Energy
A Wealth-Creating Way of Reducing Global CO2 Emissions
From the C2C Journal
By Gwyn Morgan
It is Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s contention there’s no “business case” for exporting Canada’s abundant, inexpensively produced natural gas as LNG. But Canadians might do well to politely decline management consulting advice from a former substitute drama teacher who was born into wealth and has never had to meet a payroll, balance a budget or make a sale. Bluntly stated, someone who has shown no evidence of being able to run the proverbial lemonade stand. And one whose real agenda, the evidence shows, is to strangle the nation’s most productive and wealth-generating industry. With the first LNG ship finally expected to dock at Kitimat, B.C. over the next year and load Canada’s first-ever LNG export cargo, Gwyn Morgan lays out the business and environmental cases for ramping up our LNG exports – and having them count towards Canada’s greenhouse gas reduction targets.
Pierre Poilievre’s Axe the (carbon) Tax campaign is a spectacular success. But the Conservative Party of Canada needs its own plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels. Paradoxically, it’s a fossil fuel that provides much of the answer.
Canada’s rich endowment of natural gas resources offers an immense opportunity to reduce global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions while also helping to rescue the Liberal-government-ravaged Canadian economy by exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) to China, Japan, South Korea and the other coal-dependent Asia-Pacific countries. Switching from coal to natural gas for producing electricity and generating heat for buildings and industrial processes can typically reduce CO2 emissions by 50 percent for the same unit of output, while all-but eliminating the toxic compounds and lung-clogging particulates emitted from burning coal that shorten the lives of millions living in smog-stricken Asian cities.
More natural gas is urgently needed, since countries throughout Asia – especially China and India – are currently adding even more coal-burning power plants to meet rapidly growing electricity demand. The benefits of fuel-switching are not speculation, but a proven result: the United States’ pronounced switch starting in the mid-2000s from coal to natural gas for electricity materially reduced that country’s CO2 emissions (see accompanying graph), nearly equalling the entire European Union’s emissions cuts, as I wrote about in this previous column.
A study by respected consulting firm Wood Mackenzie, released in late 2022, determined the following:
- “Canada is well-positioned geographically…Western Canadian LNG is much closer to Asia relative to US Gulf Coast LNG, which needs to be shipped through the Panama Canal to get to Asia”;
- “LNG from Canada would be cost-competitive for northeast Asian importers…due to its relatively low shipping and liquefaction costs”;
- “LNG from Canada has lower emissions intensity than LNG coming from many other global LNG exporters”;
- “Asia will not be able to produce enough natural gas domestically to meet its escalating demand, therefore Canadian LNG is a compelling alternative: With its high environmental standards and stewardship, Canada would be a great partner to fill the LNG demand gap in Asia”; and
- “If Canada aggressively ramps up its LNG exports…the emissions displaced from Canadian LNG would total 5.5 [gigatons of CO2 equivalent] from 2022 to 2050 or 181 [megatons of CO2 equivalent] on average per year, which is equivalent to removing all Canadian cars from the road.”
These impressive benefits – not to mention the opportunity to create tens of thousands of well-paying jobs in our country and provide long-term returns to investors, among them millions of pension-dependent retirees – were recognized long ago by the energy industry, Western provincial premiers and former prime minister Stephen Harper. And for a time it indeed seemed that Canada was on the cusp of an LNG boom. By 2010, there were more than 20 LNG projects in the works in B.C., representing hundreds of billions in total investment. These included Exxon Mobil’s $25-billion West Coast Canada project, Chinese-owned CNOOC’s $36-billion Aurora project, Malaysian firm Petronas’s $36 billion Pacific NorthWest project, and the Shell-led $43 billion LNG Canada project at Kitimat.
Aside from the jobs created and the wealth generated for the participating companies, B.C.’s annual natural gas royalties are forecast to double. Benefits for First Nations include significant employment and business opportunities, such as HaiSea Marine’s 50 percent interest in a $500 million contract.
But through a decade of trying to navigate Canada’s increasingly obstructive and Byzantine regulatory process, project proponents dropped out one by one. Today LNG Canada is the only one of those major projects left standing. (Two much smaller LNG projects, Woodfibre LNG in Howe Sound at Squamish, and Cedar LNG just a few kilometres from the LNG Canada project, are also proceeding, and one other large project proposed by the Nisga’a First Nation is making regulatory progress.) LNG Canada succeeded only because South African project leader Andy Calitz, backed by the enthusiasm of the Haisla Nation which saw the immense potential to create a self-sustaining, wealth-generating economy for its people, refused to give up.
After five years of construction, the LNG Canada liquefaction facility and loading terminal are nearing completion, with the first LNG ship scheduled to sail to China in 2025 (possibly even this year). The Kitimat plant itself is just one component of Canada’s first LNG export project. TC Energy Corp.’s (formerly TransCanada Pipelines) $15 billion, recently completed Coastal GasLink pipeline will carry the required natural gas from the northeastern B.C. gas fields to the Kitimat terminal. And additional billions of dollars have been invested in drilling natural gas wells, proving up the immense reserves needed to feed the LNG facility for decades to come, and constructing field production systems.
The economic benefits are myriad. Aside from the jobs created and the wealth generated for the participating companies, B.C.’s annual natural gas royalties are forecast to double from $700 million in 2024 to $1.4 billion in 2027. Benefits for First Nations include significant employment and business opportunities, such as HaiSea Marine’s 50 percent interest in a $500 million contract.
And that’s just LNG Canada’s Phase 1, which will produce 14 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) of LNG, or approximately 1.8 billion cubic feet (bcf) per day. With that one project coming on-stream, about 10 percent of Canada’s total natural gas production will be exported to international markets, earning premium prices. Construction of Phase 2 is scheduled to begin in 2026 and will double the facility’s output, with first delivery scheduled for 2032. A report from Canada Action estimates that completion of both phases will reduce CO2 emissions in Asian countries as much as would removing 18 million cars from Canadian roads. That is a far more efficient and realistic way of reducing emissions than the Trudeau government’s current scheme to force everyone into electric vehicles within a decade.
A major barrier for LNG project sponsors has been Canadian regulators’ fixation on a project’s domestic emissions – which come mainly from producing the energy needed to operate the liquefaction and storage process and loading facility. These emissions are miniscule compared to the enormous emissions reductions when natural gas is used instead of coal in consuming countries. But in their zeal to force Canada to “net zero” emissions, government authorities initially tried to veto LNG Canada generating its electricity and compression power using some of the natural gas that will be already piped to the site, insisting instead upon hydroelectric power. This seriously delayed the project due to the need for B.C. Hydro to first build a new dam to supply the required power, along with a new, $3 billion transmission line that has not even begun its environmental review process.
Regulators finally waived their objection so the project could be finished, and it will initially use natural gas for power. But the same objection is now being raised with respect to another major LNG venture proposed in the same region. The Ksi Lisims LNG project would utilize a floating liquefaction and loading facility docked at lands owned by the Nisga’a First Nation north of Prince Rupert. Its natural gas would be supplied through an already-approved but never-built pipeline planned for one of the cancelled LNG projects. The $10 billion venture would have approximately two-thirds the capacity of LNG Canada Phase 1. The facility would be powered by hydroelectricity.
Ksi Lisims sounds like a great addition to Canada’s modest LNG lineup, one that British Columbians should applaud. Instead, the proponents have been assailed by objections over the greenhouse gas emissions from the facility and the natural gas production process, and concurrently the B.C. Wilderness Committee is calling on the province’s NDP government to veto any further LNG development. None of these zealots acknowledge the vastly greater reduction of greenhouse gas emissions that will be achieved as consuming countries switch to natural gas.
Prior to the December 2018 UN Climate Change Conference in Katowice, Poland, Canada’s Conservative Party urged leaders of their nation’s delegation to propose that the use of imported natural gas to displace coal and thereby reduce emissions in one country should count towards the exporting country’s emissions reduction targets. But this made far too much sense for our Prime Minister and his team of anti-fossil-fuel eco-zealots. A new federal government that encourages LNG projects might well see a return of those other big sponsors that were driven off.
And that brings us back to Pierre Poilievre and the need for a Conservative alternative to Trudeau’s carbon tax. LNG export would be not only vastly superior in reducing emissions, it would also create tens of billions of dollars in economic benefits for a beleaguered Canadian private sector. It is beyond high time. A Macdonald-Laurier Institute report, Estimating the True Size of Government in Canada, concludes that Canada’s private sector has shrunk to just 36 percent of the nation’s GDP. That’s right – Canada’s public sector now represents nearly two-thirds of the Canadian economy, if one includes in that measure the vast amounts governments spend on tax credits and other tax-related expenditures, plus the economic impacts of regulating the pricing or outputs of private industries. This is appalling.
Even more incomprehensible is a research report from the Harvard Kennedy School noting that “Communist” China’s private sector generates “approximately 60% of China’s GDP, 70% of its innovative capacity, 80% of urban employment and 90% of new jobs.” By those measures, the private sector in ostensibly free and democratic Canada, with its allegedly market-based economy, has been reduced to barely half the relative size of the private sector in authoritarian China.
It is clear that for Canada, getting out of the way of privately-driven growth in LNG exports would be a vastly superior environmental alternative to Trudeau’s economically destructive and politically divisive carbon tax, while also helping to reverse the decline of what was once a proud, thriving nation into an indebted, unproductive, government-dominated basket case.
Gwyn Morgan is a retired business leader who was a director of five global corporations.
“If Ottawa had it’s way Albertans would be left to freeze in the dark”
The ineffective federal net-zero electricity regulations will not reduce emissions or benefit Albertans but will increase costs and lead to supply shortages.
The risk of power outages during a hot summer or the depths of harsh winter cold snaps, are not unrealistic outcomes if these regulations are implemented. According to the Alberta Electric System Operator’s analysis, the regulations in question would make Alberta’s electricity system more than 100 times less reliable than the province’s supply adequacy standard. Albertans expect their electricity to remain affordable and reliable, but implementation of these regulations could increase costs by a staggering 35 per cent.
Canada’s constitution is clear. Provinces have exclusive jurisdiction over the development, conservation and management of sites and facilities in the province for the generation and production of electrical energy. That is why Alberta’s government is referring the constitutionality of the federal government’s recent net-zero electricity regulations to the Court of Appeal of Alberta.
“The federal government refused to work collaboratively or listen to Canadians while developing these regulations. The results are ineffective, unachievable and irresponsible, and place Albertans’ livelihoods – and more importantly, lives – at significant risk. Our government will not accept unconstitutional net-zero regulations that leave Albertans vulnerable to blackouts in the middle of summer and winter when they need electricity the most.”
“The introduction of the Clean Electricity Regulations in Alberta by the federal government is another example of dangerous federal overreach. These regulations will create unpredictable power outages in the months when Albertans need reliable energy the most. They will also cause power prices to soar in Alberta, which will hit our vulnerable the hardest.”
Finalized in December 2024, the federal electricity regulations impose strict carbon limits on fossil fuel power, in an attempt to force a net-zero grid, an unachievable target given current technology and infrastructure. The reliance on unproven technologies makes it almost impossible to operate natural gas plants without costly upgrades, threatening investment, grid reliability, and Alberta’s energy security.
“Ottawa’s electricity regulations will leave Albertans in the dark. They aren’t about reducing emissions – they are unconstitutional, ideological activist policies based on standards that can’t be met and technology that doesn’t exist. It will drive away investment and punish businesses, provinces and families for using natural gas for reliable, dispatchable power. We will not put families at risk from safety and affordability impacts – rationing power during the coldest days of the year – and we will continue to stand up for Albertans.”
“Albertans depend on electricity to provide for their families, power their businesses and pursue their dreams. The federal government’s Clean Electricity Regulations threaten both the affordability and reliability of our power grid, and we will not stand by as these regulations put the well-being of Albertans at risk.”
Related information
- Conference Board of Canada socio-economic Impacts of Canada’s 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan – (April 2025)
- Alberta Electric System Operator’s position on Canadian Energy Regulations
Oh, Canada
We find it endlessly fascinating that most Canadians believe they live in a representative democracy, where aspiring candidates engage in authentic politicking to earn their place in office. So accustomed are Canada’s power brokers to getting their way, they rarely bother to cover their tracks. A careful reading of the notoriously pliant Canadian press makes anticipating future events in the country surprisingly straightforward.
Back in December, when Pierre Poilievre was given better than 90% odds of replacing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau—and Mark Carney was still just an uncharismatic banker few had heard of—we engaged in some not-so-speculative dot-connecting and correctly predicted Carney’s rise to the top spot. Our interest was driven by the notoriously rocky relationship between Ottawa and the Province of Alberta, home to one of the world’s largest hydrocarbon reserves, and how Carney’s rise might be a catalyst for resetting Canada’s energy trajectory. In a follow-up article titled “The Fix Is In,” we laid out a few more predictions:
“Here’s how the play is likely to unfold in the weeks and months ahead: Carney will be elected Prime Minister on April 28 by a comfortable margin; [Alberta Premier Danielle] Smith will trigger a constitutional crisis, providing cover for Carney to strike a grand bargain that finally resolves longstanding tensions between the provinces and Ottawa; and large infrastructure permitting reform will fall into place. Protests against these developments will be surprisingly muted, and those who do take to the streets will be largely ignored by the media. The entire effort will be wrapped in a thicket of patriotism, with Trump portrayed as a threat even greater than climate change itself. References to carbon emissions will slowly fade…
In parallel, we expect Trump and Carney to swiftly strike a favorable deal on tariffs, padding the latter’s bona fides just as his political capital will be most needed.”
The votes have barely been counted, yet the next moves are already unfolding…
“Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says she’ll make it easier for citizens to initiate a referendum on the province’s future in Canada, after warning that a Liberal win in Monday’s election could spur a groundswell of support for Alberta separatism. Smith said on Tuesday that a newly tabled elections bill will give everyday Albertans a bigger say in the province’s affairs.
‘(We’re giving) Albertans more ways to be directly involved in democracy, and to have their say on issues that matter to them,’ Smith told reporters in Edmonton.
If passed, the new law would dramatically lower the number of signatures needed to put a citizen-proposed constitutional referendum question on the ballot, setting a new threshold of 10 per cent of general election turnout — or just over 175,000, based on Alberta’s last provincial election in 2023.”
“US President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is looking to make a trade deal and will visit the White House within the next week. Trump said he congratulated Carney on his election victory when the Canadian leader called on Tuesday.
‘He called me up yesterday – he said let’s make a deal,’ Trump told reporters at the White House after a televised Cabinet meeting.”
Remember where you read it first.
 |
In Defeat, Joe Tay’s Campaign Becomes a Flashpoint for Suspected Voter Intimidation in Canada
Carney’s budget is worse than Trudeau’s
Canadians’ Interest in Buying an EV Falls for Third Year in a Row
Trump Has Driven Canadians Crazy. This Is How Crazy.
Governments in Alberta should spur homebuilding amid population explosion
History in the making? Trump, Zelensky hold meeting about Ukraine war in Vatican ahead of Francis’ funeral
Low oil prices could have big consequences for Alberta’s finances
-
Duane Rolheiser2 days agoCarney Wins: What now Alberta?
-
COVID-192 days agoFreedom Convoy leaders’ sentencing judgment delayed, Crown wants them jailed for two years
-
Banks2 days agoTD Bank Account Closures Expose Chinese Hybrid Warfare Threat
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoPost election…the chips fell where they fell
-
COVID-191 day agoCanada’s health department warns COVID vaccine injury payouts to exceed $75 million budget
-
Alberta2 days agoHours after Liberal election win, Alberta Prosperity Project drumming up interest in referendum
-
espionage1 day agoLongtime Liberal MP Warns of Existential Threat to Canada, Suggests Trump’s ’51st State’ Jibes Boosted Carney
-
Alberta2 days agoNew Alberta Election Act bans electronic vote counting machines, lowers threshold for recalls and petitions