Business
Coffee price explosion a self-inflicted wound: Liberal tariff drives up cost of coffee

This article supplied by Troy Media.
Since March 3, Canadian importers have been paying an additional 25 per cent tariff on imported coffee. This counter-tariff, introduced as part of Ottawa’s retaliatory response to a trade dispute triggered by new United States duties on Canadian agricultural exports earlier this year, directly affects a product that isn’t even grown in Canada.
Coffee is up 19 per cent—and global markets aren’t to blame. Ottawa’s political posturing is burning your wallet, one cup at a time
Canadians are paying 19 per cent more for ground coffee this year—and it’s not because of global supply issues. It’s because of a self-inflicted policy
mistake: a 25 per cent tariff imposed by Ottawa on imported coffee, a product Canada doesn’t even grow.
Many consumers may attribute the spike to global market volatility, especially after coffee futures soared to a record high of more than US$4.40 per
pound in February. But that explanation no longer holds—futures have since dropped by more than 30 per cent, yet retail prices remain stubbornly high. So, what’s driving this divergence?
The answer lies, in part, in trade policy.
Since March 3, Canadian importers have been paying an additional 25 per cent tariff on imported coffee.
This counter-tariff, introduced as part of Ottawa’s retaliatory response to a trade dispute triggered by new United States duties on Canadian agricultural exports earlier this year, directly affects a product that isn’t even grown in Canada.
Unlike dairy or poultry, coffee has no domestic farming sector to protect. These tariffs aren’t shielding Canadian producers—they’re punishing
Canadian consumers and businesses.
To grasp the scale of this impact, consider the size of the industry. According to Introspective Market Research, retail coffee sales in Canada total more than $2.7 billion annually and are projected to grow steadily over the next decade. Meanwhile, coffee shops and quick-service restaurants, from Tim Hortons to independent cafés, generate an additional $6.4 billion per year. Tim Hortons alone sells more than five million cups of coffee per day.
This is not a fringe sector; it’s a critical part of both our economy and our culture.
Ironically, the U.S.—our supposed trade adversary in this case—doesn’t grow coffee either. Yet both countries are now entangled in a tariff tug-of-war that serves no practical purpose. The same logic applies to tea, which is also subject to retaliatory measures.
The tariffs were introduced under the Trudeau government in a broader geopolitical strategy that often felt more performative than pragmatic. Trudeau’s combative approach to trade, seemingly crafted on a whiteboard without regard for economic fallout, may have resonated politically, but it ignored basic economic principles. Consumers were never part of the equation.
In contrast, Prime Minister Mark Carney appears to be taking a more measured approach. Tariffs on U.S. alcohol and citrus products remain, but those can be sourced from other markets with relatively little disruption. Coffee and tea, however, are a different matter. There are no alternative domestic sources. The cost of these tariffs is being passed directly to roasters, grocers, restaurants, and ultimately, to the consumer.
Compounding the problem is the volatility of American trade policy under U.S. President Donald Trump, which continues to inject uncertainty into food markets. Tariffs come and go with the political winds, forcing companies to engage in “buffer pricing.” Much like travelers buying insurance for
unpredictable weather, companies build in extra costs to guard against political surprises. It’s effectively a tax on unpredictability, and it’s now embedded in the price Canadians pay at the till.
And while consumers might not feel the same pinch at their local café, where coffee is a smaller fraction of the total cost of a cup, the grocery aisle tells a different story. That’s where the full weight of these policies lands.
Whether a new trade agreement can be reached by the self-imposed July 21 deadline—or a damaging 35 per cent tariff Trump has set for August 1 can be avoided—remains uncertain. But what should be obvious is this: both Canada and the U.S. need to keep essential agri-food imports like coffee and tea out of their geopolitical fights.
Canada has a vibrant coffee ecosystem, built on roasting, innovation and consumer culture, not cultivation. There is no economic rationale for taxing it. Canadians shouldn’t be paying more for their morning brew just to send a symbolic message to Washington.
It’s time Ottawa led by example and scrapped these pointless tariffs.
Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Canadian professor and researcher in food distribution and policy. He is senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast. He is frequently cited in the media for his insights on food prices, agricultural trends, and the global food supply chain.
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.
Business
Carney should rethink ‘carbon capture’ climate cure

From the Fraser Institute
In case you missed it amid the din of Trump’s trade war, Prime Minister Carney is a big believer in “carbon capture and storage.” And his energy minister, Tim Hodgson, who said it’s “critical to build carbon capture systems for the oilsands,” wants the Smith government and oilsands companies to get behind a proposed project (which hasn’t been unable to raise sufficient private investment) in Cold Lake, Alberta.
The term “carbon capture and storage” (or CCS) essentially refers to technology that separates carbon dioxide (CO2) from emissions and either stores it or uses it for other products. Proponents claim that CCS could replace other more ham-handed climate regulations such as carbon taxes, emission caps, etc. The problem is, like many (or most) proposed climate panaceas, CCS is oversold. While it’s a real technology currently in use around the world (primarily to produce more oil and gas from depleting reservoirs), jurisdictions will likely be unable to affordably scale up CCS enough to capture and store enough greenhouse gas to meaningfully reduce the risks of predicted climate change.
Why? Because while you get energy out of converting methane (natural gas) to CO2 by burning it in a power plant to generate electricity, you have to put quite a lot of energy into the process if you want to capture, compress, transport and store the attendant CO2 emissions. Again, carbon capture can be profitable (on net) for use in producing more oil and gas from depleting reservoirs, and it has a long and respected role in oil and gas production, but it’s unclear that the technology has utility outside of private for-profit use.
And in fact, according to the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), most CCS happening in Canada is less about storing carbon to avert climate change and more about stimulating oil production from existing operations. While there are “seven CCS projects currently operating in Canada, mostly in the oil and gas sector, capturing about 0.5% of national emissions,” CCS in oil and gas production does not address emissions from “downstream uses of those fuels” and will, perversely, lead to more CO2 emissions on net. The IISD also notes that CCS is expensive, costing up to C$200 per tonne for current projects. (For reference, today’s government-set minimum carbon market price to emit a tonne of CO2 emissions is C$95.) IISD concludes CCS is “energy intensive, slow to implement, and unproven at scale, making it a poor strategy for decarbonizing oil and gas production.”
Another article in Scientific American observes that industrial carbon capture projects are “too small to matter” and that “today’s largest carbon capture projects only remove a few seconds’ worth of our yearly greenhouse gas emissions” and that this is “costing thousands of dollars for every ton of CO2 removed.” And as a way to capture massive volumes of CO2 (from industrial emission streams of out the air) and sequestering it to forestall atmospheric warming (climate change), the prospects are not good. Perhaps this is why the article’s author characterizes CCS as a “figleaf” for the fossil fuel industry (and now, apparently, the Carney government) to pretend they are reducing GHG emissions.
Prime Minister Carney should sharpen his thinking on CCS. While real and profitable when used in oil and gas production, it’s unlikely to be useful in combatting climate change. Best to avoid yet another costly climate change “solution” that is overpromised, overpriced and has historically underperformed.
Alberta
World’s first direct air capture test centre to open doors in Innisfail

From the Canadian Energy Centre
Deep Sky Alpha facility will trial technologies that suck CO2 from the sky
Innisfail, Alta. is set to host the world’s first test centre for technology that removes carbon dioxide directly from the air to fight climate change.
This June, Montreal-based Deep Sky completed construction of a $110-million carbon removal innovation and commercialization centre in the town about 120 kilometres north of Calgary.
It is a key piece of the company’s vision to build 100 large-scale facilities across Canada and become a pioneer in the emerging market for direct air capture (DAC) technology.
“As of this summer, we will begin not only carbon removal, which is actually sucking it out of the air through these very powerful fans, but also liquefying it and then putting it underground for storage,” Deep Sky CEO Alex Petre told CTV News.
Work began in August 2024 on the project known as Deep Sky Alpha, which aims to begin testing up to 10 different DAC technologies in real-world conditions. It is expected to be up and running this August.
The Government of Alberta is investing $5 million in the facility through Emissions Reduction Alberta.
Deep Sky’s facility will capture up to 3,000 tons of CO2 per year over the next 10 years, with room for future expansion.
Captured CO2 will be transported by tanker trucks about 200 kilometres north to Sturgeon County where it will be injected more than two kilometres below the surface into the Meadowbrook Carbon Storage Hub.
Operated by Bison Low Carbon Ventures, the project is the first approved under Alberta’s open-access carbon sequestration hub initiative and is expected to begin operations before year-end.
“We’re going to line up these eight units side by side and run them to see how they operate in the summer and in the cold of winter,” said Damien Steel, former Deep Sky CEO who continues to serve as a company advisor.
“We’ll be tracking everything to see how all these best-in-class technologies compare – what are their strengths and weaknesses – so that ultimately we can choose the best solutions to scale up for the major commercialization of carbon removal projects that are needed.”
Unlike typical carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects that scrub CO2 from the exhaust of heavy industrial facilities such as power plants, refineries, cement plants or steel mills, DAC utilizes different technology to remove much lower concentrations of CO2 directly from the atmosphere.
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), there are 27 DAC plants operating worldwide, capturing almost 10,000 tonnes of CO2 per year. In order to reach net zero emissions by 2050, the IEA estimates DAC capacity must expand to more than 60 million tonnes per year by 2030.
Deep Sky selected Alberta for its test facility because of the province’s experience with CCS, including its advanced regulatory system for CO2 sequestration.
“To be successful at carbon removal you need three things: you need access to geologic storage, you need talent, and you need a reliable supply of renewable power to operate DAC facilities. Canada is blessed with these things, and Alberta especially has all of these attributes in spades,” Steel said.
Deep Sky Alpha is one of several clean tech projects underway in a five-acre industrial park in Innisfail as part of an economic diversification plan that was launched in 2022 to make the town a centre for energy innovation.
A municipal solar farm and a power plant that burns garbage and will be equipped with CCS to eliminate emissions are also under development.
Deep Sky says that more than 110 jobs were created during the construction phase of its Innisfail project and it will employ 15 people for annual operations.
Subsequent commercial plants it hopes to build across Canada will employ approximately 1,000 workers for construction and 150 for annual operations.
Steel said he expects the DAC test facility will become a destination for those looking to advance CCS projects around the world, showcasing Canadian expertise in the process.
“My hope is that not only will we learn and improve carbon removal technology, but we will also put Canada on the map in terms of being a place where innovation can thrive and this industry can work,” he said.
“It will be a place where corporate leaders, government officials and customers from around the world can come and see what direct air capture really is, how it works, and how Canada is the place to do it.”
-
Education1 day ago
Why more parents are turning to Christian schools
-
Immigration2 days ago
Unregulated medical procedures? Prince Edward Islanders Want Answers After Finding Biomedical Waste From PRC-Linked Monasteries
-
Business2 days ago
Democracy Watchdog Says PM Carney’s “Ethics Screen” Actually “Hides His Participation” In Conflicted Investments
-
Addictions2 days ago
After eight years, Canada still lacks long-term data on safer supply
-
Alberta1 day ago
Upgrades at Port of Churchill spark ambitions for nation-building Arctic exports
-
Alberta1 day ago
OPEC+ is playing a dangerous game with oil
-
Business1 day ago
Is dirty Chinese money undermining Canada’s Arctic?
-
National2 days ago
Liberals push to lower voting age to 16 in federal elections