Energy
Trump’s promises should prompt major rethink of Canadian energy policy

From the Fraser Institute
By Elmira Aliakbari and Julio Mejía
In three weeks, the United States will have a new president. And despite Donald Trump’s pledge to “unleash” the American oil and gas sector by cutting red tape and accelerating permit approvals, the Trudeau government remains committed to constraining Canada’s oil and gas industry. The result? More investment to the U.S. and less to Canada. To prevent Canada from falling further behind the U.S., the government must reverse harmful policies that drive investors away.
Even before Trump’s victory, Canada’s oil and gas sector was less attractive for investment compared to the U.S. According to a 2023 survey of oil and gas investors, 68 per cent of respondents said uncertainty about environmental regulations deters investment in Canada’s oil and gas sector compared to 41 per cent in the U.S. And 54 per cent said Canada’s regulatory duplication and inconsistencies deter investment compared to only 34 per cent for the U.S.
This negative perception reflects years of policy decisions that have consistently undermined Canada’s oil and gas industry. To name a few.
In 2016, just one year after taking office, the Trudeau government cancelled the Northern Gateway pipeline from Alberta to British Columbia’s coast. The $7.9 billion project, previously approved by the Harper government, would have expanded market access and boosted exports to Asia.
In 2017, the TransCanada energy company withdrew its application for the Energy East and Eastern Mainline pipelines from Alberta and Saskatchewan to the east coast, which would have expanded access to European markets. The projects became economically unfeasible after the Trudeau government required the company to account for greenhouse gas emissions from oil production and consumption—not just transportation, a requirement that was never part of prior environmental assessments. (Incidentally, that same year Prime Minister Trudeau vowed to “phase out” fossil fuels in Canada.)
In 2019, the Trudeau government enacted Bill C-69, which introduced subjective criteria—including the “social impact” and “gender implications” of projects—into the evaluation of major energy projects, creating significant uncertainty. That same year, the government passed Bill C-48, which bans large oil tankers from B.C.’s northern coast, further limiting access to Asian markets.
In 2023, the Trudeau government announced plans to cap oil and gas sector emissions at 35 per cent below 2019 levels by 2030—while leaving other sectors in the economy untouched. This will likely force energy producers to limit production. And the government’s new methane regulations and rules, which require fuel producers to reduce emissions, have added to the sector’s costs and regulatory challenges.
Predictably, these policy decisions have taken a toll. Investment in the oil and gas sector plummeted over the last decade, from $84.0 billion in 2014 to $37.2 billion in 2023 (inflation adjusted)—a 56 per cent drop. Less investment means less money to develop new energy projects, infrastructure and technologies, and consequently fewer jobs and less economic opportunity for Canadians across the country, especially in Alberta, which has been a destination for workers seeking high wages and more opportunity.
Now in 2025, Trump wants to attract investment by streamlining processes and cutting costs while Canada drives investment away with restrictive and costly regulations. If Ottawa continues on this path, Canada’s leading industry—and largest source of exports—will lose more ground to the U.S. To restore our competitiveness and attract investment, the federal government must rethink its approach to the energy sector and scrap the harmful policies that will hurt Canadians today and in the future.
Elmira Aliakbari
Alberta
Cross-Canada NGL corridor will stretch from B.C. to Ontario

Keyera Corp.’s natural gas liquids facilities in Fort Saskatchewan. Photo courtesy Keyera Corp.
From the Canadian Energy Centre
By Will Gibson
Keyera ‘Canadianizes’ natural gas liquids with $5.15 billion acquisition
Sarnia, Ont., which sits on the southern tip of Lake Huron and peers across the St. Clair River to Michigan, is a crucial energy hub for much of the eastern half of Canada and parts of the United States.
With more than 60 industrial facilities including refineries and chemical plants that produce everything from petroleum, resins, synthetic rubber, plastics, lubricants, paint, cosmetics and food additives in the southwestern Ontario city, Mayor Mike Bradley admits the ongoing dialogue about tariffs with Canada’s southern neighbour hits close to home.
So Bradley welcomed the announcement that Calgary-based Keyera Corp. will acquire the majority of Plains American Pipelines LLP’s Canadian natural gas liquids (NGL) business, creating a cross-Canada NGL corridor that includes a storage hub in Sarnia.
“As a border city, we’ve been on the frontline of the tariff wars, so we support anything that helps enhance Canadian sovereignty and jobs,” says the long-time mayor, who was first elected in 1988.
The assets in Sarnia are a key piece of the $5.15 billion transaction, which will connect natural gas liquids from the growing Montney and Duvernay plays in B.C. and Alberta to markets in central Canada and the eastern U.S. seaboard.
NGLs are hydrocarbons found within natural gas streams including ethane, propane and pentanes. They are important energy sources and used to produce a wide range of everyday items, from plastics and clothing to fuels.
Keyera CEO Dean Setoguchi cast the proposed acquisition as an act of repatriation.
“This transaction brings key NGL infrastructure under Canadian ownership, enhancing domestic energy capabilities and reinforcing Canada’s economic resilience by keeping value and decision-making closer to home,” Setoguchi told analysts in a June 17 call.
“Plains’ portfolio forms a fully integrated cross Canada NGL system connecting Western Canada supply to key demand centres across the Prairie provinces, Ontario and eastern U.S.,” he said.
“The system includes strategic hubs like Empress, Fort Saskatchewan and Sarnia – which provide a reliable source of Canadian NGL supply to extensive fractionation, storage, pipeline and logistics infrastructure.”
Martin King, RBN Energy’s managing director of North America Energy Market Analysis, sees Keyera’s ability to “Canadianize” its NGL infrastructure as improving the company’s growth prospects.
“It allows them to tap into the Duvernay and Montney, which are the fastest growing NGL plays in North America and gives them some key assets throughout the country,” said the Calgary-based analyst.
“The crown assets are probably the straddle plants in Empress, which help strip out the butane, ethane and other liquids for condensate. It also positions them well to serve the eastern half of the country.”
And that’s something welcomed in Sarnia.
“Having a Canadian source for natural gas would be our preference so we see Keyera’s acquisition as strengthening our region as an energy hub,” Bradley said.
“We are optimistic this will be good for our region in the long run.”
The acquisition is expected to close in the first quarter of 2026, pending regulatory approvals.
Meanwhile, the governments of Ontario and Alberta are joining forces to strengthen the economies of both regions, and the country, by advancing major infrastructure projects including pipelines, ports and rail.
A joint feasibility study is expected this year on how to move major private sector-led investments forward.
Business
B.C. premier wants a private pipeline—here’s how you make that happen

From the Fraser Institute
By Julio Mejía and Elmira Aliakbari
At the federal level, the Carney government should scrap several Trudeau-era policies including Bill C-69 (which introduced vague criteria into energy project assessments including the effects on the “intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors”)
The Eby government has left the door (slightly) open to Alberta’s proposed pipeline to the British Columbia’s northern coast. Premier David Eby said he isn’t opposed to a new pipeline that would expand access to Asian markets—but he does not want government to pay for it. That’s a fair condition. But to attract private investment for pipelines and other projects, both the Eby government and the Carney government must reform the regulatory environment.
First, some background.
Trump’s tariffs against Canadian products underscore the risks of heavily relying on the United States as the primary destination for our oil and gas—Canada’s main exports. In 2024, nearly 96 per cent of oil exports and virtually all natural gas exports went to our southern neighbour. Clearly, Canada must diversify our energy export markets. Expanded pipelines to transport oil and gas, mostly produced in the Prairies, to coastal terminals would allow Canada’s energy sector to find new customers in Asia and Europe and become less reliant on the U.S. In fact, following the completion of the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion between Alberta and B.C. in May 2024, exports to non-U.S. destinations increased by almost 60 per cent.
However, Canada’s uncompetitive regulatory environment continues to create uncertainty and deter investment in the energy sector. According to a 2023 survey of oil and gas investors, 68 per cent of respondents said uncertainty over environmental regulations deters investment in Canada compared to only 41 per cent of respondents for the U.S. And 59 per cent said the cost of regulatory compliance deters investment compared to 42 per cent in the U.S.
When looking at B.C. specifically, investor perceptions are even worse. Nearly 93 per cent of respondents for the province said uncertainty over environmental regulations deters investment while 92 per cent of respondents said uncertainty over protected lands deters investment. Among all Canadian jurisdictions included in the survey, investors said B.C. has the greatest barriers to investment.
How can policymakers help make B.C. more attractive to investment?
At the federal level, the Carney government should scrap several Trudeau-era policies including Bill C-69 (which introduced vague criteria into energy project assessments including the effects on the “intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors”), Bill C-48 (which effectively banned large oil tankers off B.C.’s northern coast, limiting access to Asian markets), and the proposed cap on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the oil and gas sector (which will likely lead to a reduction in oil and gas production, decreasing the need for new infrastructure and, in turn, deterring investment in the energy sector).
At the provincial level, the Eby government should abandon its latest GHG reduction targets, which discourage investment in the energy sector. Indeed, in 2023 provincial regulators rejected a proposal from FortisBC, the province’s main natural gas provider, because it did not align with the Eby government’s emission-reduction targets.
Premier Eby is right—private investment should develop energy infrastructure. But to attract that investment, the province must have clear, predictable and competitive regulations, which balance environmental protection with the need for investment, jobs and widespread prosperity. To make B.C. and Canada a more appealing destination for investment, both federal and provincial governments must remove the regulatory barriers that keep capital away.
-
Business2 days ago
CBC six-figure salaries soar
-
Addictions2 days ago
Can addiction be predicted—and prevented?
-
Addictions2 days ago
More young men want to restrict pornography: survey
-
International2 days ago
Support for the Ukraine war continues because no one elected is actually in charge.
-
Business2 days ago
Trump slaps Brazil with tariffs over social media censorship
-
National2 days ago
How Long Will Mark Carney’s Post-Election Honeymoon Last? – Michelle Rempel Garner
-
espionage1 day ago
FBI’s Dan Bongino may resign after dispute about Epstein files with Pam Bondi
-
Brownstone Institute2 days ago
Net Zero: The Mystery of the Falling Fertility