court will not hear case about government’s violation of rights and freedoms

Alberta / 2 years ago

Alberta looking to ban electronic vote tabulators ahead of next provincial election

Energy

Minus Forty and the Myth of Easy Energy

Published on October 20, 2025

By

By Stewart Muir

It’s not about ideology at  forty degrees below zero. It’s about survival

When the thermometer plunges to forty below, ideology no longer matters. Survival does.

That lesson was driven home in January 2024, when a brutal cold snap swept across America’s Pacific Northwest and western Canada. For four days, the region’s interconnected energy system teetered on the brink of collapse. Power lines snapped, gas pipelines strained, and four states of emergency were declared. In Portland, a falling power line killed three people and injured a baby.

This was no ordinary winter storm. It quickly became known as the January 2024 Event – a capital-letter crisis that planners are still analyzing nearly two years later. As recently as August 2025, experts continued to hold panels to ask the same question: how did the grid survive? Their verdict is grim.

Hydropower, long the Northwest’s reliable backup, faltered. Wind turbines stood still as the winds died at exactly the wrong time. Solar panels offered little under heavy gray skies. Natural gas supplied about two-thirds of the energy as furnaces worked around the clock – but even gas has limits.

The Real Problem: Capacity, Not Cold

Here’s the twist: post-event analysis shows the real problem wasn’t the cold. It was demand growth colliding with a system stripped of firm capacity. The cold snap may not have been unprecedented, but the risks were, BC Hydro’s Powerex reported.

They also warned that fashionable fixes like batteries and pumped hydro aren’t the cavalry many hope for. These technologies can even worsen shortages by competing for scarce electricity when it’s needed most. One Alberta utility estimated it would take a battery bigger than 13 years of the world’s entire EV battery output to cover its customers’ electricity needs for those few days.

Meanwhile, the renewables lobby was left scrambling for answers. Investigations by ProPublica and Oregon Public Broadcasting highlighted the obvious: Oregon and Washington had set “100% green” targets without solving the transmission bottlenecks needed to deliver that power. Instead of addressing the flaw, advocates doubled down, calling for more wind, more solar, more batteries without any credible plan for the impossibly large quantities required.

And so, in the depths of that frigid January, reality intruded. Gas-fired generation carried the essential load. Imports were pulled in. Utilities called for conservation, and households responded. System operators dug deep, showing remarkable resilience under pressure. Heroic efforts kept the lights on. But it should never have come to that.

The lesson is not that renewables are bad or that we should cling to the past. It is that energy policy must begin with humility. Weather is unpredictable. In a cross-border region of 26 million people, demand is also growing much faster than once forecast.

A Wake-Up Call Ignored

When lives are on the line, nothing replaces firm, dispatchable power. A balanced system – yes, with more renewables, but anchored by natural gas and supported by robust transmission – is essential. Pretending we can run an advanced economy on press releases and hope is how ideology masquerades as policy, and how families end up shivering in the dark.

The January 2024 event should have been a wake-up call. Yet too many leaders remain captivated by slogans and blind to physics. The grid doesn’t read legislation. It doesn’t listen to speeches. It responds only to supply, demand, and the weather. And when the weather turns deadly, the reckoning is swift.

Dreamers will keep promising a painless transition. British Columbia, for example, is shutting down domestic gas generation in what’s branded a “pivot” to renewables – even as the province ships its first LNG cargoes to a world hungry for reliable gas. At the same time, the explosive growth of data centres driven by artificial intelligence has experts agog at what this means for an already strained system.

Eighteen months after the event, the people we expect to have answers are still asking questions.

Questions Still Unanswered

Here’s one more: is our energy system’s fragility the result of wishful thinking colliding with reality? To many experts, the answer seems obvious.

At minus forty, there is no spin, no ideology—only survival.

If Canada and the Northwest want to avoid a repeat of January 2024, the path is clear: double down on reliability, build the neglected transmission, and keep firm power in the system. Because the next deep freeze—or heat wave—will not wait for us to get our politics straight.

References

LA Times (Jan 17, 2024). Pacific Northwest ice storm kills three.

NewsData (Aug 2025). Panelists: January 2024 gas shortage sparked conversations on coordination.

USACE (2024). Don’t bet on the weather: the role hydropower plays in balancing the grid.

Western Power Pool (2024). Assessment of January 2024 Cold Weather Event.

Powerex (Mar 2024). Analysis of the January 2024 Winter Weather Event.

ProPublica/OPB (May 2025). How the Pacific Northwest’s dream of green energy fell apart.

NW Energy Coalition (2024). Customer-side resources critical to reliability.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Busting five myths about the Alberta oil sands

Published on October 20, 2025

By

Construction of an oil sands SAGD production well pad in northern Alberta. Photo supplied to the Canadian Energy Centre

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Deborah Jaremko

The facts about one of Canada’s biggest industries

Alberta’s oil sands sector is one of Canada’s most important industries — and also one of its most misunderstood.

Here are five common myths, and the facts behind them.

Myth: Oil sands emissions are unchecked

Steam generators at a SAGD oil sands production site in northern Alberta. Photo courtesy Cenovus Energy

Reality: Oil sands emissions are strictly regulated and monitored. Producers are making improvements through innovation and efficiency.

The sector’s average emissions per barrel – already on par with the average oil consumed in the United States, according to S&P Global – continue to go down.

The province reports that oil sands emissions per barrel declined by 26 per cent per barrel from 2012 to 2023. At the same time, production increased by 96 per cent.

Analysts with S&P Global call this a “structural change” for the industry where production growth is beginning to rise faster than emissions growth.

The firm continues to anticipate a decrease in total oil sands emissions within the next few years.

The Pathways Alliance — companies representing about 95 per cent of oil sands activity — aims to significantly cut emissions from production through a major carbon capture and storage (CCS) project and other innovations.

Myth: There is no demand for oil sands production

Expanded export capacity at the Trans Mountain Westridge Terminal. Photo courtesy Trans Mountain Corporation

Reality: Demand for Canadian oil – which primarily comes from the oil sands – is strong and rising.

Today, America imports more than 80 per cent more oil from Canada than it did in 2010, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

New global customers also now have access to Canadian oil thanks to the opening of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion in 2024.

Exports to countries outside the U.S. increased by 180 per cent since the project went into service, reaching a record 525,000 barrels per day in July 2025, according to the Canada Energy Regulator.

The world’s appetite for oil keeps growing — and it’s not stopping anytime soon.

According to the latest EIA projections, the world will consume about 120 million barrels per day of oil and petroleum liquids in 2050, up from about 104 million barrels per day today.

Myth: Oil sands projects cost too much

Heavy haulers at an oil sands mining operation in northern Alberta. Photo courtesy Suncor Energy

Reality: Operating oil sands projects deliver some of the lowest-cost oil in North America, according to Enverus Intelligence Research.

Unlike U.S. shale plays, oil sands production is a long-life, low-decline “manufacturing” process without the treadmill of ongoing investment in new drilling, according to BMO Capital Markets.

Vast oil sands reserves support mining projects with no drilling, and the standard SAGD drilling method involves about 60 per cent fewer wells than the average shale play, BMO says.

After initial investment, Enverus says oil sands projects typically break even at less than US$50 per barrel WTI.

Myth: Indigenous communities don’t support the oil sands 

Chief Greg Desjarlais of Frog Lake First Nation signs an agreement in September 2022 whereby 23 First Nations and Métis communities in Alberta acquired an 11.57 per cent ownership interest in seven Enbridge-operated oil sands pipelines for approximately $1 billion. Photo courtesy Enbridge

Reality: Indigenous communities play an important role in the oil sands sector through community agreements, business contracts and, increasingly, project equity ownership.

Oil sands producers spent an average of $1.8 billion per year with 180 Indigenous-affiliated vendors between 2021 and 2023, according to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

Indigenous communities are now owners of key projects that support the oil sands, including Suncor Energy’s East Tank Farm (49 per cent owned by two communities); the Northern Courier pipeline system (14 per cent owned by eight communities); and the Athabasca Trunkline, seven operating Enbridge oil sands pipelines (~12 per cent owned by 23 communities).

These partnerships strengthen Indigenous communities with long-term revenue, helping build economic reconciliation.

Myth: Oil sands development only benefits people in Alberta 

The Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) on Bay St. Getty Images photo

Reality: Oil sands development benefits Canadians across the country through reliable energy supply, jobs, taxes and government revenues that help pay for services like roads, schools and hospitals.

The sector has contributed approximately $1 trillion to the Canadian economy over the past 25 years, according to analysis by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute (MLI).

That reflects total direct spending — including capital investment, operating costs, taxes and royalties — not profits or dividends for shareholders.

More than 2,300 companies outside of Alberta have had direct business with the oilsands, including over 1,300 in Ontario and almost 600 in Quebec, MLI said.

Energy products are by far Canada’s largest export, representing $196 billion, or about one-quarter of Canada’s total trade in 2024, according to Statistics Canada.

Led by the oil sands, Canada’s energy sector directly or indirectly employs more than 445,000 people across the country, according to Natural Resources Canada.

Continue Reading

Trending

X