From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Blackmon

U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright warned International Energy Agency (IEA) head Fatih Birol  in July that he was considering cancelling America’s membership in and funding of its activities due to its increasingly political nature.

Specifically, Wright pointed to the agency’s modeling methods used to compile its various reports and projections, which the Secretary and many others believe have trended more into the realm of advocacy than fact-based analysis in recent years.

That trend has long been clear and is a direct result of an intentional shift in the IEA’s mission that evolved in the months during and following the COVID pandemic. In 2022, the agency’s board of governors reinforced this changed mission away from the analysis of real energy-related data and policies to one of producing reports to support and “guide countries as they build net-zero emission energy systems to comply with internationally agreed climate goals” consistent with the Paris Climate Agreement of 2016.

One step Birol and his team took to incorporate its new role as cheerleader for an energy transition that isn’t actually happening was to eliminate the “current policies” modeling scenario which had long formed the base case for its periodic projections. That sterile analysis of the facts on the ground was  replaced it with a more aspirational set of assumptions based on the announced policy intentions of governments around the world. Using this new method based more on hope and dreams than facts on the ground unsurprisingly led the IEA to begin famously predicting a peak in global oil demand by 2029, something no one else sees coming.

Those projections have helped promote the belief among policymakers and investors that a high percentage of current oil company reserves would wind up becoming stranded assets, thus artificially – and many would contend falsely – deflating the value of their company stocks. This unfounded belief has also helped discourage banks from allocating capital to funding exploration for additional oil reserves that the world will almost certainly require in the decades to come.

Secretary Wright, in his role as leading energy policymaker for an administration more focused on dealing with the realities of America’s energy security needs than the fever dreams of the far-left climate alarm lobby, determined that investing millions of taxpayer dollars in IEA’s advocacy efforts each year was a poor use of his department’s budget. So, in an interview with Bloomberg in July, Wright said, “We will do one of two things: we will reform the way the IEA operates, or we will withdraw,” adding that his “strong preference is to reform it.”

Lo and behold, less than two months later, Javier Blas says in a September 10 Bloomberg op/ed headlined “The Myth of Peak Fossil Fuel Demand is Crumbling,” that the IEA will reincorporate its “current policies” scenario in its upcoming annual report. Blas notes that, “the annual report being prepared by the International Energy Agency… shows the alternative — decades more of robust fossil-fuel use, with oil and gas demand growing over the next 25 years — isn’t just possible but probable.”

On his X account, Blas posted a chart showing that, instead of projecting a “peak” of crude oil demand prior to 2030, IEA’s “current policies” scenario will be more in line with recent projections by both OPEC and ExxonMobil showing crude demand continuing to rise through the year 2050 and beyond.

Whether that is a concession to Secretary Wright’s concerns or to simple reality on the ground is not clear. Regardless, it is without question a clear about-face which hopefully signals a return by the IEA to its original mission to serve as a reliable analyst and producer of fact-based information about the global energy situation.

The global community has no shortage of well-funded advocates for the aspirational goals of the climate alarmist community. If this pending return to reality by the IEA in its upcoming annual report signals an end to its efforts to be included among that crowded field, that will be a win for everyone, regardless of the motivations behind it.

This article supplied by Troy Media.

By Rashid Husain Syed

OPEC+ output hike could sink prices, blow an even bigger hole in Alberta’s budget and drag Canada’s economy down with it

OPEC and its allies are flooding the global oil market again, betting that regaining lost market share is worth the risk of triggering a price collapse.

On Sept. 7, eight of its leading members agreed to boost production by 137,000 barrels per day beginning in October. That move, taken more than a year ahead of schedule, marks the start of a second major unwind of previous output cuts, even as warnings of a supply glut grow. OPEC+, a coalition led by Saudi Arabia and Russia, coordinates oil production targets in an effort to influence global pricing.

This isn’t oil politics in a vacuum. It’s a direct blow to Alberta’s finances, and a growing threat to Canada’s economic stability.

Canada’s broader economy depends heavily on a strong oil and gas sector, but no province is more directly reliant on resource royalties than Alberta, where oil revenues fund everything from hospitals to schools.

The province is already forecasting a $6.5-billion deficit by spring. A further slide in oil prices would deepen that gap, threatening everything from vital programs to jobs. Every drop in the benchmark West Texas Intermediate price, currently averaging around US$64, is estimated to wipe out another $750 million in annual revenue.

When Alberta’s finances falter, the ripple effects spread across the country. Equalization transfers from Ottawa to have-not provinces decline. Private investment dries up. Energy-sector jobs vanish not just in Alberta, but in supplier and service industries nationwide. Even the Canadian dollar takes a hit, reflecting reduced confidence in one of the country’s key economic engines. When Alberta stumbles, Canada’s broader economic momentum slows with it.

The timing couldn’t be crueller. October marks the end of the summer driving season, typically a lull for fuel demand. Yet extra supply is about to hit a market already leaning bearish. Oil prices have dropped roughly 15 per cent this year; Brent crude is treading just above US$65, still well beneath April’s lows.

But OPEC+ isn’t alone in raising the taps. Non-OPEC producers in Brazil, Canada, Guyana and Norway are all increasing production. The International Energy Agency warns global supply could exceed demand by as much as 500,000 barrels per day.

The market is bracing for a sustained price war. Alberta is staring down the barrel.

OPEC+ claims it’s playing the long game to reclaim market share. But gambling on long-term gains at the cost of short-term pain is reckless, especially for Alberta. The province faces immediate financial consequences: revenue losses, tougher budget decisions and diminished policy flexibility.

To make matters worse, U.S. forecasts are underwhelming, with an unexpected 2.4-million-barrel build in inventories. U.S. production remains at record highs above 13.5 million barrels per day, and refinery margins are shrinking. The signal is clear: demand isn’t coming back fast enough to absorb growing supply.

OPEC+ may think it’s posturing strategically. But for Canada, starting with Alberta, the fallout is real and immediate. It’s not just a market turn. It’s a warning blast. And the consequences? Jobs lost, public services cut and fiscal strain for months ahead.

Canada can’t direct OPEC. But it can brace for the fallout—and plan accordingly.

Toronto-based Rashid Husain Syed is a highly regarded analyst specializing in energy and politics, particularly in the Middle East. In addition to his contributions to local and international newspapers, Rashid frequently lends his expertise as a speaker at global conferences. Organizations such as the Department of Energy in Washington and the International Energy Agency in Paris have sought his insights on global energy matters.

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country