Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Canadian Energy Centre

Proposed emissions cap threatens critical Canada-U.S. energy trade

Published

8 minute read

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Deborah Jaremko

The vast majority of Canadian oil exports to the United States are processed in Midwest states. Above, the Cushing Terminal near Cushing, Oklahoma is Enbridge’s largest tank farm and the most significant trading hub for North American crude.

Canada and the United States share something that doesn’t exist anywhere else. A vast, interconnected energy network that today produces more oil and gas than any other region – including the Middle East, according to analysis by S&P Global.

It’s a blanket of energy security researchers called “a powerful card to play” in increasingly unstable times.

But, according to two leaders in governance and energy policy, that relationship is at risk.

Analysis has shown that the federal proposal to cap emissions in Canada’s oil and gas sector would result in reduced production. That likely means less energy available to Canada’s largest customer, the United States.

Jamie Tronnes, executive director of the Center for North American Prosperity and Security, is a former Canadian political staffer born in northern Alberta now living in Washington, D.C.

Jamie Tronnes

Heather Exner-Pirot is a prominent energy policy analyst and senior fellow with the Ottawa-based Macdonald-Laurier Institute.

Heather Exner-Pirot

Here’s what they shared with CEC.

CEC: The U.S. is one of the world’s largest oil and gas producers. Why does it need imports from Canada?

HEP: It’s because all oil is not the same. The United States developed its refinery industry before the shale revolution, when they were importing heavier crudes. Canada has that heavier crude. They are now exporting some of their sweet light oil and importing Canadian crude because that’s what their refinery mix requires.

What’s interesting is that we have never exported more Canadian crude to the United States than we are right now. Even as they have become the world’s largest oil producer, they’ve never needed Canadian oil more than today.

They also import a ton of natural gas from us. They have become the world’s biggest gas producer and the world’s biggest gas exporter, but part of that, and having their LNG capacity being able to so quickly surpass Qatar and Australia, is because some of the production is being backfilled by Canada.

CEC: Will the incoming new administration (either Democrat or Republican) impact the Canada-U.S. energy relationship?

JT: I don’t see a big change happening in such a way as it did when the Biden administration came in with the axing of the Keystone XL pipeline. Now that Russia has invaded Ukraine, the global energy market has changed radically.

On the Republican side, Trump often repeats the phrase “drill, baby drill.” The issue is that the U.S. is already drilling about as much as demand allows.

I don’t think a Harris government would move quickly to limit oil and gas production without having a strategic alternative in place. It simply would make her look very weak, and she has explicitly said that she would not ban fracking.

In the post-COVID world, I believe that the Democrat side of the aisle is coming to the view that it was a geopolitical mistake in terms of securing North American energy dominance to cut the Keystone XL pipeline.

The reality is that being able to export refined Canadian feedstock is key to keeping the U.S. as an energy superpower.

The U.S. government continues to offer and subsidize tax credits for investment in carbon capture technology. Even though Trump has said that he would end all of those carbon capture credits and subsidies, it still would not stop the U.S. from importing Canadian oil and gas.

That’s only going to grow as things like AI continue to create more demand for energy. A huge amount of the United States electrical energy grid is powered still by natural gas, and that’s going to take decades to change.

CEC: Would a reduction in Canadian production from the federal government’s proposed oil and gas emissions cap impact the United States?

HEP: Yes, and we should be raising the alarm bells. The federal government has said it is a cap on emissions, not a cap on production, but all the analysis that Alberta and the oil and gas sector have done is that it will create somewhere between 1 million and 2 million barrels of production being shut in.

Well, 95 per cent of our exports are to the United States. If we are shutting in 1 million barrels or 2 million barrels, that all comes out of their end just when their shale oil is expected to plateau and decline.

A cap would also tap down natural gas production and LNG capacity. If you’re Japan or South Korea and you’re looking to secure 20 years of supply, the cap creates a lot of uncertainty with that Canadian supply. There’s zero uncertainty with Qatar’s supply. If you’re Japanese, these are not pleasant conversations. This is not giving you confidence. And if you don’t have confidence in LNG, you’re going to burn coal.

In a perfect world, Canada would supply LNG to Asia, the United States would supply it to Europe, and we’d be a pretty energy-independent Western alliance.

I wish we would be honest that we need a different way to reduce emissions that does not take away from production, because that capacity is a big part of what we offer our allies right now.

JT: It threatens the security of North America in a big way because the energy dominance of the United States is tied to Canada. Especially with what’s going on in Russia and other countries, it behooves us as Canadians and me as an American to remember that security is not freely granted.

We have to make sure that we are thinking more holistically when we think of things like emissions cap legislation that’s going to have knock-on effects and may even increase emissions. If you’re trying to replace that feedstock, it’s got to come from somewhere.

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

Alberta

Alberta rail hub doubling in size to transport plastic from major new carbon-neutral plant

Published on

Haulage bridge at Cando Rail & Terminals’ Sturgeon Terminal in Alberta’s Industrial Heartland, near Edmonton. Photo courtesy Cando Rail & Terminals

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Will Gibson

Cando Rail & Terminals to invest $200 million to support Dow’s Path2Zero petrochemical complex

A major rail hub in Alberta’s Industrial Heartland will double in size to support a new carbon-neutral plastic production facility, turning the terminal into the largest of its kind in the country.

Cando Rail & Terminals will invest $200 million at its Sturgeon Terminal after securing Dow Chemical as an anchor tenant for its expanded terminal, which will support the planned $8.9 billion Path2Zero petrochemical complex being built in the region northeast of Edmonton.

“Half of the terminal expansion will be dedicated to the Dow project and handle the products produced at the Path2Zero complex,” says Steve Bromley, Cando’s chief commercial officer.

Steve Bromley, chief commercial officer with Cando Rail & Terminals.

By incorporating carbon capture and storage, the complex, which began construction this spring, is expected to be the world’s first to produce polyethylene with net zero scope 1 and 2 emissions.

The widely used plastic’s journey to global markets will begin by rail.

“Dow stores their polyethylene in covered railcars while waiting to sell it,” Bromley says.

“When buyers purchase it, we will build unit trains and those cars will go to the Port of Prince Rupert and eventually be shipped to their customers in Asia.”

A “unit train” is a single train where all the cars carry the same commodity to the same destination.

The expanded Cando terminal will have the capacity to prepare 12,000-foot unit trains – or trains that are more than three-and-a-half kilometers long.

Construction will start on the expansion in 2025 at a 320-acre site west of Cando’s existing terminal, which 20 industrial customers use to stage and store railcars as well as assemble unit trains.

Bromley, a former CP Rail executive who joined Cando in 2013, says the other half of the terminal’s capacity not used by the Dow facility will be sold to other major projects in the region.

The announcement is the latest in a series of investments for Cando to grow its operations in Alberta that will see the company spend more than $500 million by 2027.

The company, which is majority owned by the Alberta Investment Management Corporation previously spent $100 million to acquire a 1,700-railcar facility in Lethbridge along with $150 million to build its existing Sturgeon terminal.

Cando Rail’s existing Sturgeon Terminal near Edmonton, Alberta. Photo courtesy Cando Rail & Terminals

“Alberta is important to us – we have 300 active employees in this province and handle 900,000 railcars annually here,” Bromley says.

“But we are looking for opportunities across North America, both in Canada and the United States as well.”

Cando released the news of the Sturgeon Terminal expansion at the Alberta Industrial Heartland Association’s annual conference on Sept. 19.

“This is an investment in critical infrastructure that underpins additional growth in the region,” says Mark Plamondon, the association’s executive director.

The announcement came as the association marked its 25th anniversary at the event, which Plamondon saw as fitting.

“Dow’s Path2Zero came to the region because of the competitive advantages gained by clustering heavy industry. Competitive advantages are built from infrastructure that’s already here, such as the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line, which transports and stores carbon dioxide for industry,” he says.

“Having that level of integration can turn inputs into one operation into outputs for another. Competitive advantages for one become advantages for others. Cando’s investment will attract others just as Dow’s Path2Zero was a pull for additional investment.”

Continue Reading

Canadian Energy Centre

Unleashing Canada’s competitive advantage in energy and natural resources

Published on

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Cody Ciona

Q&A with Bryan Detchou, senior director of natural resources, environment and sustainability with the Canadian Chamber of Commerce

Canada’s energy sector is one of the country’s greatest strengths, says an emerging leader with the Canadian Chamber of Commerce.

Bryan Detchou is the Chamber’s senior director of natural resources, environment and sustainability.

A former government relations consultant and staffer on Parliament Hill, in 2023 The Peak recognized Detchou as one of Canada’s young leaders shaping the country’s economy, culture and society.

The Chamber boasts a membership of over 200,000 businesses, including many energy-related companies. Detchou helps advocate for achieving the sector’s untapped potential.

Here’s what he shared with the Canadian Energy Centre:

CEC: Why does the Canadian Chamber of Commerce support Canada’s oil and natural gas sector? 

BD: The mandate of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce is to support and be the leading voice for all businesses across the Canadian economy.

You cannot discuss the Canadian economy without recognizing the essential role of the oil and gas sector.

CEC: What role should Canada’s energy sector play in the 21st century Canadian and world economies? 

BD: We believe that Canada’s energy and natural resources sectors are sources of pride and deserve strong support. These sectors hold the potential for Canada to exceed expectations on the global stage, positioning us as a key player in solving many of the world’s pressing challenges.

The conflict in Ukraine has exposed vulnerabilities in European and global energy security, underscoring the critical role Canada can play in addressing these issues. It is not only Canada’s responsibility to its citizens but also its duty to the global community to be a strong and reliable energy partner.

However, our failure to act decisively on energy security weakens our position and undermines our ability to contribute meaningfully to the reduction of global emissions.

CEC: How can Canadian energy businesses take a leadership position in emissions reduction? 

BD: The majority of emissions reductions are being driven by the private sector, and we’re already seeing significant investments from various organizations. However, the challenge lies in the substantial capital required for these initiatives.

Before making major investment decisions, companies need a level of certainty and predictability in the markets they operate in—this is where the government can play a stronger role.

Regulatory hurdles, such as amendments to the Impact Assessment Act and the slow deployment of Investment Tax Credits, continue to create uncertainty.

We must understand that this is a global race. Canada is not the only country working to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and attract the necessary investment.

It is our responsibility to identify and leverage our competitive advantages. There is still much Canada can do to ensure its regulatory framework is conducive to attracting investment and driving environmental progress.

CEC: How is the federal greenwashing Bill C-59 impacting Canadian energy companies? 

BD: From the outset, we have been fully engaged in addressing the challenges posed by this new legislation, starting with our involvement when the amendment was first introduced in the House of Commons committee in late May.

We testified before the Senate in early June, voicing the concerns of the industry, and have remained actively engaged ever since.

We unequivocally support the goal of ensuring that no Canadian company engages in deceptive marketing, whether in terms of product claims or the communication of their environmental commitments, particularly those aimed at combating climate change. Transparency and accountability are fundamental.

However, the law’s vague language and the absence of a clearly defined methodology have unfortunately created uncertainty across all sectors of the Canadian economy. This uncertainty hinders the ability of businesses to openly and confidently contribute to Canada’s ambitious climate goals.

Rather than driving environmental progress, the new law has inadvertently undermined the significant efforts already made by Canadian corporations, and by extension, the Canadian government. It has become a barrier to both innovation and meaningful environmental action.

The time has come for the government to revisit this legislation. The government should do now what it should have done in May and work collaboratively with industry stakeholders to develop a made-in-Canada regime that ensures corporate accountability and transparency while fostering, not stifling, innovation and environmental ambition.

Only by doing this can we achieve the climate objectives that Canada is striving for.

CEC: What does the Chamber believe are the best steps forward for Canada’s energy sector? 

BD: The best way forward for Canada’s energy sector involves recognizing and leveraging our natural resources as one of the country’s greatest strengths, rather than a weakness. In the face of global challenges Canada’s energy sector must evolve to address these pressing issues.

We advocate for a balanced approach that includes diversifying the energy portfolio with investments in renewable technologies and innovations like carbon capture and storage and hydrogen, ensuring a clear and efficient regulatory framework to attract investment, and strengthening Indigenous partnerships to foster shared prosperity.

Promoting sustainable resource development to meet net-zero targets, expanding global market opportunities, and enhancing collaboration between government and industry are crucial.

By embracing our energy sector as a key asset, Canada can enhance its role on the global stage, support our allies, and combat climate change effectively. Unleashing the full potential of Canada’s natural resources is essential for securing energy security, achieving economic growth and driving long-term prosperity.

Continue Reading

Trending

X