Alberta
A Matter of Fact: AP news story misrepresents the oil sands by ignoring environmental progress
A truck approaches Wapisiw Lookout, the first reclaimed tailings pond in the oil sands industry. Photo courtesy Suncor Energy
From the Canadian Energy Centre
Producers reducing emissions per barrel, on track for absolute emissions reductions
A widely-circulated article this week by the Associated Press misrepresents Canada’s oil sands industry by ignoring its progress improving environmental performance and its commitment to achieving climate targets.
Here are the facts.
Fact: Canadian oil is not “the world’s dirtiest”
The article repeats the false narrative that oil from the oil sands is far “dirtier” than other crudes produced around the world. This is not the case.
Analysis by S&P Global found that average oil sands emissions per barrel are in the range of other crude oils consumed in the United States, the industry’s main customer.
Average oil sands emissions per barrel range from 1.6 per cent below to 8.6 per cent above, depending on production process, S&P Global predecessor IHS Markit reported in 2018.
Canada’s oil sands producers are doing more to reduce emissions than operators in other countries, according to BMO Capital Markets.
Between 2013 and 2021, BMO estimates the average oil sands barrel shaved off more than 22 kilograms of emissions, compared to a reduction of just five kilograms per barrel for other major global oil producers.
Fact: Oil sands producers reducing emissions per barrel, on track for absolute emissions reductions
The AP article makes no mention of the success oil sands producers have achieved reducing emissions per barrel. That so-called emissions intensity is now estimated to be 23 per cent lower than it was in 2009, according to S&P Global.
Further, there is no mention that the success reducing emissions per barrel is catching up to production growth, and total oil sands emissions may be close to their peak.
Last year, for the first time since S&P Global started estimating the data, oil sands production went up, but emissions did not.
Total oil sands emissions were 81 megatonnes in 2022, nearly flat with 2021 despite a production increase of about 50,000 barrels per day.
Last year analysts predicted that absolute oil sands emissions would start going down by 2025. The new findings indicate that could happen sooner. And that’s before shovels hit the ground for the Pathways Alliance’s foundational carbon capture and storage (CCS) project.
Fact: Pathways Alliance collaboration is critical to emissions reduction
The AP article leaves out any mention of the Pathways Alliance, one of the most significant environmental initiatives ever undertaken in Canada.
Six companies representing 95 per cent of Canada’s oil sands production are working together with the goal of net zero emissions in their operations by 2050.
With anticipated co-funding support from Canadian governments, the Alliance has announced plans to invest about $24 billion before 2030 in the first phase of its plan.
This includes $16.5 billion on the foundational CCS project and $7.6 billion on other technologies like switching to clean hydrogen and electricity to power oil sands operations.
About half of the targeted 22 million tonne per year emissions reduction by 2030 will come from CCS, with a network connecting CO2 capture at an initial 14 oil sands facilities to a storage hub in northern Alberta.
Fact: CCS projects in Canada are working
The AP article perpetuates the inaccurate position that CCS is not a proven technology. But CCS in Canada has successfully operated for more than two decades.
Canada has six of the world’s 39 commercial CCS operations, accounting for about 15 per cent of global CCS capacity even though Canada generates less than two per cent of global CO2 emissions, according to the International CCS Knowledge Centre.
In Alberta, since 2015 two CCS projects – both tied to oil sands production – have safely stored more than 12 million tonnes of CO2, or the equivalent of taking more than 2.6 million internal combustion engine vehicles off the road.
Fact: The world needs oil now and long into the future
While activists trumpet the narrative that the world is rapidly transitioning away from fossil fuels, the reality is oil and gas will be around for a long, long time.
Even as more renewable and alternative energy sources become technically and economically feasible at a large scale, on the current trajectory the International Energy Agency (IEA) projects that oil alone will still supply 26 per cent of world energy needs in 2050. That’s down only modestly from 30 per cent in 2022.
Even in the IEA’s unlikely net zero scenario – which would require unprecedented global cooperation and includes more than a third of emissions reductions coming from technologies that do not yet exist – oil still accounts for 8 per cent of world energy supply in 2050.
Oil demand for non-energy use (like pavement, which improves in quality when using oil from Canada’s oil sands) even continues to increase in the IEA’s net zero scenario, rising to 6 per cent of world energy use in 2050, from five per cent in 2022.
Canada’s oil sands industry leads the world in its commitment to continuous improvement in environmental performance and emissions reduction, and this should be recognized by media outlets including the Associated Press.
From the Fraser Institute
By Spencer Gudewill and Tegan Hill
Last November, Premier Danielle Smith announced that her government will give up to $1.8 billion in subsidies to Dow Chemicals, which plans to expand a petrochemical project northeast of Edmonton. In other words, $1.8 billion in corporate welfare.
And this is just one example of corporate welfare paid for by Albertans.
According to a recent study published by the Fraser Institute, from 2007 to 2021, the latest year of available data, the Alberta government spent $31.0 billion (inflation-adjusted) on subsidies (a.k.a. corporate welfare) to select firms and businesses, purportedly to help Albertans. And this number excludes other forms of government handouts such as loan guarantees, direct investment and regulatory or tax privileges for particular firms and industries. So the total cost of corporate welfare in Alberta is likely much higher.
Why should Albertans care?
First off, there’s little evidence that corporate welfare generates widespread economic growth or jobs. In fact, evidence suggests the contrary—that subsidies result in a net loss to the economy by shifting resources to less productive sectors or locations (what economists call the “substitution effect”) and/or by keeping businesses alive that are otherwise economically unviable (i.e. “zombie companies”). This misallocation of resources leads to a less efficient, less productive and less prosperous Alberta.
And there are other costs to corporate welfare.
For example, between 2007 and 2019 (the latest year of pre-COVID data), every year on average the Alberta government spent 35 cents (out of every dollar of business income tax revenue it collected) on corporate welfare. Given that workers bear the burden of more than half of any business income tax indirectly through lower wages, if the government reduced business income taxes rather than spend money on corporate welfare, workers could benefit.
Moreover, Premier Smith failed in last month’s provincial budget to provide promised personal income tax relief and create a lower tax bracket for incomes below $60,000 to provide $760 in annual savings for Albertans (on average). But in 2019, after adjusting for inflation, the Alberta government spent $2.4 billion on corporate welfare—equivalent to $1,034 per tax filer. Clearly, instead of subsidizing select businesses, the Smith government could have kept its promise to lower personal income taxes.
Finally, there’s the Heritage Fund, which the Alberta government created almost 50 years ago to save a share of the province’s resource wealth for the future.
In her 2024 budget, Premier Smith earmarked $2.0 billion for the Heritage Fund this fiscal year—almost the exact amount spent on corporate welfare each year (on average) between 2007 and 2019. Put another way, the Alberta government could save twice as much in the Heritage Fund in 2024/25 if it ended corporate welfare, which would help Premier Smith keep her promise to build up the Heritage Fund to between $250 billion and $400 billion by 2050.
By eliminating corporate welfare, the Smith government can create fiscal room to reduce personal and business income taxes, or save more in the Heritage Fund. Any of these options will benefit Albertans far more than wasteful billion-dollar subsidies to favoured firms.
Authors:
Alberta
Official statement from Premier Danielle Smith and Energy Minister Brian Jean on the start-up of the Trans Mountain Pipeline
“The Numbers Favour Our Side”
Making Alberta a geothermal energy leader
Canadian interest in electric vehicles falls for second year in a row: survey
Three Calgary massage parlours linked to human trafficking investigation
The EV ‘Bloodbath’ Arrives Early
Canada’s postal service refuses to help with Trudeau’s gun ban buyback program: report
Peckford: Hallelujah! Supreme Court of Canada to hear Newfoundland and Labrador charter case
-
Business2 days agoWEF panelist suggests COVID response accustomed people to the idea of CBDCs
-
illegal immigration2 days agoFlight Docs Reveal Which Cities Are Receiving Migrants Under Biden’s Parole Program
-
Fraser Institute2 days agoCanada can solve its productivity ‘emergency’—we just need politicians on board
-
International2 days agoNYPD storms protest-occupied Columbia building, several arrested
-
Addictions2 days agoBritish Columbia to re-criminalize hard drug use in public after massive policy failure
-
Addictions13 hours agoCity of Toronto asks Trudeau gov’t to decriminalize hard drugs despite policy’s failure in BC
-
Great Reset1 day agoMiddle school girls who refused to compete against male banned from next track meet
-
Environment2 days agoJournalism Misrepresent Climate Science