Energy
The sudden, newfound support for LNG projects in Canada is truly remarkable.
From Resource Works
The sudden, newfound support for LNG projects in Canada is truly remarkable.
What’s all this? Green-leaning governments, federal and provincial, suddenly speaking in favour of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and other resource development?
It began with British Columbia Premier David Eby telling Bloomberg News that he’s optimistic that LNG Canada’s LNG-for-export plant at Kitimat, BC can be expanded in a way that satisfies its investors but without supercharging the province’s emissions.
This came as LNG Canada was reported continuing to look into possible Phase Two expansion. Such expansion would double the plant’s output of LNG to 14 million tonnes a year.
Industry reports say LNG Canada has been discussing with prime contractors their potential availability down the road. A key, though, is whether and how B.C. can provide enough electrical power.
The LNG Canada plant now is going through a pre-production testing program, and has finished welding on its first “train” (production line). LNG Canada is expected to go into full operation in mid-2025. And Malaysia’s Petronas (a 25% partner) has added three new LNG carriers to its fleet, to gear up for LNG Canada’s launch.
The Eby story noted that he has also thrown his support behind other projects — including hydrogen production and an electric-vehicle battery recycling plant — to create jobs and keep B.C.’s economy growing at a challenging time.
Then came Ottawa’s minister of innovation, science and industry, François-Philippe Champagne, who visited the Haisla Nation in B.C. to support its Cedar LNG project with partner Pembina Pipeline Corp.
Champagne declared: “This is the kind of project we want to see, where there are all the elements supporting attracting investments in British Columbia.”
His government news release said: “This project presents an exciting opportunity for Canada, as it is expected to commercialize one of the lowest-carbon-intensity liquified natural gas (LNG) facilities in the world and represents the largest Indigenous-majority-owned infrastructure project in Canada.”
Champagne went on to tell The Terrace Standard that “We are in active conversations with Pembina and Haisla First Nations. We are saying today that we will support the project, but discussions are still ongoing.’
There had already been reports that Export Development Canada is set to lend Cedar LNG $400-$500 million.
And then came federal minister Jonathan Wilkinson, announcing to the national Energy and Mines Ministers’ Conference in Calgary that Ottawa “will get clean growth projects built faster” by streamlining regulatory processes and moving to “make good approvals faster.”
Wilkinson has long talked, too, of streamlining and speeding up approval processes for resource projects in general, especially for mining for critical minerals. “(We’re) looking at how do we optimise the regulatory and permanent processes so you can take what is a 12- to 15-year process and bring it down to maybe five.”
The Canada Energy Regulator now is inviting input on its plans to improve the efficiency and predictability of project reviews.
All this as Deloitte Canada consultants reported that “the natural gas sector is poised for significant growth, driven by ongoing LNG projects and rising demand for gas-fired electricity generation in Canada.”
And energy giant BP said that under its two new energy ‘scenarios’, world demand for LNG in 2030 grows by 30-40% above 2022 levels, then increases by more than 25% over the subsequent 20 years.
Wilkinson earned pats on the back from some provincial ministers at the Calgary conference, but Alberta’s minister of energy and minerals, Brian Jean, aired concerns over how Ottawa’s new “greenwashing” law would impact the oil and gas sector.
Under it, companies (and individuals) must prove the truth of their public statements on climate benefits of their products or programs, or face potential millions in fines. But the ground rules for this legislation have not yet been announced.
(Jean was not alone. Other critics included CEO Karen Ogen of the First Nations LNG Alliance, who said the new law “could be used as one more tool to discourage resource companies that might seek Indigenous partnerships, and to obstruct Indigenous investment in energy projects, and frustrate Indigenous benefits from resource projects.”)
Wilkinson replied that the Competition Bureau needs to provide information so people understand how the rules apply and what is actionable.
“I think once that is done, this will be, perhaps, a bit of a different conversation. I would expect that the guidance will be something like folks simply have to have a good faith basis to believe what they’re saying. And assuming that is true, I think the sector probably will calm down.”
No pats on the back for Ottawa, though, from the mining industry or the oil-and-gas sector.
Aiming to combat China’s efforts to corner the market in critical minerals, Canada is making it harder for foreign firms to take over big Canadian mining companies. Major mining shares quickly dropped in value.
And Heather Exner-Pirot of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and special advisor to the Business Council of Canada, says: “We produced less critical minerals last year than we did in 2019. We’re producing less copper, less nickel, less platinum, less cobalt, all these things. And the investment has not picked up; in real dollars it’s almost half of what it was in 2013 . . . and the regulatory system is still a huge barrier to that development.”
On top of that, the petroleum sector has long protested that federal moves to limit oil and gas emissions will, in practice, limit production.
While governments signalled support for LNG, supporters of natural-resource development quickly sent clear messages to governments of all levels.
Calgary-based Canada Action, for one, reminded governments that the oil and gas sector is projected to generate more than in $1.1 trillion in revenue to governments from 2000 through 2032. And that the oil and gas sector supports nearly 500,000 direct and indirect jobs across the country.
Then the industry-supporting Fraser Institute pointed out that business investment in Canada’s extractive sector (mining, quarrying, and oil and gas) has declined substantially since 2014.
“In fact, adjusted for inflation, business investment in the oil and gas sector has declined 52.1 per cent since 2014, falling from $46.6 billion in 2014 to $22.3 billion in 2022. In percentage terms the decline in non-conventional oil extraction was even larger at 71.2 percent, falling from $37.3 billion in 2014 to $10.7 billion in 2022. . . .
“One of the major challenges facing Canadian prosperity are regulatory barriers, particularly in the oil and gas sector.”
Over to government, then, to reduce those barriers.
Following the recent positive moves listed above from two levels of government, there’s an obvious question: Would there happen to be federal and provincial elections in the offing?
Yes: B.C. will hold its next general election on or before October 19. And the feds go to the polls for an election on or before October 20.
Stand by for more promises.
From Energy Now
By Canada Powered by Women
Canada has entered a new period of energy cooperation, marking one of the biggest shifts in federal–provincial alignment on energy priorities in years.
Last week as Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that outlines how both governments will approach a potential pipeline to British Columbia’s coast.
The agreement, which has been described as a “new starting point” after years of tension, lays the groundwork for a privately financed pipeline while also linking this commitment to a broader set of infrastructure priorities across oil and gas, LNG, renewables, critical minerals and electricity transmission.
It also sets out how a privately financed project, moving roughly 300,000 to 400,000 barrels of oil to global markets each day, will be reviewed.
Now that the announcement is behind us, attention has turned to how (or if) a pipeline is going to get built.
Alberta has set out its ambitions, British Columbia has its conditions, and the federal government has its own expectations. Together, these positions are shaping what some are calling a “grand bargain” which will be made up of trade-offs.
Trade-offs are not a new concept for the engaged women that Canada Powered by Women (CPW) represents, as they’ve been showing up in our research for several years now. And anyone who reads us also knows we like to look at what the data says.
According to new polling from the Angus Reid Institute, a clear majority of Canadians support a pipeline, with national backing above 60 per cent. And there’s strong support for the pipeline among those in B.C. This aligns with other emerging data points that show Canadians are looking for practical solutions that strengthen affordability and long-term reliability.
By the numbers:
• 60 per cent of Canadians support the pipeline concept, while 25 per cent oppose it.
• 53 per cent of people support in British Columbia, compared to 37 percent opposed.
• 74 per cent of people in Alberta and Saskatchewan support the pipeline.
Our research shows the same trends.
A large majority (85 per cent) of engaged women agree that building pipelines and refining capacity within the country should be prioritized. They favour policies that will progress stability, affordability and long-term economic opportunity.
A key feature of the MOU is the expectation of Indigenous ownership and benefit sharing, which Alberta and B.C. governments identify as essential, and which aligns with public opinion. As of right now, Indigenous groups remain split on support for a pipeline.
The agreement also signals that changes to the federal Oil Tanker Moratorium Act may need to be considered. The moratorium, in place since 2019, is designed to limit large tanker traffic on the North Coast of B.C. because of navigation risks in narrow channels and the need to protect sensitive coastal ecosystems.
Those in favour of the pipeline point to this as a critical barrier to moving Canadian oil to international markets.
Polling from the Angus Reid Institute shows that 47 per cent of Canadians believe the moratorium could be modified or repealed if stronger safety measures are in place. Again, we come back to trade-offs.
The MOU is a starting point and does not replace consultation, environmental review or provincial alignment. These steps are still required before any project can advance. Taken together, the agreement and the data show broad support for strengthening Canada’s energy options.
This will be an issue that engaged women are no doubt going to watch, and the conversation is likely to move from ideas to discussing what trade-offs can be made to bring this opportunity to life.
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
During the latest marathon cabinet meeting on Dec. 2, Energy Secretary Chris Wright made news when he told President Donald Trump that “The biggest determinant of the price of energy is politicians, political leaders, and polices — that’s what drives energy prices.”
He’s right about that, and it is why the back-and-forth struggle over federal energy and climate policy plays such a key role in America’s economy and society. Just 10 months into this second Trump presidency, the administration’s policies are already having a profound impact, both at home and abroad.
While the rapid expansion of AI datacenters over the past year is currently being blamed by many for driving up electric costs, power bills were skyrocketing long before that big tech boom began, driven in large part by the policies of the Obama and Biden administration designed to regulate and subsidize an energy transition into reality. As I’ve pointed out here in the past, driving up the costs of all forms of energy to encourage conservation is a central objective of the climate alarm-driven transition, and that part of the green agenda has been highly effective.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
President Trump, Wright, and other key appointees like Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin have moved aggressively throughout 2025 to repeal much of that onerous regulatory agenda. The GOP congressional majorities succeeded in phasing out Biden’s costly green energy subsidies as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Trump signed into law on July 4. As the federal regulatory structure eases and subsidy costs diminish, it is reasonable to expect a gradual easing of electricity and other energy prices.
This year’s fading out of public fear over climate change and its attendant fright narrative spells bad news for the climate alarm movement. The resulting cracks in the green facade have manifested rapidly in recent weeks.
Climate-focused conflict groups that rely on public fears to drive donations have fallen on hard times. According to a report in the New York Times, the Sierra Club has lost 60 percent of the membership it reported in 2019 and the group’s management team has fallen into infighting over elements of the group’s agenda. Greenpeace is struggling just to stay afloat after losing a huge court judgment for defaming pipeline company Energy Transfer during its efforts to stop the building of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
350.org, an advocacy group founded by Bill McKibben, shut down its U.S. operations in November amid funding woes that had forced planned 25 percent budget cuts for 2025 and 2026. Employees at EDF voted to form their own union after the group went through several rounds of budget cuts and layoffs in recent months.
The fading of climate fears in turn caused the ESG management and investing fad to also fall out of favor, leading to a flood of companies backtracking on green investments and climate commitments. The Net Zero Banking Alliance disbanded after most of America’s big banks – Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and others – chose to drop out of its membership.
The EV industry is also struggling. As the Trump White House moves to repeal Biden-era auto mileage requirements, Ford Motor Company is preparing to shut down production of its vaunted F-150 Lightning electric pickup, and Stellantis cancelled plans to roll out a full-size EV truck of its own. Overall EV sales in the U.S. collapsed in October and November following the repeal of the $7,500 per car IRA subsidy effective Sept 30.
The administration’s policy actions have already ended any new leasing for costly and unneeded offshore wind projects in federal waters and have forced the suspension or abandonment of several projects that were already moving ahead. Capital has continued to flow into the solar industry, but even that industry’s ability to expand seems likely to fade once the federal subsidies are fully repealed at the end of 2027.
Truly, public policy matters where energy is concerned. It drives corporate strategies, capital investments, resource development and movement, and ultimately influences the cost of energy in all its forms and products. The speed at which Trump and his key appointees have driven this principle home since Jan. 20 has been truly stunning.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
From Underdog to Top Broodmare
READ IT HERE – Canada-Alberta Memorandum of Understanding – From the Prime Minister’s Office
IEA peak-oil reversal gives Alberta long-term leverage
Healthcare And Pipelines Are The Front Lines of Canada’s Struggle To Stay United
Net Zero goal is a fundamental flaw in the Ottawa-Alberta MOU
Falling resource revenue fuels Alberta government’s red ink
Alberta can’t fix its deficits with oil money: Lennie Kaplan
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta Sports Hall of Fame Announces Class of 2026 Inductees
-
Business2 days agoCanada’s climate agenda hit business hard but barely cut emissions
-
Business2 days agoCarney government should privatize airports—then open airline industry to competition
-
Business1 day agoCarney’s Toronto cabinet meetings cost $530,000
-
Business2 days agoIs Carney Falling Into The Same Fiscal Traps As Trudeau?
-
Alberta2 days agoCarney’s pipeline deal hits a wall in B.C.
-
COVID-1910 hours agoCanadian legislator introduces bill to establish ‘Freedom Convoy Recognition Day’ as a holiday
-
Artificial Intelligence1 day agoAI is accelerating the porn crisis as kids create, consume explicit deepfake images of classmates