Energy
Oil tankers in Vancouver are loading plenty, but they can load even more

From Resource Works
Despite years of protest, ballooning costs, and political hurdles, the federally funded TMX pipeline expansion has become a strategic economic success story for Canada.
The federally funded expansion of the Trans Mountain oil pipeline from Alberta to tidewater at Burnaby has been much attacked by critics, but has quickly turned into a gold-star success story.
The 980-km expansion, known as TMX, opened in May 2024, almost tripling the capacity of the original (1953) Trans Mountain Pipeline. Since then, TMX has enabled major expansion of our crude oil exports to American and Asian buyers.
It is, says Trans Mountain CEO Mark Maki, “one of the most strategic investments Canada has ever made,” providing Canada with new trading options to Pacific Rim nations in the face of Donald Trump’s tariffs, and bringing in billions in new revenues.
Since opening on May 1, 2024, Trans Mountain has sent half of its tanker shipments to countries other than the US, and half to refineries on the US west coast.
Alberta Central chief economist Charles St-Arnaud said in a report earlier this year that TMX had brought in an extra $10 billion in revenues in 2024, equivalent to “adding a thirteenth month of production to the year.”
The export picture would be even brighter if the Port of Vancouver could accommodate larger loads in departing oil tankers, and that now is being addressed by both federal and provincial governments.
Right now, 245-metre-long Aframax-size tankers can handle up to 120,000 tonnes of oil. But under our port restrictions and limited depths of water in Burrard Inlet, they usually load only up to 96,000 tonnes.
In the BC legislature, Gavin Dew, Conservative MLA for Kelowna-Mission and the Opposition critic for jobs, economic development and innovation, asked if BC and the new federal government are indeed supporting dredging Burrard Inlet to allow fully laden Aframax oil tankers.
The simple reply from Adrian Dix, BC’s minister of energy and climate solutions: “Yes.”
Dix added later in an interview that the idea most recently came from Prime Minister Mark Carney. “Broadly, the premier and us have indicated our support for it,” Dix said.
No plan or timing has yet been announced.
While fully loaded Aframax tankers would carry more oil, they still have to meet requirements that include these: All tankers calling at the Westridge Marine Terminal must first be pre-screened by Trans Mountain to ensure criteria are met for safety and reliability; They must be double-hulled, and have segregated internal cargo tanks; They must have two radar systems in working order, one of them being a specialized collision-avoidance radar. For loading, a containment boom is deployed to enclose the tanker and its berth while loading. The tankers are escorted by tugs, and carry a fully qualified and licensed marine pilot.
There are also upgraded emergency facilities to cope with any spill, but Trans Mountain notes that there has not been a single oil spill from one of its tankers since the original pipeline opened in 1956.
The terminal now can handle some 34 tankers a month.
While a success story now, the TMX expansion went through a lot of pain, protest, obstruction, money, and red tape to get there.
The expansion was first proposed in 2012 by the Canadian division of US pipeline giant Kinder Morgan Inc., which bought the original Trans Mountain pipeline in 2005. It applied in December 2013 for federal approval of expansion, and estimated the cost at $5.4 billion.
The expansion proposal then ran into endless protests, opposition from the BC government (then-premier John Horgan promised to use “every tool in the toolbox” to stop the expansion), and a federal approval process that took almost three years of red tape.
Ottawa’s approval finally came with 157 conditions, and BC’s “toolbox” now included restrictions on any increase in diluted bitumen shipments pending further studies.
By 2018, Kinder Morgan Canada said estimated costs had risen to $7.4 billion, and the company began to send up distress signals.
Ottawa then bought TMX from Kinder Morgan for $4.5 billion, calling the purchase “a serious and necessary investment made in the national interest.”
The feds added: “The completion of this important infrastructure project is making Canada and the Canadian economy more resilient by diversifying global market access for our resources.”
Construction began in the Edmonton area in November 2019. By 2020, though, Trans Mountain said the cost of the expansion had risen to $12.6 billion, and in 2022 the cost was estimated at $21.4 billion, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic among the reasons. In March 2023, Trans Mountain put the cost at $30.9 billion.
Some of the benefits listed by Ottawa: Opening new markets for Canadian energy exports, reducing our reliance on a single customer, and ensuring that Canada receives fair market value for its resources while maintaining the highest environmental standards; Significantly increasing the royalties and tax revenues that all levels of government receive: According to an independent study, TMX is expected to add $9.2 billion in GDP and $2.8 billion in tax revenues between 2024 and 2043; Contributing to global and regional energy security by providing a secure, long-term supply of energy; Creating economic benefits for many Indigenous groups through contracting, financial compensation, and employment and training opportunities.
But Ottawa has said all along that it would not own the pipeline forever, and that at some point it will divest itself of ownership, and make at least partial ownership available to Indigenous groups.
Trans Mountain CEO Mark Maki now wonders if the feds might postpone that divestment, particularly if they decide TMX shouldn’t be the last oil export pipeline built in Canada.
We await word from the new federal government on its plans.
Business
EPA to shut down “Energy Star” program

MxM News
Quick Hit:
The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to shut down its long-standing Energy Star program, which has certified energy-efficient appliances for over three decades. The move is part of a sweeping agency reorganization that also includes eliminating the climate change office and other environmental initiatives not mandated by law.
Key Details:
- EPA officials announced the dismantling of the Energy Star program in a staff meeting on May 6, 2025.
- The agency is eliminating its climate-related divisions, including those overseeing Energy Star and greenhouse gas reporting.
- The move is framed as part of a broader restructuring to prioritize statutory obligations and reduce government overreach.
Diving Deeper:
In a significant shift for federal environmental policy, the Environmental Protection Agency will eliminate the Energy Star program, a popular certification used to identify energy-efficient home appliances like refrigerators, dishwashers, and dryers. Internal documents and a recorded staff meeting reveal that EPA leadership is dismantling entire divisions focused on climate change and voluntary energy initiatives.
Paul Gunning, director of the EPA’s Office of Atmospheric Protection—which is also being cut—told staff the agency would “de-prioritize and eliminate” all climate-related work outside of what’s legally required. The Energy Star program, created in 1992 under President George H.W. Bush, has helped save American households and businesses over $500 billion in energy costs and prevented billions of metric tons of greenhouse gases from entering the atmosphere.
Supporters argue the program has been a bipartisan success story. Nearly 90% of U.S. consumers recognize the Energy Star label, and manufacturers have long relied on it to market efficient products. Even the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and major industries, from lighting to food-equipment makers, have urged the EPA to keep it in place. A joint letter in March from dozens of trade organizations to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin warned that ending the program would not benefit Americans.
Critics of the move, like Paula R. Glover of the Alliance to Save Energy, say the Energy Star program costs just $32 million annually but delivers $40 billion in utility bill savings. “Eliminating the Energy Star program is counterintuitive to this administration’s pledge to reduce household costs,” she said. Glover added that with electricity demand set to rise 35–50% by 2040, energy-saving measures are more important than ever.
The Biden-era EPA heavily prioritized climate policy and environmental regulation, often blurring the lines between environmental stewardship and bureaucratic overreach. In contrast, the current administration—under 47th President Donald Trump—is refocusing the agency toward its statutory mission, aligning with the broader conservative agenda of streamlining government and cutting redundant or ideologically-driven programs.
While Trump previously attempted to defund Energy Star during his first term, the effort failed amid bipartisan concern that privatization could lead to lowered standards. The current plan appears to accomplish the same goal through internal restructuring, cutting not just Energy Star but programs related to methane emissions reduction, climate science, and policy.
Notably, the agency’s largest union has cried foul over how the reorganization was handled. Marie Owens Powell, its president, accused the agency of “union busting” after being blocked from attending reorganization meetings. Staff have been told they may be reassigned or let go as the EPA scales back to staffing levels not seen since the Reagan administration.
For an agency that has long served as the regulatory spearhead for the left’s climate agenda, this realignment could represent a return to core environmental functions—clean air and water—while removing the taxpayer burden of subsidizing climate-centric programs with questionable returns. The decision also signals a shift away from corporatist alliances that prop up select industries under the guise of energy policy.
Business
Innovative Solutions Like This Plan To Provide Power For Data Centres Will Drive Natural Gas Demand For Decades

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By David Blackmon
The dramatic expansion of the number and scale of planned datacenter projects across the United States has generated a great deal of news over the last year. The central question in many of those stories centers around the power needs of these projects, and how the power will be generated.
Early developers hyped their preference to use electricity generated by wind and/or solar to power their projects but found the 99.999% datacenter uptime requirements can’t be met by these intermittent power sources, even when backed up by stationary batteries.
With new nuclear projects facing permitting times of 10-15 years and coal being crowded out by emissions regulations, more recent speculation has centered heavily on natural gas as being the fuel of choice for developers whose projects won’t be interconnected into a regional power grid. Natural gas generation is cheaper and faster to build than nuclear, and, while anti-fossil fuel activists complain that gas still comes with emissions, it presents a far cleaner alternative to coal.
In Wyoming, a group of three companies said this week they’ve agreed to a joint project that also satisfies the emissions critics. In a release dated May 6, data center developer Prometheus Hyperscale, Wyoming’s largest gas producer PureWest Energy, and carbon capture and storage (CCS) developer Frontier Carbon Solutions, LLC, rolled out what they call “a first-of-its-kind partnership focused on driving innovation and sustainability while contributing to Wyoming’s long-term economic growth.”
In simple terms, the plan goes like this:
- Prometheus will permit and build the datacenter;
- PureWest will produce and supply the natural gas to a nearby power plant operated by an independent power provider from its Wyoming production portfolio, which it boasts maintains “industry leading emissions performance with a rigorous Measurement, Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MMRV) program and ISO 14067 verification;”
- Frontier will capture biogenic carbon dioxide from across the Mountain West and sequester it in underground formations in Southwestern Wyoming; and
- Frontier will sell traceable carbon removal credits to Prometheus.
Through entering into these various agreements, a datacenter sporting a net-zero emissions profile is created. This not only embellishes the clean energy scorecards for the three companies involved in the partnership, but also for customers who purchase the computing power from the datacenter, as well as the operators of processing plants and transportation systems which move both the natural gas and the carbon dioxide.
“PureWest’s goal to be the region’s energy supplier of choice is rooted in innovation and cutting-edge technology, and today’s exciting announcement reflects our ongoing mission and progress,” said Ty Harrison, President and CFO of PureWest said in a release. “We’re proud to partner with Prometheus and Frontier because this project affirms the critical role that verified low-carbon natural gas will play in sustainably meeting the growing energy needs of AI and its related infrastructure. PureWest is committed to ensuring Wyoming continues to be a leader in delivering scalable energy and decarbonization solutions for the data-driven future of the United States.”
While the joint venture is fairly complex with a number of moving parts, it actually represents a pretty ingenious solution. Once up and running, the partners end up creating a major datacenter with the same carbon footprint as one powered by wind or solar would have, but which will enjoy the added benefit of being able to meet its 99.999% uptime requirements.
But it’s more than that. As the Trump administration’s energy and climate regulatory agenda moves ahead to consolidation, these companies will also avoid running into the reality of so many U.S. wind and solar projects becoming financially unsustainable when the endless stream of rising subsidies their business models require are inevitably reduced or cut off entirely.
As the religious global fervor driven by climate alarmism continues its inevitable fade, producers of American natural gas like PureWest will find themselves presented with a wide array of innovative opportunities like this one. Those opportunities will be driven by customers and potential partners who need the combination of abundance, affordability, reliability, speed of development and low emissions profile that only natural gas is capable of providing.
Anyone who still believes that oil and gas is a dying industry is in for a very rude awakening.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
-
Crime2 days ago
Inside B.C.’s Cultus Lake Narco Corridor — How Chinese State-Linked Syndicates are Building a Narco Empire in Canada
-
Business2 days ago
Top business group warns Carney’s ‘net zero’ push spells disaster for Canada’s economy
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Misguided Climate Policies Create ‘Real Energy Emergency’ And Permit China To Dominate US
-
Alberta1 day ago
Bonnyville RCMP targeted by suspect driving a trackhoe – Update
-
Business2 days ago
Trump praises Carney at White House, says ‘never say never’ about 51st state
-
International2 days ago
Trump DOJ investigating Washington for new law forcing priests to break Seal of Confession
-
Alberta20 hours ago
Charges laid in record cocaine seizure
-
Business1 day ago
After successful anti-American election campaign, Carney pivots to embrace US: Hails Trump as a “transformational president”