Economy
Canadian Natural Gas Exports Could Significantly Reduce Global Emissions

From the Fraser Institute
By Elmira Aliakbari and Julio Mejía
Doubling Canadian natural gas production and exporting to Asia could reduce global emissions by up to 630 million tonnes—nearly as much as Canada produces in a year
Canada could help significantly reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by increasing natural gas production and exporting the additional supply to Asia in the form of liquefied natural gas (LNG), according to a new study from the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think tank.
“As countries like China and India continue to burn coal for power, Canadian LNG offers a lower-emission alternative with the potential for major global impact,” said Elmira Aliakbari, director of natural resource studies at the Fraser Institute and coauthor of the study, Exporting Canadian LNG to the World: A Practical Solution for Reducing GHG Emissions
The study estimates the impact from Canada doubling its natural gas production and exporting to Asia to replace coal-fired power. In that scenario, global emissions could drop up to 630 million tonnes annually, which is the equivalent of removing approximately 137 million cars from the road. More specifically, replacing coal-fired power in China with Canadian LNG could cut emissions by up to 62 per cent for every unit of power produced.
“Focusing only on domestic emissions ignores Canada’s potential to support global climate goals,” said Aliakbari. “By displacing coal abroad, Canadian LNG can play a critical role in cutting total global emissions even if domestic emissions were to increase.”
However, regulatory uncertainty and a range of federal and provincial policies continue to hinder LNG development in Canada, despite strong global demand.
“Policymakers need to clear a path if Canada is going to play a meaningful role in reducing global emissions,” Aliakbari added.
Exporting Canadian LNG to the World: A Practical Solution for Reducing GHG Emissions
- Coal, a major source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, remains a leading energy source in many Asian countries, especially China and India. Some European countries have also turned back to coal as sanctions on Russian energy intensified following the invasion of Ukraine.
- As the world seeks practical solutions for reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, natural gas, with its lower carbon footprint, offers a promising alternative to coal.
- With abundant reserve, Canada is well positioned to help reduce global reliance on coal. By exporting Canadian liquified natural gas (LNG) and helping Asian and European countries reduce their reliance on coal, Canada can lower net global GHG emissions.
- Exporting LNG from Canada to China and substituting LNG for coal in the generation of power there can eliminate between 291 and 687 gCO₂eq per kWh of power generated, a reduction of between 34% and 62%.
- If Canada were to double its current natural gas production and export the additional supply to Asia as LNG to displace an equivalent amount of coal used to generate power, global GHG emissions could be reduced by up to 630 million tonnes annually, a significant reduction equivalent to 89% of Canada’s total GHG emissions.
- Canada enjoys several competitive advantages, including cooler temperatures that reduce liquefaction energy costs and a strategic location that offers shorter shipping routes to Europe and Asia compared to many other suppliers.
- Regulatory challenges and a mix of federal and provincial policies, however, have slowed or blocked LNG developments in Canada.
Business
‘Experts’ Warned Free Markets Would Ruin Argentina — Looks Like They Were Dead Wrong

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
The current state of Argentina’s economy is a far cry from what “experts” predicted when they warned that President Javier Milei’s pro-free market leadership would devastate the country.
The chainsaw-wielding libertarian rose to power on promises to slash government spending, implement free-market policies and lift strict currency controls to rescue a nation crippled by inflation, debt and entrenched poverty. Though the pundit class warned that Milei’s policies would spark an economic collapse, the results so far have been a rebuke to those warnings.
Just days before the November 2023 presidential election, 108 economists from around the world signed an open letter claiming that Milei’s “simple solutions” were “likely to cause more devastation in the real world in the short run, while severely reducing policy space in the long run.”
“His policies are poorly thought through. Far from building a consensus, he would struggle to govern,” The Economist’s editorial board wrote in a September 2023 piece describing “Javier Milei’s dangerous allure.”
Well over a year into Milei’s presidency, Argentina is showing its strongest economic performance in years. The country’s gross domestic product (GDP) jumped 7.7% in April compared to the same month in 2024, far exceeding expectations.
The GDP is expected to rise by 5.2% in 2025, compared to declines of 1.3% in 2024 and 1.9% in 2023, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
Inflation, a long-standing hallmark of Argentina’s economic dysfunction, dropped to 1.5% between April and May, reaching a five-year low. Annual inflation has plunged from 160.9% in November 2023 — just before Milei took office — to 43.5% in May.
Meanwhile, poverty rates have also declined sharply, falling from 52.9% in the first half of 2024 to 38.1% in the second half of the year.
Argentina’s rental housing supply also increased by 212% between December 2023 and June 2024, after Milei repealed the country’s rent control laws, according to the Cato Institute.
“Against the background of a difficult legacy of macroeconomic imbalances, Argentina has embarked on an ambitious reform process, starting with an unprecedented upfront fiscal adjustment. Reforms have started to pay off. Inflation has receded and the economy is set for a strong recovery,” the OECD noted in its new analysis of the Argentinian economy. “Maintaining the reform momentum will be key to restore confidence, boost investment and productivity growth.”
Milei — a self-described anarcho-capitalist — has been an ardent supporter of President Donald Trump’s efforts to downsize the U.S. government, including the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) push to cut spending.
“I come from a country that bought all of those stupid ideas that went from being one of the most affluent countries in the world to one to one of the [poorest],” Milei said in a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2024. “If you don’t fight for your freedom, they will drag you into misery … Don’t surrender.”
Automotive
Federal government should swiftly axe foolish EV mandate

From the Fraser Institute
Two recent events exemplify the fundamental irrationality that is Canada’s electric vehicle (EV) policy.
First, the Carney government re-committed to Justin Trudeau’s EV transition mandate that by 2035 all (that’s 100 per cent) of new car sales in Canada consist of “zero emission vehicles” including battery EVs, plug-in hybrid EVs and fuel-cell powered vehicles (which are virtually non-existent in today’s market). This policy has been a foolish idea since inception. The mass of car-buyers in Canada showed little desire to buy them in 2022, when the government announced the plan, and they still don’t want them.
Second, President Trump’s “Big Beautiful” budget bill has slashed taxpayer subsidies for buying new and used EVs, ended federal support for EV charging stations, and limited the ability of states to use fuel standards to force EVs onto the sales lot. Of course, Canada should not craft policy to simply match U.S. policy, but in light of policy changes south of the border Canadian policymakers would be wise to give their own EV policies a rethink.
And in this case, a rethink—that is, scrapping Ottawa’s mandate—would only benefit most Canadians. Indeed, most Canadians disapprove of the mandate; most do not want to buy EVs; most can’t afford to buy EVs (which are more expensive than traditional internal combustion vehicles and more expensive to insure and repair); and if they do manage to swing the cost of an EV, most will likely find it difficult to find public charging stations.
Also, consider this. Globally, the mining sector likely lacks the ability to keep up with the supply of metals needed to produce EVs and satisfy government mandates like we have in Canada, potentially further driving up production costs and ultimately sticker prices.
Finally, if you’re worried about losing the climate and environmental benefits of an EV transition, you should, well, not worry that much. The benefits of vehicle electrification for climate/environmental risk reduction have been oversold. In some circumstances EVs can help reduce GHG emissions—in others, they can make them worse. It depends on the fuel used to generate electricity used to charge them. And EVs have environmental negatives of their own—their fancy tires cause a lot of fine particulate pollution, one of the more harmful types of air pollution that can affect our health. And when they burst into flames (which they do with disturbing regularity) they spew toxic metals and plastics into the air with abandon.
So, to sum up in point form. Prime Minister Carney’s government has re-upped its commitment to the Trudeau-era 2035 EV mandate even while Canadians have shown for years that most don’t want to buy them. EVs don’t provide meaningful environmental benefits. They represent the worst of public policy (picking winning or losing technologies in mass markets). They are unjust (tax-robbing people who can’t afford them to subsidize those who can). And taxpayer-funded “investments” in EVs and EV-battery technology will likely be wasted in light of the diminishing U.S. market for Canadian EV tech.
If ever there was a policy so justifiably axed on its failed merits, it’s Ottawa’s EV mandate. Hopefully, the pragmatists we’ve heard much about since Carney’s election victory will acknowledge EV reality.
-
Fraser Institute2 days ago
Before Trudeau average annual immigration was 617,800. Under Trudeau number skyrocketted to 1.4 million annually
-
Crime2 days ago
“This is a total fucking disaster”
-
MAiD2 days ago
Canada’s euthanasia regime is already killing the disabled. It’s about to get worse
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy1 day ago
New Book Warns The Decline In Marriage Comes At A High Cost
-
Economy1 day ago
The stars are aligning for a new pipeline to the West Coast
-
Red Deer2 days ago
Join SPARC in spreading kindness by July 14th
-
Business2 days ago
Prime minister can make good on campaign promise by reforming Canada Health Act
-
National1 day ago
Liberal ‘Project Fear’ A Longer Con