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
Energy
Canada’s Most Impactful Energy Issues in 2024
From EnergyNow.ca
By Deidra Garyk
It feels like we are in the beginning of a cultural, social, and political disruption. The fear of saying the wrong thing and being cancelled is subsiding, resulting in robust debate about important topics. Public pushback against climate alarmism and energy misinformation is getting louder as more and more people join in the discussion.
I have enjoyed watching the increased skepticism and distrust towards “the settled Science” and the agreed upon narratives in favour of open, genuine, inquisitive conversations with a focus on practicable solutions. People are fed up with niche topics taking up a disproportionate amount of airtime in place of issues that are relevant to the majority of the country.
These are a few of the energy topics that I feel were most impactful for the year, with many having a lasting impact into 2025 and beyond.
SHIFTING POLITICAL WINDS
As Canada implements more and more regulatory hurdles for the oil and gas industry, the US re-elected pro-business, pro-oil, political outsider Donald Trump in a ‘uge win, with the majority of counties shifting from blue (Democrat) to red (Republican).
He isn’t even sworn in, and Trump is lighting things up via social media decrees. Using Truth Social, he announced that a 25 percent tariff will be placed on all goods coming from Canada and Mexico unless their respective borders are addressed to his satisfaction.
This will affect all Canadian businesses, not the least being those in the oil patch since 4 million barrels of oil per day go to the US, along with 7.9 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas. 77 percent of Canadian exports enter the US market; therefore, a 25 percent tariff is another obstacle affecting Canadian businesses’ competitiveness, which are already faced with various regulatory and taxation hurdles from Canadian governments, such as the carbon tax that increases each year.
Expect to see a shake-up in the Department of Energy and the narrative around climate and energy with the nomination of Chris Wright, CEO of Liberty Energy, for US Secretary of Energy. Chris has been a bold, unapologetic, pragmatic energy realist who cares about balancing environmental responsibility with resource development to help supply the world with reliable, affordable energy. His principled leadership has elevated him to one of the highest offices in the US.
Chris Wright is not afraid to go against the crowd. Liberty successfully challenged the SEC’s climate reporting rules and were instrumental in getting them halted. You can listen to his clarity of thought as he testifies on the rules before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Financial Services Committee (Chris’ testimony starts at 53:58).
As the first energy secretary to come from the energy sector, I anticipate that the government’s energy messaging and policy is going to shift away from climate alarmism to one of balance and open-mindedness. I hope he staffs the Department with people who understand energy and are not focused on misguided ideology. The ripple effects will be felt around the globe, and now is the time to embrace people’s scepticism and exhaustion with the constant drumbeat of fear about the use of hydrocarbons.
Much like the massive political shift voted in by the Americans, Canadians are also ready for a change. Prime Minister Trudeau and his Liberal party continue to lag in the polls, indicating voters’ displeasure with their policies. Poll aggregator 338Canada predicts a resounding majority for the federal Conservatives. Will we begin to see better energy policy after the next election?
RENEWABLES’ REALITY AND COOLING CLIMATE CLUBS
As a further demonstration of the shifting social and political winds, the net zero climate movement has seen major companies quell their public support for associated initiatives. The appetite for costly net zero commitments from voters who are struggling to pay their bills is waning, and politicians are hearing about it.
Many Republican-led states have pushed back on anti-hydrocarbon, net zero financing, and that has influenced how companies behave, starting with an exodus from Mark Carney’s net zero alliance, GFANZ (Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero). The Net-Zero Insurance Alliance (NZIA), a subset of GFANZ, has lost about half of its members since March 2023. Climate initiatives, like Climate Action 100+ and the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) are also losing members who are concerned about the consequences of their affiliation with anti-hydrocarbon groups who attempt to influence how businesses conduct their operations, sometimes through coercive involuntary membership and social shaming.
The energy transition continues to face opposition. In summer 2023, the Alberta government placed a temporary, six-month moratorium on renewable energy – wind and solar – projects in an attempt to balance development with agricultural and social concerns. The condemnation from environmental groups and the Alberta NDP was swift and loud, but not always truthful. On the other side were landowners who were concerned about the consequences of the projects on their communities. A documentary, Generation Green, by filmmaker Heidi McKillop, documents the push-pull of renewable project development in Alberta.
The new rules include development limits on certain agricultural lands, protection of viewscapes using buffer zones, and a requirement for an upfront bond to pay for future reclamation costs. Landowners and associations have praised the changes for addressing concerns and being balanced.
January’s polar vortex reconfirmed people’s willingness to rethink some large-scale industrial wind and solar installations. The extreme cold resulted in alerts warning of potential rotating blackouts, reminding Albertans about the need for reliable, affordable, on-demand energy.
At the same time that Canadians are questioning the reliability of our grids, the government went all in on their bet on the adoption of electric vehicles, generously giving EV battery makers billions of taxpayer-funded subsidies to set up shop in Canada. However, plans have hit speed bumps (pun intended).
Sweden’s Northvolt, the recipient of $7.3 billion in loans, equity stakes, and subsidies from Canada, recently filed for bankruptcy protection in the US. The company says this will not affect its Canadian plant, which is being used as collateral to secure bailout financing in the US. Meanwhile, other plants have been delayed. It seems like this may not have been a good “investment” for taxpayers.
Not that the Liberal government has been cautious with our money. Sustainable Development Technology Canada, colloquially referred to as the green slush fund, violated government funding rules and breached conflict-of-interest and ethics laws by improperly giving away millions of dollars. The scandal is so bad that the RCMP are investigating whether or not there was criminal wrongdoing; however, the government has been at a standstill for weeks because the Liberals refuse to hand over documents to help with the investigation.
COP29, THE FINANCE COP(S)
The COP conflab in Baku, Azerbaijan, in November didn’t skip a beat, seemingly ignorant of the shifting support for costly environmental action predicated on alarmism. Its 65,000 delegates waxed lyrical about the need to transfer funds from developed nations who are allegedly responsible for climate change to developing nations who are disproportionately victimized by changing weather conditions. What was dubbed “the New Collective Quantified Goal” (NCQG) on climate finance, governments tripled their handouts to US$300 billion annually by 2035, and got commits from public and private entities to increase that funding to US$1.3 trillion per year by 2035.
No one likes spending other people’s money quite like Minister Steven Guilbeault. You can find a daily outline of Canada’s COP commitments here.
We should have a new environment minister in time for COP30 in Brazil. And thankfully so, my wallet can’t take much more!
REGULATORY RAT’S NEST
In June, with the passage of Bill C-59, the Canadian Competition Act was amended with expanded provisions to address greenwashing complaints, including excessively punitive charges for breaking the new rules. The gag order has silenced oil and gas companies. Many, such as the Pathways Alliance of the six biggest oilsands producers, took down their websites immediately after the changes were announced. Others took down their ESG reports and environmental statements.
Even though oil and gas is likely to be disproportionately targeted and penalized, this Bill is agnostic; complaints can be made against all industries, and the unelected, unaccountable bureaucracy will decide who will and will not be investigated.
The fines are material. $750,000 for an individual’s first offence and $10 million per misrepresentation for a company’s first offense, up to 3% of annual worldwide gross revenues. Analysis from one of the Big Four consulting firms uncovered approximately one potential misrepresentation per page of an ESG report; some reports run close to 100 pages, so the consequences of a fine are impactful, hence the swift reaction from companies.
While business leaders navigate the landmines created by C-59, mandatory sustainability (i.e. ESG) reporting standards are expected to be rolled out next year, with the latest draft issued in the next week or two. The Canadian securities regulator has said they are focused on climate as the first reporting topic. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to expect the Canadian standards will be expanded as the international standards broaden to include biodiversity and human capital, and possibly “just transition”.
In addition to the requirements for publicly traded companies, the feds’ announced mandatory climate reporting for all large, Canadian incorporated companies, including private. Corporations will be forced to publicly disclose their environmental performance while also being hamstrung by the greenwashing changes.
If you feel like an Olympian high jumper, it may be because companies have to be to meet ever higher regulatory requirements set by our federal government. Just when companies think they’ve cleared the bar by voluntarily cutting emissions from production, the feds raise it one foot higher.
November 4 brought the long-awaited draft emissions cap for the oil and gas industry, targeting a 35 percent emissions reduction below 2019 levels by 2030. To say the industry is annoyed is an understatement, and rightfully so.
You can’t keep a good industry down, though! The Canadian Association of Energy Contractors (CAOEC) is forecasting drilling growth in 2025, meaning the industry and its jobs are maintaining a positive trajectory. There’s continued optimism in the patch thanks to increased egress capacity following the start-up of TMX and the near completion of LNG Canada. The CAOEC 2025 forecast anticipates a total of 6,604 wells drilled, a 5.2% increase in rig operating hours, and total jobs (direct and indirect) of 41,800 – all up from 2024. This is good for workers, families, communities, and the economy.
PIPELINE EGRESS PROGRESS
The long-delayed, over-cost Trans Mountain Expansion Project (TMX) became operational on May 1, 2024, proving that we can still build things in Canada. The pipeline allows for the transportation of up to 890,000 barrels per day of oil to the west coast, which has helped narrow the differential of Western Canada Select crude. Congrats to everyone who worked on the project!
Another project of significant national importance is the 670 kilometre Coastal GasLink (CGL), the first pipeline built to the west coast in 70 years. Although the historical pipeline was completed ahead of schedule in late 2023, its completion affected the drilling and development plans of companies this year as we wait for the start up of the LNG Canada facility in 2025. CGL is another reason for optimism.
PERSONAL HIGHLIGHTS AND MILESTONES
2024 marks 20 years in the patch for me. I’ve had the opportunity to work alongside many astute, industrious, innovative folks who have integrity and heart for their work and co-workers. I thank each of you for shaping my career.
In February, I moderated EnergyNow’s event The Road Ahead: Alberta Energy 2024 with Minister of Energy and Minerals Brian Jean and distinguished energy analyst Dave Yager. We sold out the Petroleum Club ballroom and filled the room with lively discussion and camaraderie.
I then had the honour of moderating the sold-out luncheon panel at the 2024 Lloydminster Heavy Oil Show in September, featuring Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe. They graciously answered my questions, including one on the Keystone Pipeline – the new “hot topic”.
Premier Smith predicted that a change in US government could see the project resurrected. The Republicans took control of the White House, the Senate, and the House, so we will see if the Premier gets her wish. You can listen to her full answer here and a shorter clip here.
As we close off another fortunate year, I wish all the best for 2025.
Deidra Garyk is the Founder and President of Equipois:ability Advisory, a consulting firm specializing in sustainability solutions. Over 20 years in the Canadian energy sector, Deidra held key roles, where she focused on a broad range of initiatives, from sustainability reporting to fostering collaboration among industry stakeholders through her work in joint venture contracts.
Outside of her professional commitments, Deidra is an energy advocate and a recognized thought leader. She is passionate about promoting balanced, fact-based discussions on energy policy, and sustainability. Through her research, writing, and public speaking, Deidra seeks to advance a more informed and pragmatic dialogue on the future of energy.
C2C Journal
Natural Gas – Not Nuclear – Is the Key to Powering North America’s Future
From the C2C Journal
By Gwyn Morgan
After decades on the outs with environmentalists and regulators, nuclear power is being heralded as a key component for a “net zero” future of clean, reliable energy. Its promise is likely to fall short, however, due to some hard realities. As North America grapples with the challenge of providing secure, affordable and sustainable energy amidst soaring electricity demand, it is time to accept this fact: natural gas remains the most practical solution for powering our grid and economy.
Nuclear power’s limitations are rooted in its costs, risks and delays. Even under ideal circumstances, building or restarting a nuclear facility is arduous. Consider Microsoft’s much-publicized plan to restart the long-dormant Unit 1 reactor at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania. This project is lauded as proof of an incipient “nuclear revival”, but despite leveraging existing infrastructure it will cost US$1.6 billion and take four years to bring online.
This is not a unique case. Across North America, nuclear energy projects face monumental lead times. The new generation of small modular reactors (SMRs), often touted as a game-changer, is still largely theoretical. In Canada – Alberta in particular – discussions around SMRs have been ongoing for years, with no concrete progress. The most optimistic projections estimate the first SMR in Western Canada might be operational by 2034.
The reality is that nuclear energy cannot scale quickly enough to meet urgent electricity needs. Canada’s power grid is already strained, and electricity demand is set to grow significantly, driven by electric vehicles and enormous data centres for AI applications. Nuclear power, even if expanded aggressively, cannot fill the gap within the necessary timeframes.
Natural gas, by contrast, is abundant, flexible, low-risk – and highly affordable. It accounts for 40 percent of U.S. electricity generation and plays a critical role in Canada’s energy mix. Unlike nuclear, natural gas infrastructure can be built rapidly, ensuring that new capacity comes online when it’s needed – not decades later. Gas-fired plants are cost-effective and capable of providing consistent, large-scale power while being capable of rapid starts and shut-downs, making them suitable for meeting both base-load and “peaking” power demands.
Climate-related concerns surrounding natural gas need to be put in perspective. Natural gas is the lowest-emission fossil fuel and produces less than half the carbon dioxide of coal per unit of energy output. It is also highly adaptable, supporting renewable energy integration by compensating for the intermittency of wind and solar power.
Nuclear energy advocates frequently highlight its zero-emission credentials, yet they overlook its immense challenges, not just the front-end problems of high cost and long lead times, but ongoing waste disposal and future decommissioning.
Natural gas, by comparison, presents fewer risks. Its production and distribution systems are well-established, and North America is uniquely positioned to benefit from the vast reserves underlying all three countries on the continent. Despite low prices and ever-increasing regulatory obstacles, Canada’s natural gas production has been setting new records.
Streamlining regulatory processes and expanding liquefied natural gas (LNG) export capacity would help revive Canada’s battered economy, with plenty of natural gas left over to help meet growing domestic electricity needs.
Critics argue that investing in natural gas is at odds with the “energy transition” to a glorious net zero future, but this oversimplifies the related challenges and ignores hard realities. By reducing reliance on dirtier fuels like coal, natural gas can help lower a country’s greenhouse gas emissions while providing the reliability needed to support economic growth and renewable energy integration.
Europe’s energy crisis following the recent reduction of Russian gas imports underscores natural gas’s vital role in maintaining reliable electricity supplies. As nations like Germany still phase out nuclear power due to the sheer blind ideology of their left-wing parties, they’re growing more dependent on natural gas to keep the lights (mostly) on and the factories (partially) humming.
Europe is already a destination for LNG exported from the U.S. Gulf Coast, and American LNG exports will soon resume growth under the incoming Trump Administration. Canada has the resources and know-how to similarly scale up its LNG exports; all we need is a supportive federal government.
For all its theoretical benefits, nuclear power remains impractical for meeting immediate and medium-term energy demands. Its high costs, lengthy timelines and significant remaining public opposition make it unlikely to serve as North America’s energy backbone.
Natural gas, on the other hand, is affordable, scalable and reliable. It is the fuel that powers industries, keeps homes warm and provides the stability our electricity grid needs – whether or not we ever transition to “net zero”. By prioritizing investment in natural gas infrastructure and expanding its use, we can meet today’s energy challenges head-on while laying the groundwork for tomorrow’s innovations.
The original, full-length version of this article was recently published in C2C Journal.
Gwyn Morgan is a retired business leader who was a director of five global corporations.
-
Economy11 hours ago
When Potatoes Become a Luxury: Canada’s Grocery Gouging Can’t Continue
-
Energy41 mins ago
Canada’s Most Impactful Energy Issues in 2024
-
COVID-196 hours ago
New Study Finds COVID-19 ‘Vaccination’ Doubles Risk of Post-COVID Death
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy12 hours ago
Global Warming Predictions of Doom Are Dubious
-
Health7 hours ago
Wellness Revolution
-
Censorship Industrial Complex13 hours ago
Here’s How The Trump Admin Could Help Crush The Censorship Industry
-
Brownstone Institute2 days ago
Opponents coordinating campaign to discredit RFK Jr.
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days ago
2024 In Review: The Year Woke Fever Broke