Ottawa’s emissions cap—all pain, no gain

From the Fraser Institute

By: Julio Mejía, Elmira Aliakbari and Tegan Hill

According to a recent analysis by the Conference Board of Canada think-tank, the cap could reduce Canada’s GDP by up to $1 trillion between 2030 and 2040, eliminate up to 151,000 jobs by 2030, reduce federal government revenue by up to $151 billion between 2030 and 2040, and reduce Alberta government revenue by up to $127 billion over the same period.

According to an announcements last week by Premier Danielle Smith, the Alberta government will use the Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act to challenge Ottawa’s proposal to cap greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas sector at 35 per cent below 2019 levels by 2030.

Premier Smith, who said the cap will harm the economy and represents an overstep of federal authority, also plans to prevent emissions data from individual oil and gas companies from being shared with Ottawa. While the federal government said the cap is necessary to fight climate change, several studies suggest the cap will impose significant costs on Canadians without yielding detectable environmental benefits.

According to a recent report by Deloitte, a leading audit and consulting firm, the cap will force Canadian firms to curtail oil production by 626,000 barrels per day by 2030 or by approximately 10.0 per cent of the expected production—and curtail gas production by approximately 12.0 per cent.

Deloitte estimates that Alberta will be hit hardest, with 3.6 per cent less investment, almost 70,000 fewer jobs, and a 4.5 per cent decrease in the province’s economic output (i.e. GDP) by 2040. Ontario will lose 15,000 jobs and $2.3 billion from its economy by 2040. And Quebec will lose more than 3,000 jobs and $0.4 billion from its economy during the same period.

Overall, the country will experience an economic loss equivalent to 1.0 per cent of the value of the entire economy (GDP), translating into lower wages, the loss of nearly 113,000 jobs and a 1.3 per cent reduction in government tax revenues. Canada’s inflation-adjusted GDP growth in 2023 was a paltry 1.3 per cent, so a 1 per cent reduction would be a significant economic loss.

Deloitte’s findings echo previous studies. According to a recent analysis by the Conference Board of Canada think-tank, the cap could reduce Canada’s GDP by up to $1 trillion between 2030 and 2040, eliminate up to 151,000 jobs by 2030, reduce federal government revenue by up to $151 billion between 2030 and 2040, and reduce Alberta government revenue by up to $127 billion over the same period.

Similarly, another recent study published by the Fraser Institute found that the cap would reduce production and exports, leading to at least $45 billion in lost economic activity in 2030 alone, accompanied by a substantial drop in government revenue.

Crucially, these huge economic costs to Canadians will come without any discernable environmental benefits. Even if Canada entirely shut down its oil and gas industry by 2030, eliminating all GHG emissions from the sector, the resulting reduction in global GHG emissions would amount to a mere four-tenths of one per cent with virtually no impact on the climate or any detectable environmental, health or safety benefits.

Given the demand for fossil fuels, constraining oil and gas production and exports in Canada would likely merely shift production to other countries with lower environmental and human rights standards such as Iran, Russia and Venezuela. Consequently, global GHG emissions would increase, not decrease. No other major oil and gas-producing country has imposed a similar cap on its leading export sector.

The Trudeau government’s proposed cap, which still must pass the House and Senate, would further strain an already struggling Canadian economy, and to make matters worse, do virtually nothing to improve the environment. The government should cancel the cap plan given the economic costs and nonexistent environmental benefits.

Julio Mejía

Policy Analyst

Elmira Aliakbari

Director, Natural Resource Studies, Fraser Institute

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute

Up Next

Report: Oil sands, Montney growth key to meet rising world energy demand

Don't Miss

Luxury Vancouver Homes at the Center of $100M CAD Loan and Chinese Murder Saga

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

CIA Offers To Payout Entire Agency: REPORT

Daily Caller / 5 hours ago

‘Extraordinary’: El Salvador Agrees To Take In Any Gangbangers, Convicted Criminals Deported Out Of US

Daily Caller / 5 hours ago

Biden Admin Filled Terrorist Coffers With Over $1,300,000,000 Before Trump Took Wrecking Ball To Foreign Aid

Business

Trudeau still refusing to recall Parliament despite ongoing Trump tariff threats

Published on February 4, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

While Trump has delayed imposing tariffs for 30 days, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre is demanding Justin Trudeau recall Parliament as the threat of a trade war looms.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is still refusing to reopen Parliament despite the growing tensions between Canada and the United States.

This week, Canadians pleaded with Trudeau to resume Parliament following the now-delayed 25% tariffs on Canadian exports that were set to be implemented on Tuesday by U.S. President Donald Trump. Despite the economic threat, Trudeau continued to deny the need for the reopening of the legislature.

“This is a moment where we need to set aside our differences and focus on delivering for Canadians, standing up for Canadians,” Trudeau told reporters on Saturday.

“We’re going through a difficult time right now,” he continued. “Emotions may run high here and there.”

“Will you recall Parliament?” asked a reporter.

“We have the tools,” replied Trudeau, suggesting such a recall is unnecessary.

On Saturday, Trump said an unprecedented 25 percent tariff on all imports from Canada and Mexico would soon be coming. Canadian oil and gas exports, as well as electricity exports that the U.S. imports in abundance, would be subject to a 10 percent tariff. Of note is that Trump enacted only a 10 percent tariff on goods from China.

Fortunately for Canadians, on Monday the country was given a 30-day reprieve from the tariffs by Trump after Trudeau promised to increase border security and crack down on fentanyl at the border.

Trudeau noted that Canada was implementing a “$1.3 billion border plan — reinforcing the border with new choppers, technology and personnel, enhanced coordination with our American partners, and increased resources to stop the flow of fentanyl.”

“In addition, Canada is making new commitments to appoint a Fentanyl czar, we will list cartels as terrorists, ensure 24/7 eyes on the border, launch a Canada- U.S. Joint Strike Force to combat organized crime, fentanyl and money laundering,” Trudeau said.

Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre pointed out that while Canadians are relieved to hear the tariffs will be paused, Parliament must resume so Canada can plan their response after the 30-day reprieve.

“Like Canadians across the country, Conservatives are relieved to hear that there will be a one month pause on tariffs from the United States that would have hurt workers, families and businesses on both sides of the border,” he wrote on X.

“But this is not a time to sit back. We must urgently work to strengthen Canada’s economy and do everything we can to ensure these tariffs are never brought in,” Poilievre continued.

“Liberals must recall Parliament NOW and put country over Party so that we can put Canada First,” he declared.

Banks

The Great Exodus from the Net Zero Banking Alliance has arrived

Published on February 3, 2025

Todayville

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.