Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Energy

Canada’s Most Impactful Energy Issues in 2024

Published

17 minute read

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 allianceGFANZ (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.

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

More from this author

Economy

Latest dire predictions about Carney’s emissions cap

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Kenneth P. Green

According to a new report from the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO), the federal government’s proposed oil and gas emissions cap will curtail production, cost a not-so-small fortune and kill a lot of jobs. This news will surprise absolutely no one who’s been paying attention to Ottawa’s regulatory crusade against greenhouse gases over the past few years.

To be precise, according to the PBO’s report of March 2025, under the proposed cap, production for upstream industry oil and gas subsectors must be reduced by 4.9 per cent relative to their projected baseline levels out to 2030/32. Further, required reduction in upstream oil and gas sector production levels will lower GDP (inflation-adjusted) in Canada by an estimated 0.39 per cent in 2032 and reduce nominal GDP by $20.5 billion. And achieving the legal upper bound will reduce economy-wide employment in Canada by an estimated 40,300 jobs and fulltime equivalents by 54,400 in 2032.

The federal government is contesting the PBO’s estimates, with Jonathan Wilkinson, federal minister of Energy and Natural Resources of Canada, claiming that the “PBO wasted their time and taxpayer dollars by analyzing a made up scenario.” Of course, one might observe that using “made up scenarios” is what making forecasts of regulatory costs is all about. No one, including the government, has a crystal ball that can show the future.

But the PBO’s projected costs are only the latest analysis. 2024 report by Deloitte (and commissioned by the federal Treasury Board) found that the proposed “cap results in a significant decline in GDP in Alberta and the Rest of Canada.” The main impacts of the cap are lower oil and gas activity and output, reduced employment, reduce income, lower returns on investment and a higher price of oil.

Consequently, according to the report, by 2040 Alberta’s GDP will be lower by 4.5 per cent and Canada’s GDP will be lower by 1 per cent compared to a no-cap baseline. Cumulatively over the 2030 to 2040 timeline, Deloitte estimated that real GDP in Alberta will be $191 billion lower, and real GDP in the Rest of Canada will be $91 billion lower compared to the no-cap (business as usual) baseline (in 2017 dollars). Employment also took a hit in the Deloitte report, which found the level of employment in 2040 will be lower by 2 per cent in Alberta and 0.5 per cent in the Rest of Canada compared to a no-cap baseline. Alberta will lose an estimated 55,000 jobs on average (35,000 in the Rest of Canada) between 2030 and 2040 under the cap.

Another 2024 report by the Conference Board of Canada estimated that the “oil and gas productions cuts forecasted lead to a one-time, permanent decline in total Canadian real GDP of between 0.9 per cent (most likely outcome) to 1.6 per cent (least likely outcome) relative to the baseline in 2030. This is equivalent to a loss of $22.8 to $40.4 billion (in 2012 dollars)… In Alberta, real GDP would fall by between $16.3 and $28.5 billion—or by 3.8 per cent and 6.7 per cent, respectively.”

Finally, a report by S&P Global Commodity Insights (and commissioned by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers) estimated that a “production cut driven by a stringent 40% emission cap could cause $75 billion lower upstream spend and $247 billion lower GDP contribution (vs. a no cap reference case).”

All of these estimates, by respected economic analysis firms, raise serious questions about the government’s own 2024 Regulatory Impact Analysis, which suggested that the proposed regulations will only have incremental impacts on the economy—namely, $3.3 billion (plus administrative costs to industry and the government, estimated to be $219 million). According to the analysis, the “proposed Regulations are expected to result in a net decrease in labour expenditure in the oil and gas sector of about 1.6% relative to the baseline estimate of employment income over the 2030 to 2032 time frame.”

But according to the new PBO report, the costs of the government’s proposed cap on greenhouse gas emission from Canada’s oil and gas sector will be costly and destructive to the sector, it’s primary province (Alberta), and its employees in Alberta and across Canada. All this in the face of likely-resurgent U.S. oil and gas production.

Now that policymakers in Ottawa have seemingly recognized the unpopularity of the consumer carbon tax, a good next step would be to scrap the cap.

Continue Reading

Economy

Welcome to the Era of Energy Realism

Published on

The Honest Broker Roger Pielke Jr.

Every year for the past 15 years, JP Morgan publishes an outstanding annual energy report by Michael Cembalest. Last week JP Morgan published its 2025 edition and today I share five important figures from the many in the report, which I highly recommend.

Cembalest’s top line:

[A]fter $9 trillion globally over the last decade spent on wind, solar, electric vehicles, energy storage, electrified heat and power grids, the renewable transition is still a linear one; the renewable share of final energy consumption is slowly advancing at 0.3%–0.6% per year.

You can see that in the figure below — my graph using data from the 2024 EI Statistical Review of World Energy — which shows the proportion of global energy consumption from all carbon-free sources. Since 2012, that proportion has increased from about 14% to a bit over 18%. Exactly as Cembaest observes — that increase has been linear. At that rate of change the world would hit 100% carbon-free sometime after 2200.

Let’s take a look at some of the figures I found most interesting in the JP Morgan Report.

Solar Reality Check

“. . . when you boil it all down, solar power accounts for ~2% of global final energy consumption, a figure we expect to reach 4.5% by 2027. Even if these solar trends continue into the 2030’s, human prosperity will be inextricably linked to affordable natural gas and other fossil fuels for many years.

Human prosperity, in places where it thrives, relies heavily on steel, cement, ammonia/fertilizer, plastics, glass, chemicals and other industrial products which are energy- intensive to produce. . . these products currently rely on fossil fuels for 80%-85% of their energy.

And remember, prosperity itself is energy-intensive: among the tightest relationships in economics is the connection between a country’s per capita GDP and its per capita energy consumption.”

I remain very bullish on solar, but it won’t displace much fossil fuels anytime soon.

Electrify Everything is Proceeding Slowly

“Remember this key aspect of the energy transition: until an energy use is electrified, it’s hard to decarbonize it using green grid electrons. And while grid decarbonization is continuing at a steady pace, the US has made little progress increasing the electricity share of final energy consumption for the reasons discussed in last year’s “Electravision” piece. One major obstacle: transmission line growth is stuck in a rut, way below DoE targets for 2030 and 2035. Another obstacle: shortages of transformer equipment, whose delivery times have extended from 4-6 weeks in 2019 to 2-3 years. . . “

The panel on the rgiht above indicates that the U.S. was never going to meet the emissions reduction targets of the Biden Administration — which has been clear for several years now.

“The US is not unique with respect to the slow pace of electrification, although a few countries are making faster progress. Over the last decade China made the largest advance, bringing it in line with the OECD.

Part of the challenge may simply be the long useful lives of existing industrial plants, furnaces, boilers and vehicles. In other words, electrification might accelerate as their useful lives are exhausted. But the high cost of electricity compared to natural gas (particularly in places without a carbon tax) is another impediment to electrification that is not easy to solve since this ratio reflects relative total costs of production and distribution.”

(In order to coerce users, a carbon tax is necessary)

Energy Dependence and Independence

“The US has achieved US energy independence for the first time in 40 years while Europe and China compete for global energy resources. China’s imports are similar to Europe in energy terms but half as much as a share of domestic energy consumption. Energy intensive manufacturing has shifted to the developing world since the mid 1990’s. China is negotiating with Russia and Turkmenistan regarding future gas pipeline projects. China has the benefit of time: China gas imports are projected to reach 250 bcm by 2030 vs 170 bcm in 2023, almost all of which can be met by already contracted supplies. What was Taiwan thinking by shutting down nuclear power which has fallen from 50% to 5% of generation? Taiwan is now one of the most energy dependent countries in the world, resulting in rising economic costs if China were to impose a blockade.”

The Trump administration’s trade war with Canada risks upending North America’s energy dominance. What can they be thinking?

Fossil Fuels Falling and Rising

“Fossil fuel shares of final energy are falling faster in China, Japan and Europe than in the US. Growth in fossil fuel consumption is slowing but no clear sign of a peak on a global basis. Hydraulically fractured oil and gas account for 60%+ of US primary energy consumption. Global LNG export capacity is set to expand by one third by 2030. Coal consumption is roughly flat in final energy terms as rising EM consumption offsets falling OECD consumption.”

US Secretary of Energy Chris Wright spoke at an energy conference in Houston, and his remarks have been transcribed by Robert Bryce. Here is an excerpt:

Let’s do a quick survey of energy access today. Roughly one billion people live lives remotely recognizable to us in this room. We wear fancy clothes, mostly made out of hydrocarbons. We travel in motorized transport. The extra lucky of us fly across the world to attend conferences. We heat our homes in winter, cool them in summer, store myriad foods in our freezers and refrigerators, and have light, communications and entertainment at the flip of a switch.

Pretty awesome.

This lifestyle requires an average of 13 barrels of oil per person per year. What about the other seven billion people? They want what we have. The other seven billion people, on average, consume only three barrels of oil per person per year versus our 13. Africans average less than one barrel.

We need more energy. Lots more energy. That much should be obvious.

Read Wright’s speech alongside Cembalest’s energy analysis — We are at long last in an era of energy realism.

The Honest Broker

THB is reader supported.

Please consider a subscription or an upgrade to support work like that you just read.

Continue Reading

Trending

X