Business
Biden Admin Reportedly Throws Support Behind UN Push To Decrease Global Plastic Production
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Nick Pope
“If the Biden-Harris Administration wants to meet its sustainable development and climate change goals, the world will need to rely on plastic more, not less. Plastics enable solar and wind energy, are critical to modern healthcare, deliver clean drinking water, reduce home, building and transportation energy needs, and help prevent food wastage.”
The Biden administration is reportedly now in favor of a United Nations-led effort to reduce global plastic production, according to multiple reports.
U.S. officials now reportedly support a developing U.N. treaty that would aim to impose a cap on plastic production worldwide, a shift from its earlier position of allowing countries to determine production levels for themselves, sources familiar with the matter told Reuters and Politico. Biden administration officials have also reportedly signaled that they will support measures to target particular types of plastics and establish a list of specific chemicals to address with new, uniform obligations.
Senior White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) official Jonathan Black reportedly informed industry stakeholders and environmental activists of the shift in position during two private meetings that were closed to the media, according to Politico. Reuters first reported on the administration’s pivot on the UN plastic treaty on Wednesday, and CEQ spokesperson Justin Weiss confirmed the outlet’s reporting in subsequent correspondence with Politico.
It is currently unclear exactly how such a treaty would actually be enforced if adopted.
Prior to the administration’s position shift, U.S. officials had endorsed a more “flexible” approach rather than a global cap on plastic production and had not offered much indication as to whether or not the Biden administration supported an effort to crack down on specific chemicals, according to Politico. Negotiations on the U.N. treaty are still ongoing and are expected to conclude at a November conference in Busan, South Korea; that meeting will take place after Nov. 5’s U.S. presidential election, according to Reuters.
The Biden administration’s reported change of position on the matter now aligns the U.S. with countries like South Korea, the European Union’s member states, Canada and Peru, according to Reuters. Nations that are major petrochemical producers, like China and Saudi Arabia, have attempted to block further discussions about a possible cap on global plastic production and instead want countries to focus on less divisive initiatives, such as improving waste management.
“As the White House caves to the wishes of extreme NGO groups, it does a disservice towards our mutual ambition for a cleaner, lower carbon future where used plastic doesn’t become pollution in the first place,” Chris Jahn, president and CEO of the American Chemistry Council, said of the pivot in a Wednesday statement. “If the Biden-Harris Administration wants to meet its sustainable development and climate change goals, the world will need to rely on plastic more, not less. Plastics enable solar and wind energy, are critical to modern healthcare, deliver clean drinking water, reduce home, building and transportation energy needs, and help prevent food wastage.”
Meanwhile, Greenpeace — a major environmental group — is pleased to see the Biden administration harden its stance on a global plastic production cap.
“This shift in U.S. policy is crucial for creating the unified approach needed to tackle the plastics crisis,” Greenpeace USA Oceans Campaign Director John Hocevar said in a Wednesday statement. “By supporting global criteria for phasing out harmful chemicals and avoidable plastic products, the U.S. is helping to ensure that the treaty will have the teeth needed to protect families and ecosystems alike. It is a welcome signal that they are finally listening to the demands of the American people, almost two-thirds of whom support a Global Plastics Treaty that would ban single-use plastic packaging.”
Neither the White House nor the CEQ responded immediately to requests for comment.
From Pierre Poilievre
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Ian Madsen
Canada’s growing LNG exports are opening global markets and reducing dependence on U.S. prices, if Ottawa allows the pipelines and export facilities needed to reach those markets
Canada’s LNG advantage is clear, but federal bottlenecks still risk turning a rare opening into another missed opportunity
Canada is finally in a position to profit from global LNG demand. But that opportunity will slip away unless Ottawa supports the pipelines and export capacity needed to reach those markets.
Most major LNG and pipeline projects still need federal impact assessments and approvals, which means Ottawa can delay or block them even when provincial and Indigenous governments are onside. Several major projects are already moving ahead, which makes Ottawa’s role even more important.
The Ksi Lisims floating liquefaction and export facility near Prince Rupert, British Columbia, along with the LNG Canada terminal at Kitimat, B.C., Cedar LNG and a likely expansion of LNG Canada, are all increasing Canada’s export capacity. For the first time, Canada will be able to sell natural gas to overseas buyers instead of relying solely on the U.S. market and its lower prices.
These projects give the northeast B.C. and northwest Alberta Montney region a long-needed outlet for its natural gas. Horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing made it possible to tap these reserves at scale. Until 2025, producers had no choice but to sell into the saturated U.S. market at whatever price American buyers offered. Gaining access to world markets marks one of the most significant changes for an industry long tied to U.S. pricing.
According to an International Gas Union report, “Global liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade grew by 2.4 per cent in 2024 to 411.24 million tonnes, connecting 22 exporting markets with 48 importing markets.” LNG still represents a small share of global natural gas production, but it opens the door to buyers willing to pay more than U.S. markets.
LNG Canada is expected to export a meaningful share of Canada’s natural gas when fully operational. Statistics Canada reports that Canada already contributes to global LNG exports, and that contribution is poised to rise as new facilities come online.
Higher returns have encouraged more development in the Montney region, which produces more than half of Canada’s natural gas. A growing share now goes directly to LNG Canada.
Canadian LNG projects have lower estimated break-even costs than several U.S. or Mexican facilities. That gives Canada a cost advantage in Asia, where LNG demand continues to grow.
Asian LNG prices are higher because major buyers such as Japan and South Korea lack domestic natural gas and rely heavily on imports tied to global price benchmarks. In June 2025, LNG in East Asia sold well above Canadian break-even levels. This price difference, combined with Canada’s competitive costs, gives exporters strong margins compared with sales into North American markets.
The International Energy Agency expects global LNG exports to rise significantly by 2030 as Europe replaces Russian pipeline gas and Asian economies increase their LNG use. Canada is entering the global market at the right time, which strengthens the case for expanding LNG capacity.
As Canadian and U.S. LNG exports grow, North American supply will tighten and local prices will rise. Higher domestic prices will raise revenues and shrink the discount that drains billions from Canada’s economy.
Canada loses more than $20 billion a year because of an estimated $20-per-barrel discount on oil and about $2 per gigajoule on natural gas, according to the Frontier Centre for Public Policy’s energy discount tracker. Those losses appear directly in public budgets. Higher natural gas revenues help fund provincial services, health care, infrastructure and Indigenous revenue-sharing agreements that rely on resource income.
Canada is already seeing early gains from selling more natural gas into global markets. Government support for more pipelines and LNG export capacity would build on those gains and lift GDP and incomes. Ottawa’s job is straightforward. Let the industry reach the markets willing to pay.
Ian Madsen is a senior policy analyst at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
Media bound to pay the price for selling their freedom to (selectively) offend
Sometimes An Ingrate Nation Pt. 2: The Great One Makes His Choice
Recent price declines don’t solve Toronto’s housing affordability crisis
From Exception to Routine. Why Canada’s State-Assisted Suicide Regime Demands a Human-Rights Review
-
COVID-191 day agoUniversity of Colorado will pay $10 million to staff, students for trying to force them to take COVID shots
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day agoIntegration Or Indignation: Whose Strategy Worked Best Against Trump?
-
Focal Points2 days agoCommon Vaccines Linked to 38-50% Increased Risk of Dementia and Alzheimer’s
-
espionage1 day agoWestern Campuses Help Build China’s Digital Dragnet With U.S. Tax Funds, Study Warns
-
Opinion2 days agoThe day the ‘King of rock ‘n’ roll saved the Arizona memorial
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day agoWayne Gretzky’s Terrible, Awful Week.. And Soccer/ Football.
-
Agriculture1 day agoCanada’s air quality among the best in the world
-
Health1 day agoCDC Vaccine Panel Votes to End Universal Hep B Vaccine for Newborns