Energy
Canada wallows on LNG sidelines, paralyzed by Ottawa’s onerous regulatory system

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Lee Harding
Mitsotakis said Greece has built a major facility outside the city of Alexandroupolis to process incoming LNG tankers. He said Greece will pump LNG to the rest of Europe and needs more at home as the country abandons coal.
When it comes to fossil fuels, the world wants what Canada’s got. The problem is, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau doesn’t care.
Fresh proof came with the recent visit of Kyriakos Mitsotakis, the first Greek leader to come to Canada in more than 40 years.
According to the office of the Prime Minister Trudeau, Mitsotakis was simply here to march in Montreal’s Greek Independence Day Parade, discuss “shared interests” and cut the ribbon as Greece purchased Canadian-made firefighting planes.
But, during an interview with CTV, Mitsotakis said his country would “of course” like to start importing Canadian liquified natural gas (LNG).
“We are a big entry point for LNG, not just for the Greek market, but also for the Balkans, for Eastern Europe. Theoretically, we could even supply Ukraine,” said Mitsotakis.
“In principle, yes, we are very interested in obtaining LNG at competitive prices.”
Mitsotakis said Greece has built a major facility outside the city of Alexandroupolis to process incoming LNG tankers. He said Greece will pump LNG to the rest of Europe and needs more at home as the country abandons coal.
Much of Europe’s energy has traditionally come from Russia or Middle Eastern autocracies. More than a decade ago, author Ezra Levant made the case for Canada’s “Ethical Oil” as a better alternative. Canada’s status as a democratic state that respects human rights and extracts oil with a minimal environmental footprint is as good as it gets. Mitsotakis, a Harvard-educated investment banker, understands that quite readily today.
“Canada is a country (for) which we share so many values,” said Mitsotakis. “I think we see eye-to-eye on many of the challenges that we face.”
Still, there was no mention of energy exports in Trudeau’s public comments regarding Mitsotakis, nor in official government communications about the visit.
Mitsotakis can take little consolation that his treatment is not unusual, as true as that may be. In the past 18 months, both the Japanese prime minister and the German chancellor returned home without official assurances that Ottawa was eager to offer bulk quantities of Canadian LNG.
Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida came to Canada in January, 2023 making no secret of his “high expectations” to reach an LNG export agreement with Canada.
In August 2022, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz came to Canada hoping to reach an LNG deal. “Canada is our partner of choice,” Scholz said at the time.
Somehow, Trudeau said at a press conference with the German leader that there was no “business case” for LNG exports to Europe. Instead, he took the chancellor to an empty field in Newfoundland that was the chosen site for a future Canadian facility to export carbon-neutral hydrogen.
That will help Germany a little, but not nearly enough. The country turned to Qatar and signed a 15-year LNG export deal.
Canada is currently the world’s fifth largest producer of natural gas. But, as is the case with oil, facilities to sell it overseas are very limited. Canada has no LNG export facilities currently operating. Any LNG exports to Europe would have to go through a US export terminal.
Kitimat, BC will open a major export facility in early 2025, but plans to build an LNG pipeline to ports on the East Coast have fallen apart due to high costs.
On Monday, Alberta Energy Minister Brian Jean said “onerous” regulatory procedures were more to blame.
“With massive natural gas reserves, Canada can no longer wait on the LNG sidelines, burdened by an onerous regulatory system. Our allies and trading partners need us. We must have more LNG export facilities approved and built,” Jean said in a statement.
Jean is right. Canada has scuttled one opportunity after another during the Trudeau era, first by smothering pipeline development in onerous regulations. The Northern Gateway pipeline was the only one the nation banned, citing environmental concerns off the coast of northern B.C., despite the fact that 50 tankers passed the same waters every day with exports from Alaska.
Other proposals, such as the Energy East pipeline, were held up in red tape until its proponents decided the project wasn’t worth it. A 30,000-page application went for not, as did the hope that refineries in the Maritimes could refine Canadian products instead of those from the Middle East.
The trans mountain pipeline was also bound up until the government bought it, after which its progress still went painfully slowly. Years late and six times over-budget at a cost of $34 billion, the “long delayed” pipeline is finally ready for crude deliveries.
Bill C-69, dubbed by former Alberta Premier Jason Kenney as the “No More Pipelines Act”, was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Canada last fall. The development is welcome but cannot restore lost time.
Canada remains poorly positioned to capitalize on another historic opportunity–the European thirst for oil as it tries to distance itself from Russia. Unfortunately, this problem seems more convenient to Ottawa than not. The Canadian government seems more interested in having zero carbon emissions even if that means zero economy. Too bad that makes zero sense.
Lee Harding is a Research Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
Business
Senator wants to torpedo Canada’s oil and gas industry

From the Fraser Institute
Recently, without much fanfare, Senator Rosa Galvez re-pitched a piece of legislation that died on the vine when former prime minister Justin Trudeau prorogued Parliament in January. Her “Climate-Aligned Finance Act” (CAFA), which would basically bring a form of BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions) to Canada’s oil and gas sector, would much better be left in its current legislative oblivion.
CAFA would essentially treat Canada’s oil and gas sector like an enemy of the state—a state, in Senator Galvez’ view, where all values are subordinate to greenhouse gas emission control. Think I’m kidding? Per CAFA, alignment with national climate commitments means that everyone engaged in federal investment in “emission intensive activities [read, the entire oil and gas sector] must give precedence to that duty over all other duties and obligations of office, and, for that purpose, ensuring the entity is in alignment with climate commitments is deemed to be a superseding matter of public interest.”
In plain English, CAFA would require anyone involved in federal financing (or federally-regulated financing) of the oil and gas sector to divest their Canadian federal investments in the oil and gas sector. And the government would sanction those who argue against it.
There’s another disturbing component to CAFA—in short, it stacks investment decision-making boards. CAFA requires at least one board member of every federally-regulated financial institution to have “climate expertise.” How is “climate expertise” defined? CAFA says it includes people with experience in climate science, social science, Indgineuous “ways of knowing,” and people who have “acute lived experience related to the physical or economic damages of climate change.” (Stacking advisory boards like this, by the way, is a great way to build public distrust in governmental advisory boards, which, in our post-COVID world, is probably not all that high. Might want to rethink this, senator.)
Clearly, Senator Galvez’ CAFA is draconian public policy dressed up in drab finance-speak camouflage. But here’s what it would do. By making federal investment off-limits to oil and gas companies, it would quickly put negative pressure on investment from both national and international investors, effectively starving the sector for capital. After all, if a company’s activities are anathema to its own federal regulators or investment organs, and are statutorily prohibited from even verbally defending such investments, who in their right minds would want to invest?
And that is the BDS of CAFA. In so many words, it calls on the Canadian federal government to boycott, divest from, and sanction Canada’s oil and gas sector—which powers our country, produces a huge share of our exports, and employs people from coast to coast. Senator Galvez would like to see her Climate-Aligned Finance Act (CAFA) resurrected by the Carney government, whose energy policy to-date has been less than crystal clear. But for the sake of Canadians, it should stay dead.
Energy
Who put the energy illiterate in charge?

This article supplied by Troy Media.
Canada’s energy policy is being shaped by politicians who don’t actually understand how energy works. That’s not just embarrassing. It’s dangerous
Canada’s energy future is being held back by a critical obstacle: our elected officials don’t understand energy.
At all three levels of government, most politicians lack even a basic grasp of how our energy systems function. That ignorance isn’t just a knowledge gap—it’s a leadership crisis. Energy systems are evolving rapidly, and our leaders are ill-equipped to manage the complexity, tradeoffs and consequences involved. With few exceptions, their understanding is superficial, shaped more by talking points than substance.
By “energy systems,” I mean the complex web of technologies, infrastructure, markets and regulations that generate, distribute and manage power—from oil and gas to hydro, nuclear, wind and solar. These systems are deeply interconnected, constantly changing and central to every aspect of modern life. Yet the people making decisions about them often have little idea how they actually work.
This shows up frequently in public life: dodged questions, scripted answers, vague platitudes. Many politicians skate across the surface of issues with the thinnest understanding. The old adage “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing” perfectly describes Canadian energy politics today.
Decisions about energy directly affect household utility bills, climate goals, industrial competitiveness and grid reliability. Yet politicians tend to be tethered to the dominant energy source in their own region—oil and gas in Alberta, hydro in Quebec, nuclear in Ontario—without grasping how those systems connect or conflict. Canada’s energy landscape is fragmented, with each province operating under its own regulatory framework, infrastructure constraints and political pressures. That makes coordination difficult and systems-level thinking essential.
This isn’t a left-versus-right issue. It’s not oil and gas versus renewables. It’s a national failure to understand the integrated systems that power our lives and economy. Canada is, functionally, energy illiterate, and our elected officials reflect that reality. We flip a switch, pump gas, turn up the thermostat and rarely ask how or why it works, or what it costs in environmental or economic terms.
Take the Clean Electricity Regulations as one example. Introduced by the federal government to drive Canada’s electricity grid to net-zero emissions by 2035, the CERs require provinces to sharply reduce or eliminate fossil fuel-based power. But in Alberta and Saskatchewan, where coal and natural gas still dominate, those regulations landed with a thud. The federal government failed to account for regional infrastructure limitations, market structure
differences and technology readiness. The result? Immediate backlash, legal threats and political gridlock—not because climate action is unwelcome, but because the policy was crafted in a vacuum of systems-level understanding.
Adding to the problem is the dominance of bureaucrats and political handlers in shaping what passes for energy messaging. Speeches are often a patchwork of statistics and sanitized clichés, stripped of nuance or depth. Many politicians simply deliver what they’re handed, guided more by risk management than insight. The result is policy that’s disconnected from the realities it aims to change.
A handful of elected officials do have real-world energy experience, but even that is often narrow, based on one role or one sector. It rarely translates into the kind of broad, integrated knowledge needed to lead across multiple interdependent systems. The risks of this fragmented thinking are immense.
What’s needed is mandatory education—an energy information and insights toolkit for anyone seeking public office. This shared curriculum would cover how electricity and fuel systems work, the economics of energy markets, climate dynamics, environmental trade-offs and public policy principles. It should be grounded in both natural and social sciences and structured to develop systems thinking, so that decisions are informed by how energy technologies, markets and governance truly interact.
Imagine if thousands of politicians—urban and rural, left and right, federal and local—learned from the same textbook. Politics wouldn’t vanish. Disagreements wouldn’t disappear. But the debate would shift from tribal talking points to informed discussion.
And for once, Canada might start moving forward on energy, not with noise or paralysis, but with purpose.
Bill Whitelaw is a director and advisor to many industry boards, including the Canadian Society for Evolving Energy, which he chairs. He speaks and comments frequently on the subjects of social licence, innovation and technology, and energy supply networks.
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.
-
espionage15 hours ago
From Sidewinder to P.E.I.: Are Canada’s Political Elites Benefiting from Beijing’s Real Estate Reach?
-
conflict2 days ago
Trump dismisses US intelligence that Iran wasn’t pursuing nuclear bomb before Israeli attack
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days ago
Jordan Peterson reveals DEI ‘expert’ serving as his ‘re-education coach’ for opposing LGBT agenda
-
Alberta1 day ago
Unified message for Ottawa: Premier Danielle Smith and Premier Scott Moe call for change to federal policies
-
Business1 day ago
Canada’s critical minerals are key to negotiating with Trump
-
Business1 day ago
RFK Jr. planning new restrictions on drug advertising: report
-
Education2 days ago
Students can’t use AI to cheat on standardized tests
-
Daily Caller19 hours ago
Unanimous Supreme Court Ruling Inspires Hope For Future Energy Project Permitting