Energy
Russia says it will cut oil production over Western caps

By David Mchugh And Vladimir Isachenkov in Moscow
MOSCOW (AP) — Russia announced Friday that will cut oil production by 500,000 barrels per day next month after Western countries capped the price of its crude over its action in Ukraine.
“As of today, we fully sell all our crude output, but as we stated before, we will not sell oil to those who directly or indirectly adhere to the ‘price ceiling,’” Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak said in remarks carried by Russian news agencies.
“In connection with that, Russia will voluntarily cut production by 500,000 barrels a day. It will help restore market-style relations,” he said.
Analysts have said one possible Russian response to the cap would be to slash production to try to raise oil prices, which could eventually flow through to higher gasoline prices at the pump as less oil makes it to the global market.
International benchmark Brent crude rose 2.2% Friday, to $86.42 per barrel.
The Group of Seven major democracies have imposed a $60-per-barrel price cap on Russian oil shipped to non-Western countries. The goal is to keep oil flowing to the world to prevent price spikes that were seen last year, while limiting Russia’s financial gains that can be used to pay for its campaign against Ukraine.
The cap is enforced by barring Western companies that largely control shipping and insurance services from moving oil priced above the limit.
Russia has said it will not sell oil to countries observing the cap, a moot point because Russian oil has been trading below the price ceiling recently. However, the cap, an accompanying European Union embargo on most Russian oil and lower demand for crude have meant that customers in India, Turkey and China have been able to push for substantial discounts on Russian oil.
The impact of a cut of 500,000 barrels per day is an open question as a slowing global economy reduces the thirst for oil.
The OPEC+ alliance of oil producers, which includes Russia, tried to boost oil prices with an October announcement that it would cut production by 2 million barrels per day, only to see prices fall below $80 per barrel by December.
Asked if Russia consulted OPEC+ members about Moscow’s new production cut, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said “there had been conversations with some members of the OPEC+” before the move was announced. He didn’t offer any details.
But Novak insisted in a statement later that Moscow made the move without consulting anyone.
“It’s a voluntary cut; there have been no consultations with anyone regarding it,” the deputy prime minister said, according to the Russian media.
The new reduction could be “an early sign that Russia might try to weaponize oil supplies after last year’s failed attempt to weaponize natural gas,” said Simone Tagliapietra, an energy policy expert at the Bruegel think tank in Brussels.
But that could be difficult to accomplish because it’s easier to find alternative supplies of oil, traded through tankers that crisscross the globe, than to replace natural gas, which before the war mostly came by pipeline.
Russian exporter Gazprom has cut off most supplies of natural gas to Europe, citing technical issues and refusal by some customers to pay in Russian currency. European officials call it retaliation for supporting Ukraine.
Europe did suffer from resulting high natural gas prices but has managed to replace much of the lost Russian supply from other sources including shipborne liquefied gas from the U.S. and Qatar. Natural gas prices have since come down from all-time highs last summer but are still three times higher than before Russia massed troops on the Ukraine border.
___
McHugh reported from Frankfurt, Germany.
Daily Caller
Unanimous Supreme Court Ruling Inspires Hope For Future Energy Project Permitting

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
It comes as a surprise to many Americans when they learn that the vast majority of decisions issued by the U.S. Supreme Court are decided unanimously. Far too often, these unanimous decisions receive scant attention in the press due to their lack of controversy.
Such is the case with a key 8-0 decision the Court published May 29 that could help Congress and the Trump administration meet their goals to streamline permitting for energy projects in the United States. The decision narrows the scope of application of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), a law whose environmental review provisions have been systematically used – and often abused – by climate alarm groups and plaintiff lawyers for decades to impede the progress of major projects of all kinds.
The case at hand involves the Uinta Basin Railway Project, which will transport oil produced in Utah’s Unita Basin and connect it to the national railway network so it can reach national markets. Because the rail line would parallel the Colorado River for roughly 100 miles, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled in 2023 that the project’s developers would have to conduct a second, expanded environmental impact study under NEPA to try to assess nebulous potential impacts to air quality – often taking place thousands of miles away – or from a possible oil spill, rescinding a key permit that had been issued in 2021 by federal regulators.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
It is key to note that that permit was issued by the federal Surface Transportation Board (STB) along with a 3,600-page environmental impact statement to comply with NEPA. In the conduct of the environmental review, the Wall Street Journal wrote that STB and the company assessed “the railway’s potential effects on local water resources, air quality, protected species, recreation, local economies, the Ute Indian tribe and much more.”
But for the plaintiffs and the D.C. Circuit Court, 3,600 pages of thorough scientific analysis just weren’t enough. They filed suit, complaining that the study didn’t try to assess potential impacts that might happen on dozens of other rail lines hundreds of miles distant, or, even more absurd, assess potential pollution in “environmental justice communities” as far away as the Texas and Louisiana Gulf Coast.
You really can’t make this stuff up.
If delay was the goal, the plaintiffs got a win, halting progress for four years. That is a sadly typical outcome for cases involving energy-related projects such as this one.
In their unanimous opinion written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the justices state, “The goal of the law is to inform agency decisionmaking, not to paralyze it.”
As I’ve written in previous stories, the vast majority of delays in permitting processes stem from provisions contained in major federal statutes designed to protect the environment and endangered species. In addition to NEPA, these laws include the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act. Among them all, none has been more broadly abused and misinterpreted by activist courts than NEPA.
In its analysis of the decision, the Institute for Energy Research says, in part, that the “decision means that agencies can approve projects like pipelines, railways, and dams and not be mandated to consider distant environmental effects of the projects, such as increased greenhouse gas emissions, that had stopped or delayed fossil fuel projects from moving forward, particularly during the Biden administration.” But, the author cautions, “the Uinta Basin Railway project could still face additional legal and regulatory hurdles within Colorado,” despite the ruling.
The good news is that even the liberal justices on the Supreme Court appear to be developing a growing awareness of just how absurd some of the claims made in lawsuits like this case really are. The unanimous nature of this decision inspires some sense of hope that the Trump administration can succeed in some of its efforts to reform the system and put an end to some of the most unjustified delays.
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.
Alberta
Alberta’s carbon diet – how to lose megatonnes in just three short decades

Carl Marcotte, Candu Energy, Scott Henuset, Energy Alberta, and William McLeod
From Resource Works
Solving emissions problem is turning Alberta into a clean-tech powerhouse.
While oil, gas and pipelines took up a lot of oxygen at last week’s Global Energy Canada Show in Calgary, there was also a considerable focus on clean energy, clean-tech and decarbonization.
Alberta’s very survival in a decarbonizing world depends on innovation, best practices and regulations that will allow it to continue to produce oil and gas while trying to meet net zero targets that, like a mirage, appear to move further away the closer we get to them. Necessity being the mother of invention, Wild Rose Country has become rather inventive. It has become something of a clean-tech powerhouse and, as a result, has made some notable progress in its emissions intensity. Alberta’s industrial carbon tax, in place since 2007, and which hit $95 per tonne in 2025, has been used to fund emissions abatement technology and innovation through the Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction (TIER) program.
According to the Government of Alberta, the province has, to date, achieved:
- an 8.7% decline in overall emissions since 2015;
- a 52% decline in methane emissions since 2014;
- a 26% decline in oil sands emissions intensity since 2012; and
- 15 million tonnes of CO2 sequestered through carbon capture and storage.
The Pembina Institute, it is worth noting, has taken issue with some of Alberta’s reporting. Based on the federal National Inventory Report, Alberta’s methane emissions have declined by 35% between 2014 and 2023, not 52%.
Information sessions at last week’s conference covered topics like geothermal energy, lithium extraction, methane emissions detection and reduction technology, low-carbon hydrogen production and use, carbon capture and storage, and nuclear power. Alberta’s contributions to the energy transition and decarbonization is, I think, a bit of an untold story.
In the case of carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS), it’s a story that some environmentalists don’t want to hear, and don’t want anyone else to hear. In 2023, Greenpeace and two other environmental NGOs filed a complaint with the Competition Bureau against the Pathways Alliance, saying its claims of potential emissions reduction through CCUS constituted greenwashing. The Trudeau government responded with an anti-greenwashing bill — C-59 — that puts companies at risk of fines for making claims on emission reductions that are not backed by “adequate and proper” testing and evidence. Basically, companies will need to show their homework before making claims on climate benefits or risk hefty fines.”Some of the things that I’ve said would be illegal for my companies to say under the existing law because it would be called greenwashing,” Premier Danielle Smith said at last week ‘s conference. Green fundamentalists don’t want to hear about climate benefits, if it involves things like carbon capture, which they view as extending the lifetime of fossil fuels. Maybe they didn’t get the memo from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Group 3, which last year pronounced in a special report that carbon sequestration is “unavoidable if net zero CO2 or GHG emissions are to be achieved.”
Alberta’s oil and gas industry understands full well there is a big target on their backs: the oil sands. This energy intensive form of extracting oil generated 86.5 million million tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) in 2023, according to the Alberta government. That accounts for 33% of Alberta’s total GHG emissions, and is getting perilously close to the federal government’s emission’s cap for oil and gas.

Alberta ingenuity and innovation in extracting oil from sand led Canada to become the world’s fourth largest oil producer, with huge economic benefits for Canada. Alberta is now applying that ingenuity to try to shrink its GHG profile. Alberta has had some of the largest emissions reductions in the power generation sector in Canada recently, thanks to the phasing out of coal power.
Last year, it retired its last coal power plant, meaning the province reached its goal of phasing out coal six years ahead of federal and provincial targets of 2030. As a result, emissions from Alberta’s electricity sector declined 54% between 2015 and 2023, according to the Alberta government. It accomplished this by investing in wind and solar power, backed by firm natural gas power. Alberta now has about twice the amount of installed wind power as B.C. Alberta also reached methane emission reduction targets ahead of schedule. The Alberta government reports a 52% decline in methane intensity between 2014 and 2023, exceeding the target of a 45% decrease by 2025.
According to a recent S&P Global report, the GHG intensity of Alberta’s oil sands has declined 23% since 2009. And since 2019, S&P reports, the pace of oil sands emissions growth has slowed, with a 3% increase in emissions since 2019, despite a 9% growth in oil and gas production. Alberta’s challenge is that, as long as it plans to increase oil and gas production — and it does — reducing its emissions is like draining a bathtub while the faucet is still on. While emissions intensity may go down, absolute emissions could still grow with production growth, and Danielle Smith would like to see Alberta’s oil production double. So, some pretty big gains will be needed if Alberta is to achieve the dual goal of increasing oil production while trying to bring its emissions intensity down to zero by 2050. The only way to do that is through large-scale CCUS, and Alberta has become a global leader in its deployment. Thanks to CCUS, Alberta is poised to become a leading producer of blue hydrogen, ammonia and other “net-zero chemicals.” Through CCUS initiatives like the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the Shell Quest CCS project, Alberta has already sequestered 13.5 million tonnes of CO2, according to Emissions Reduction Alberta.
The Pathways Alliance — a consortium of Alberta’s biggest oil producers — propose a $10 billion to $20 billion investment that includes a large scale-up of CCUS, to decarbonize oil sands production and Alberta’s petrochemical industry. According to Natural Resources Canada, the estimated sequestration of the Pathways project would be 13.9 Mt CO2 captured by 2030 — 4.2 MT per year — and 62 Mt per year by 2050. A buildout of CCUS infrastructure in Alberta’s refining and petrochemical complex in the Edmonton area would capture CO2 from gas combustion. “That then puts them on the road to net-zero aviation fuels, net-zero chemicals, what-have-you,” Chris Bataille, adjunct research fellow at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, told me. “If you look at this as a transition, it’s a necessary thing to do, and we have the right geology for it, and these companies know how to do this kind of thing.”
In addition to CCUS, Alberta also now plans to become a nuclear power producer. A company called Energy Alberta plans to deploy existing Canadian nuclear technology — the CANDU reactor. It proposes to build a 1,000 megawatt twin CANDU MONARK reactor north of Peace River, Alberta. It is now in the early stage of a federal Impact Assessment process. If the federal Liberal government is serious about achieving its ambitious climate policy objectives, it needs to either help Alberta with its ambitious decarbonization efforts, which would include some major federal subsidies, or just get out of its way and let Alberta do what it does best, which is innovate.
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta health care blockbuster: Province eliminating AHS Health Zones in favour of local decision-making!
-
Alberta1 day ago
Central Alberta MP resigns to give Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre a chance to regain a seat in Parliament
-
Alberta1 day ago
Calls for a new pipeline to the coast are only getting louder
-
conflict2 days ago
Trump: ‘We’ have control over Iranian airspace; know where Khomeini is hiding
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta pro-life group says health officials admit many babies are left to die after failed abortions
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
‘Not Held Hostage Anymore’: Economist Explains How America Benefits If Trump Gets Oil And Gas Expansion
-
Alberta18 hours ago
Unified message for Ottawa: Premier Danielle Smith and Premier Scott Moe call for change to federal policies
-
Censorship Industrial Complex21 hours ago
Jordan Peterson reveals DEI ‘expert’ serving as his ‘re-education coach’ for opposing LGBT agenda