Energy
Rising cost of living influencing women’s opinions on Canadian oil and gas
News release from CanadaPoweredByWomen.ca
New survey shows engaged Canadian women prioritize standard of living along with continued development of Canadian energy
The rising cost of living may be shifting national opinions about Canadian oil and gas among informed and engaged Canadian women, according to a new survey released by Canada Powered by Women (CPW). The Leger survey reveals a significant majority of engaged Canadian women (78 per cent) support the production and distribution of Canadian oil and gas, and the work the oil and gas industry is doing with innovation and technology to reduce Canadian and global emissions, if it means prioritizing their standard of living. More than half say they are not willing to sacrifice their own prosperity to reduce global emissions by transforming away from oil and gas.
The survey data illustrates that women are overwhelmingly united in recognizing the links between a thriving energy sector in Canada, including the continued production of oil and gas, a prosperous economy and an affordable standard of living.
“The survey results highlight the ongoing challenges that women across the country are facing when it comes to balancing affordability and sharing their opinions on energy development,” said Canada Powered by Women Board Chair, Sue Riddell Rose. “This further strengthens the critical need for a platform like Canada Powered by Women that elevates the voice of women, providing them a channel to participate in constructive conversation surrounding one of the most important elements of our lives and our economy – energy.”
Despite prioritizing their standard of living, engaged Canadian women very much care about the environment. Most surveyed women across the country stated they want to see a focus on LNG and an energy mix of renewables and fossil fuels, to secure energy independence and boost the Canadian economy while reducing emissions at the same time.
“The participation of women in the ongoing dialogue is an essential step towards a more sustainable and prosperous future for everyone,” said Tracey Bodnarchuk, CEO of Canada Powered by Women. “This is why we’re continuing to build on the work we began earlier this year. Seventy-six per cent of the women we surveyed want to have a voice about the future of energy in Canada. By creating informed, trusted spaces and facilitating bold conversations, we listen and work to amplify the voices of Canadian women in our communities and boardrooms.”
“The survey findings make it clear that Canada’s energy industry is supported by engaged women, especially when they connect the dots with the economy and their own standard of living,” said Paige Schoenfeld, Senior Vice President at Leger. “Measuring shifts in attitudes allows us to gain a deeper understanding of the priorities of the women we’re talking to, and this can further help advance the important conversations on energy transformation that are already happening.”
See our research highlights here.
About Canada Powered by Women
In 2019, a group of women with backgrounds in various sectors – including energy, founded Canada Powered by Women to put the spotlight on an important gap – women’s voices in the energy transformation conversation and the balance of energy security, the environment and the economy. The organization aims to understand what women across the country are thinking and feeling and provides opportunities to bring women together to find common ground on energy transformation – to be a vehicle for the voices of many women across Canada in a manner that is unignorable and has real impact.
Canada Powered by Women facilitates discussions amongst women across the country, creating a trusted place to talk about complex issues that matter, a place to listen and a place to raise awareness and create positive change for all Canadians. Learn more at canadapoweredbywomen.ca
From the Fraser Institute
Even if Canada eliminated all its GHG emissions expected in 2030 due to the federal cap, the emission reduction would equal only four-tenths of one per cent of global emissions—a reduction unlikely to have any impact on the trajectory of the climate in any detectable manner or produce any related environmental, health or safety benefits.
After considerable waiting, the Trudeau government released on Monday draft regulations to cap greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from Canada’s oil and gas producers.
The proposed regulations would set a cap on GHG emissions equivalent to 35 per cent of the emissions produced in 2019 and create a GHG emissions “cap and trade” system to enable oil and gas producers (who cannot reduce emissions enough to avoid the cap) to buy credits from other producers able to meet the cap. Producers unable to meet the cap will also be able to obtain emission credits (of up to 20 per cent of their needed emission reductions) by investing in decarbonization programs or by buying emission “offsets” in Canada’s carbon markets.
According to the government, the cap will “cap pollution, drive innovation, and create jobs in the oil and gas industry.” But in reality, while the cap may well cap pollution and drive some innovation, according to several recent analyses it won’t create jobs in the oil and gas industry and will in fact kill many jobs.
For example, the Conference Board of Canada think-tank estimates that the cap would reduce Canada’s GDP by up to $1 trillion between 2030 and 2040, kill up to 151,300 jobs across Canada by 2030, and national economic growth from 2023 to 2030 would slow from 15.3 per cent to 14.3 per cent.
Not surprisingly, Alberta would be hardest hit. According to the Board, from 2023 to 2030, the province’s economic growth would fall from an estimated 17.8 per cent to 13.3 per cent and employment growth would fall from 15.8 per cent to 13.6 per cent over the same period. Alberta government revenues from the sector would decline by 4.5 per cent in 2030 compared to a scenario without the cap. As a result, Alberta government revenues would be $4.5 billion lower in nominal terms in fiscal year 2030/31. And between 54,000 to 91,500 of Canada’s job losses would occur in Alberta.
Another study by Deloitte estimates that, due to the federal cap, Alberta will see 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 would lose more than 15,000 jobs and $2.3 billion from its economy by 2040. And Quebec would lose more than 3,000 jobs and $0.4 billion from its economy during the same period.
Overall, according to Deloitte, Canada would experience an economic loss equivalent to 1.0 per cent of GDP, translating into lower wages, the loss of nearly 113,000 jobs and a 1.3 per cent reduction in government tax revenues. (For context, Canada’s economic growth in 2023 was only 1.1 per cent.)
And what will Canadians get for all that economic pain?
In my study published last year by the Fraser Institute, I found that, even if Canada eliminated all its GHG emissions expected in 2030 due to the federal cap, the emission reduction would equal only four-tenths of one per cent of global emissions—a reduction unlikely to have any impact on the trajectory of the climate in any detectable manner or produce any related environmental, health or safety benefits.
Clearly, the Trudeau government’s new proposed emissions cap on the oil and gas sector will impose significant harms on Canada’s economy, Canadian workers and our quality of life—and hit Alberta with a wallop. And yet, as a measure intended to avert harmful climate change, it’s purely performative (like many of the government’s other GHG regulations) and will generate too little emission reductions to have any meaningful impact on the climate.
In a world of rational policy development, where the benefits of government regulations are supposed to exceed their costs, policymakers would never consider this proposed cap. The Trudeau government will submit the plan to Parliament, and if the cap becomes law, it will await some other future government to undo the damage inflicted on Canadians and their families.
Author:
From the Canadian Energy Center
By Grady Semmens$923 million spent cleaning up inactive wells, sites and pipelines in 2023
As a business owner, Ryan Smith values few things more than predictability when it comes to the oil and gas market and the demand for his company’s services.
That’s why knowing that next year in Alberta, the regulator requires at least $750 million worth of work cleaning up inactive oil and gas wells and other legacy energy infrastructure is tremendously helpful for the CEO of Calgary-based 360 Engineering & Environmental Consulting.
“Having a minimum spend in place for the province makes the market more predictable and consistent, which in turn helps our clients and our business plan for the future, which is a good thing,” says Smith, whose company has completed more than 5,000 site closure activities in Canada and internationally since 2015.
“Site closure has really emerged as a growth market over the last decade, especially in Western Canada where the regulatory systems for oil and gas are more advanced than anywhere else we are exposed to. It is an integral part of the energy lifecycle, and if it is done well it adds a lot of value to the industry.”
The Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) introduced an industry-wide minimum “closure” spending requirement in 2022, part of Alberta’s Inventory Reduction Program to accelerate the remediation of inactive oil and gas wells, facilities and pipelines across the province.
The mandatory quota determines the minimum level of work a company must conduct primarily to decommission and reclaim a proportion of its inactive inventory.
Inactive wells are defined as those that have not been used for six months or a year, depending on what they are being used for. When a company decides that they will not reactivate an inactive well they decommission it through a process called abandonment.
A well is considered successfully abandoned after it is cleaned, plugged with cement, cut to a minimum of one meter below the surface and covered with a vented cap. After abandonment comes remediation and reclamation, where the land around the well is returned to the equivalent of its original state.
The first two years under the new rules saw Alberta’s energy industry significantly exceed the minimum closure requirements.
In 2022, companies spent more than $696 million, about 65 per cent more than the initial threshold of $422 million. The AER increased the minimum spend to $700 million in 2023, which producers surpassed by 22 per cent with total expenditures of $923 million.
The 2024 minimum remains at $700 million, while in July the regulator announced that the minimum spend for 2025 was raised to $750 million.
This closure work does not include remediation of oil sands mining sites, which is handled under the Mine Financial Security Program, nor does it include the closure of orphan wells (wells without a legal owner) managed by the industry-funded Orphan Well Association.
Gurpreet Lail, CEO of Enserva, an industry association representing energy service companies, suppliers and manufacturers, says there was an initial rush of closure work when the quotas were first put in place, but activity has since become more even as companies develop long-term closure plans.
“A lot of the low-lying fruit has been taken care of, so now companies are working on more complex closure files that take more time and more money,” Lail says.
Facility owners say that Alberta’s rules provide direction for planning closure and remediation work, which in the past may have been put on hold due to the ups and downs of the oil and gas market.
“When commodity prices are up, everyone is focused on drilling more wells and when prices are down, budgets are strained for doing work that doesn’t bring in revenue. Having a minimum spend makes sure closure work happens every year and ensures there is longer-term progress,” says Deborah Borthwick, asset retirement coordinator for Birchcliff Energy, an oil and natural gas producer focused in Alberta.
Over the last few years, Birchcliff has budgeted more than $3 million for annual facility closure work, far above its required minimum spend.
The company completed 11 well abandonments and decommissioned 23 facilities and pipelines in 2022, according to its latest environmental, social and governance report.
Borthwick says having the closure quota for 2025 already set has allowed it to plan ahead and line up the necessary service companies well in advance for next year’s remediation work.
They Are Scrubbing the Internet Right Now
Hat Trick: Nick Bosa’s Photo Bomb Re-Ignites The Colin Kaepernick Fury
Dr John Campbell urges a complete moratorium on mRNA vaccines
CBS News insider says the network knew the Hunter Biden Laptop was verified
-
RCMP2 days agoDrugs, gun, money seized as RCMP arrest 2 in Red Deer
-
Agriculture2 days ago2024 harvest wrap-up: Minister Sigurdson
-
Alberta2 days ago39 percent increase in funding for RCMP instigates discussion about future policing for rural Alberta
-
Health2 days agoHow the Trump-RFK Jr. coalition could realign US politics against Big Pharma and Big Food
-
Business1 day agoCanada’s struggle against transnational crime & money laundering
-
Red Deer2 days agoChamber urges city council to look harder at cutting costs
-
Addictions2 days agoAlberta closing Red Deer’s only overdose prevention site in favor of recovery model
-
Energy2 days agoEnergy Effect: Trump’s big win fuels talk of policy actions