S&P Global Commodity Insights found that a 40 per cent emissions cap could lead to a reduction in oil and natural gas production of one million barrels per day by 2030 and a 2.1-million barrel reduction by 2035.

Independent analysis by the Conference Board of Canada, Deloitte and S&P Global tell the same story: the federal government’s proposed cap would require oil and gas production cuts that would put people out of work and drain billions from Canada’s economy. Despite these reports and continued opposition from many provinces, industry, businesses, experts and Canadians, the federal government will soon release its draft regulations.

The proposed emissions cap is a production cap. S&P Global Commodity Insights found that a 40 per cent emissions cap could lead to a reduction in oil and natural gas production of one million barrels per day by 2030 and a 2.1-million barrel reduction by 2035. According to the Conference Board of Canada and Deloitte, the cap could amount to a more than 10 per cent reduction in oil production and a 16 per cent reduction in conventional gas production in Alberta in 2030.

Alberta’s government is launching a national advertising campaign to inform Canadians that this cap will lead our province and country into economic and societal decline. Alberta would be hit hardest and in 2040, the province’s GDP would shrink by 4.5 per cent. Canada’s would decline by 1 per cent. The cap would result in 150,000 Canadians losing their jobs and the loss of $14 billion a year from the economy. The average Canadian family would be left with up to $419 less per month to spend on groceries, housing or fuel, impacting the quality of life Canadians enjoy coast to coast to coast.

All Canadians deserve to know the dangers of this cap, which will negatively impact their families without reducing global emissions whatsoever.

“Once again, Ottawa is attempting to set policies that are shortsighted and reckless. We’re challenging proposed policy that would stifle our energy industry, kill jobs and ruin economies by launching a national campaign that tells Ottawa to “Scrap the Cap.” We’re telling the federal government to forget this reckless and extreme idea and get behind Alberta’s leadership by investing in real solutions that cut emissions, not Canada’s prosperity.”

The proposed cap will put safe, reliable and secure energy at risk while costing tens of thousands of jobs and billions in lost federal revenue that pays for important programs, services and infrastructure. This means lost jobs, hurt families shuttered businesses and less revenue going to the schools, hospitals, programs and services every Canadian relies on.

If left unchanged, this cap would force Canada’s energy industry to curtail production at the expense of struggling Canadian families. When production is cut, jobs, tax revenues and the economy are cut too. It is, in effect, a cap on prosperity that would be felt across the country.

Alberta is encouraging Canadians to visit the Scrap the Cap website and tell Ottawa they cannot and will not support a cap on energy production that leaves Canadians with a lower standard of living and reduced services. Print, television and social media advertisements will run nationwide from Oct. 15 to the end of November to urge Canadians to contact their member of parliament (MP) and share their thoughts. The Scrap the Cap website includes a letter that can be sent electronically.

“We will not stand by while the federal government threatens tens of thousands of jobs. This production cap means billions in revenues down the drain, and we will not let our province’s – or our country’s – economic future be gutted by an out-of-touch federal government. There is a way to reduce emissions without killing the economy… but this unconstitutional production cap is not it.”

“A cap on oil and gas production will kill jobs and investment and adds to the growing list of federal programs that will kill investments in decarbonization. All Canadians need to let Ottawa know how this cap hurts Alberta and risks Canada’s energy security.”

Alberta is reducing emissions through common sense, incentives and technologies, not taxes or punitive regulations. The oil sands emissions intensity per barrel has fallen 23 per cent since 2009 and is expected to decline another 28 per cent by 2035. Alberta’s overall emissions, electricity emissions and methane emissions are all declining, even as energy demand rises and the economy grows.

The province aspires to be carbon neutral by 2050 without cutting jobs or compromising affordable, reliable and secure energy for Albertans, Canadians and the world.

Related information

• Scrap the Cap website
• Proposed federal oil and gas emissions cap regulatory framework: Government of Alberta technical submission
• Deloitte: Potential Economic Impact of the Proposed Federal Oil and Gas Emissions Cap 
• S&P Global Commodity Insights: Economic Impact Assessment of Canadian Conventional Oil and Gas
• Conference Board of Canada: Economic Impacts of a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cap on the Oil and Gas Sector
• Alberta’s emissions reduction and energy development plan

Related news

• It’s time to scrap the cap: Joint statement (May 27, 2024)

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Lee Harding

Alberta is leading the country with sensible youth gender policies. Other provinces should emulate them.

Premier Danielle Smith recently confirmed transgender surgeries will be banned for those under 18 years of age. Puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones will be prohibited for youth under 16, while those 16 to 18 years old would need parental, psychiatric, and medical approval.

Biological females will have competitive sports to themselves. Students under 16 who want to change pronouns at school won’t do so without parental consent.

Fifteen years ago, none of this would be controversial. That was before a transgender trend took hold. In the U.S., not so different from Canada, the number of children on puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones doubled from 2017 to 2021, and cases of gender dysphoria tripled.

Advocates for the transgender approach say one’s inner sense of self must be affirmed by everyone around them and by transforming their bodies as closely as possible to the gender they identify with. Otherwise, they may kill themselves.

Such ideas could be challenged on many levels. If gender and sex are separate, why transform the body? Why can’t gender and sex remain separate and go on happily? By wanting to transform their bodies, every transgender inadvertently confirms the link between biological sex and how people typically are and act.

There are other logical incongruities. Trans advocates usually believe in gender fluidity. That means someone may have one gender now, but they could have another gender soon and even change back again. This presents a problem, given current Canadian bans on conversion therapy.

Once someone identifies their gender with the opposite sex, it is illegal for anyone to oppose it in counsel or therapy, with the punishment of fines and imprisonment. Even if someone wants help to steer their inner sense of self, they cannot receive it. A new whim in their shaky self-identification is the only thing that takes them off the transformation train.

Tomboy girls and boys who like fashion should feel no need to change. But now, at an age where insecurities about weight and appearance are especially common, some teens conclude they were born in the wrong body entirely. This lie presents an awful and insidious burden–that one’s entire body is wrong.

Would it not be better to tell youth their bodies are good and give them time to grow up as the sex nature gave them and the names parents gave them?

Kierra Bell, a tomboy from the UK, never got that chance. She sued the Tavistock Clinic for transitioning her, even though as a 15-year-old she was adamant it was the right path.

“What was really going on was that I was a girl insecure in my body who had experienced parental abandonment, felt alienated from my peers, suffered from anxiety and depression, and struggled with my sexual orientation,” she later recalled.

The UK High Court ruled it was “highly unlikely” for children under 14 to have the capacity for meaningful consent to cross-sex medical interventions on gender. This capacity was also “very doubtful” for 14 to 15-year-olds. As for 16- to 17-year-olds, a court order was recommended before proceeding.

Alberta will save innumerable teenagers from a path of regret. When will other provinces follow?

Lee Harding is a Research Fellow for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.