From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Gina Pappano

Next, we need a Great Exodus from net zero ideology

In 2021, all of Canada’s Big Five Banks – TD, CIBC, BMO, Scotiabank and RBC – signed onto the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) and the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA).

U.N.-sponsored and Mark Carney-led, GFANZ is a sector-wide umbrella coalition whose goal is to accelerate global decarbonization and the emergence of a worldwide net zero global economy.

But now, in the first month of 2025, four of Canada’s Big Five Banks – TD, CIBC, BMO and Scotiabank – have announced their decision to exit the NZBA.

This came on the heels of similar announcements by six of the biggest U.S. banks – Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo as well as the investment firm BlackRock leaving the Asset Management subgroup of the GFANZ.

That group, the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, has now suspended operations altogether, and the GFANZ and all of its subgroups are falling like a house of cards.

At InvestNow, the not-for-profit that I lead, we’re considering these developments a victory and a vindication of our work.

In November of 2024, we submitted shareholder proposals to Canada’s Big Five banks asking them to leave both the NZBA and the GFANZ. As of this writing, all but one of them have done just that.

But this is only a partial victory.

When they signed on to the NZBA, the banks pledged to align their lending, investment and banking activities with decarbonization goals, including achieving net zero emissions by 2050. They pledged to focus on higher emitting sectors first and foremost. In practice, this means they would be setting their sights on Canada’s natural resource sector.

That’s because the net zero ideology motivating these groups requires the drastic reduction of oil and gas production and use over a comparatively short period of time.

That is a serious threat to Canada since we’ve been blessed with an abundance of natural resources. Hydrocarbon energy has become the backbone of our economy, and the war being waged against it has already made our lives harder and more expensive. Left unchecked, these difficulties will compound, with ruinous results.

In joining the NZBA, the Big Five Banks agreed to divest from oil and gas, eliminating projects and companies from the investment pool simply because of the sector they work in, as part of a long-term goal of totally decarbonizing the economy.

Presumably, having left the Alliance, those banks could now change course, increasing investment in and lending to oil and gas firms with an eye toward increasing the return on investment for their shareholders.

Except the banks have stressed that they have no intention of doing so. In the press releases and articles about leaving the NZBA, each bank emphasized that this move should not be interpreted as them abandoning net zero itself. All of these banks remain committed to aligning their activities with decarbonization, no matter the cost to Canada, the Canadian economy or the good of its citizens.

This means we still have work to do. While we applaud the banks for exiting the NZBA, we will continue to work to get them to leave behind the net zero ideology as well. Then, and only then, will we claim a full victory.

Gina Pappano is the former head of market intelligence at the Toronto Stock Exchange and TSX Venture Exchange and executive director of InvestNow , a non-profit dedicated to demonstrating that investing in Canada’s resource sectors helps Canada and the world. Join the movement and pass the InvestNow resolution at investnow.org.

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Deborah Jaremko

Complementary production in Canada and the U.S. boosts energy security

The United States is now the world’s largest oil producer, but its reliance on oil imports from Canada has never been higher.

Through a vast handshake of pipelines and refineries, Canadian oil and U.S. oil complement each other, strengthening North American energy security.

Here’s why.

Decades in the making

Twenty years ago, the North American energy market looked a lot different than it does today.

In the early 2000s, U.S. oil production had been declining for more than 20 years. By 2005, it dropped to its lowest level since 1949, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

America’s imports of oil from foreign nations were on the rise.

But then, the first of two powerhouse North American oil plays started ramping up.

In Canada’s oil sands, a drilling technology called SAGD – steam-assisted gravity drainage – unlocked enormous resources that could not be economically produced by the established surface mining processes. And the first new mines in nearly 25 years started coming online.

In about 2010, the second massive play – U.S. light, tight oil – emerged on the scene, thanks to hydraulic fracturing technology.

Oil sands production jumped from about one million barrels per day in 2005 to 2.5 million barrels per day in 2015, reaching an average 3.5 million barrels per day last year, according to the Canada Energy Regulator.

Meanwhile, U.S. oil production skyrocketed from 5.5 million barrels per day in 2005 to 9.4 million barrels per day in 2015 and 13.3 million barrels per day in 2024, according to the EIA.

Together the United States and Canada now produce more oil than anywhere else on earth, according to S&P Global.

As a result, overall U.S. foreign oil imports declined by 35 per cent between 2005 and 2023. But imports from Canada have steadily gone up.

In 2005, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Nigeria together supplied 52 per cent of U.S. oil imports. Canada was at just 16 per cent.

In 2024, Canada supplied 62 per cent of American oil imports, with Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela together supplying just 14 per cent, according to the EIA.

“Light” and “heavy” oil

Canadian and U.S. oil production are complementary because they are different from each other in composition.

Canada’s oil exports to the U.S. are primarily “heavy” oil from the oil sands, while U.S. production is primarily “light” oil from the Permian Basin in Texas and New Mexico.

One way to think of it is that heavy oil is thick and does not flow easily, while light oil is thin and flows freely – like orange juice compared to fudge.

The components that make the oil like this require different refinery equipment to generate products including gasoline, jet fuel and base petrochemicals.

Of the oil the U.S. imported from Canada from January to October last year, 75 per cent was heavy, six per cent was light, and the remaining 19 per cent was “medium,” which basically has qualities in between the two.

Tailored for Canadian crude

Many refineries in the United States are specifically designed to process heavy oil, primarily in the U.S. Midwest and U.S. Gulf Coast.

Overall, there are about 130 operable oil refineries in the United States, according to the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers.

The Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission (APMC) estimates that 25 consistently use oil from Alberta.

According to APMC, the top five U.S. refineries running the most Alberta crude are:

• Marathon Petroleum, Robinson, Illinois (100% Alberta crude)
• Exxon Mobil, Joliet, Illinois (96% Alberta crude)
• CHS Inc., Laurel, Montana (95% Alberta crude)
• Phillips 66, Billings, Montana (92% Alberta crude)
• Citgo, Lemont, Illinois (78% Alberta crude)

Since 2010, virtually 100 per cent of oil imports to the U.S. Midwest have come from Canada, according to the EIA.

In recent years, new pipeline access and crude-by-rail have allowed more Canadian oil to reach refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast, rising from about 140,000 barrels per day in 2010 to about 450,000 barrels per day in 2024.

U.S. oil exports

The United States banned oil exports from 1975 to the end of 2015. Since, exports have surged, averaging 4.1 million barrels per day last year, according to the EIA.

That is nearly equivalent to the 4.6 million barrels per day of Canadian oil imported into the U.S. over the same time period, indicating that Canadian crude imports enable sales of U.S. oil to global markets.

Future outlook

Twenty-five years from now, the U.S. will need to import virtually exactly the same amount of oil as it does today (7.0 million barrels per day in 2050 compared to 6.98 million barrels per day in 2023), according to the EIA.