Energy
Ending energy poverty among Indigenous communities is essential

Haida Heritage Centre, Haida Gwaii, Queen Charlotte Islands
From Resource Works
Halting funding for natural gas expansion cut off many Indigenous communities from affordable energy.
Energy poverty in Canada is both an urgent and underreported crisis that is affecting Indigenous, rural, and remote communities across the country.
This is a resource-rich country, but Canada has continually failed to remedy the glaring energy affordability and accessibility gap in these communities. In particular, Indigenous families and households have to face disproportionately high energy costs due to their geographic isolation, a lack of built infrastructure, and neglect during policymaking.
In a report for the Energy for a Secure Future, authored by Heather Exner-Pirot, titled “The Other Energy Security: Addressing Energy Poverty in Canada’s Indigenous Communities,” she lays out these many problems that must be fixed.
It is a dire situation, with remote Indigenous communities being forced to spend over three times more of their household income on energy than the Canadian average. Twenty-six percent of Indigenous households fall into the category of energy poverty, as defined by the Canadian Urban Sustainability Practitioners (CUSP).
Many families spend more than six percent of their disposable income on energy, and this has worsened in recent years as energy costs rise with inflation and other present economic hardships.
Natural gas is the most plentiful and affordable source of household energy in Canada, but it cannot be accessed by many Indigenous communities that lack pipeline infrastructure. Although natural gas is cheaper and cleaner than diesel, propane, heating oil, or wood, the expansion of gas infrastructure into remote regions has hit snags in recent years.
From the 1980s to the 2000s, Ottawa supported the expansion of infrastructure to rural areas in a bid to alleviate affordability issues. However, the shift to reducing emissions and growing renewable energy has resulted in a lack of support for natural gas infrastructure.
This has had the counterproductive effect of leaving Indigenous communities with higher costs and higher emitting fuels like heating oil and diesel due to a lack of alternatives. As a source of energy, diesel is handy and reliable, but is expensive, heavily polluting, and expensive to transport into remote areas.
Renewables like solar and wind help to meet climate goals, but they are not feasible in remote northern communities because of their unreliability and high upfront costs. Phasing out fossil fuels in rural and remote Canada is a bad decision for the people affected without a fair transition strategy.
Many of the Indigenous leaders featured in Exner-Pirot’s report expressed grave concerns about the impact of energy poverty in their communities. They cited the many difficult choices that they have to make, such as having to pick between adequate heating or food.
These leaders are frustrated with the decisions made by distant authorities that prioritize ambitious sustainability goals instead of immediate, practical solutions. Many explicitly called for the expansion of natural gas, declaring it to be feasible, cost-effective, and cleaner than their current options.
One of the more striking statements is their assertion that withholding federal funding from natural gas projects actively denies Indigenous communities relief from energy poverty.
There is good evidence that reveals the benefits of expanding natural gas.
Red Lake, Ontario saw its energy costs fall by 70 percent once it was connected to natural gas infrastructure. Alberta’s Bigstone Cree Nation formerly used propane for decades, but then saw their energy security and affordability greatly improve after the province expanded the natural gas network.
The O’Chiese First Nation, also in Alberta, has been a model for energy autonomy and energy development, having harnessed its natural gas production for the benefit of the whole community.
Exner-Pirot’s report ends with several clear recommendations:
- Equal treatment of all fuels under carbon pricing to eliminate undesirable incentives
- Expanded eligibility for funding programs to include transitional fuels like natural gas
- Financial support for Indigenous-led energy security projects
- Explicit provincial targets and timelines for natural gas infrastructure expansion, using Ontario’s Natural Gas Expansion Program as a model
There is no debate that Canadian energy policy in Indigenous and remote communities has to change immediately. As they currently stand, they are exacerbating energy poverty by cutting out transitional and practical solutions.
No one-size-fits-all approach works for the countless Indigenous communities that reside in Canada, and they each need a tailored approach that respects their geographic and economic realities, as well as their right to self-determination.
Energy
LNG Export Marks Beginning Of Canadian Energy Independence

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
Kitimat’s LNG launch ends years of delay, weak policy and lost opportunity. This is a strategic turning point for Canada
Last week marked a turning point for Canadian sovereignty. On July 1, 2025, the tanker Gaslog Glasgow departed Kitimat, B.C., carrying Canada’s first-ever commercial liquefied natural gas (LNG) export to Asia. More than a shipment, it signalled the end of our economic vassalage to the United States and a long-overdue leap into global energy markets.
LNG Canada CEO Chris Cooper called it a “truly historic moment.” He’s right. The cargo left just days after the Kitimat plant produced its first liquefied natural gas and entered operation. The $40-billion megaproject, the largest private-sector investment in Canadian history, is now a fully functional Pacific Coast export hub. It can ship up to 14 million tonnes annually, and expansion is already being discussed.
Yet this success didn’t come easily. Despite being one of the world’s largest natural gas producers, Canada lacked an LNG export terminal, largely due to political delays, regulatory hurdles and lack of federal support. That this happened at all is remarkable, given nearly a decade of federal sabotage. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s ideological hostility to natural gas meant rebuffed allies, stalled projects and choked-off investment.
Foreign leaders (from Japan and Germany to Greece) practically begged Ottawa to green-light Canadian LNG. Trudeau dismissed them, claiming there was “no business case.” No one in his caucus dared contradict him. The result: lost time, lost markets and a near-complete surrender of our energy advantage.
But the business case was always there. Kitimat proves it.
The U.S. has been exporting LNG since 2016, giving them a nearly decade-long head start. But Canada has something our neighbours don’t: the Montney Formation. Spanning northeast B.C. and parts of Alberta, it covers about 130,000 square kilometres and holds enormous gas reserves. Montney gas, abundant and close to tidewater, trades at roughly half the Henry Hub price, giving Canada a significant cost edge.
Location seals the deal. Kitimat, perched on the Pacific, bypasses the congested Panama Canal, a major chokepoint for U.S. Gulf Coast exports, and offers a shorter, more direct route to energy-hungry Asian markets. This geographic advantage makes Canadian LNG not only viable but globally competitive.
In 2024, Canada exported about 8.6 billion cubic feet of gas daily to the U.S. via pipeline. With Kitimat, we finally begin breaking that one-market dependency. We also start clawing back the price differential losses that come with being captive sellers. This is how you build productivity, strengthen the dollar and reclaim economic independence from Washington.
The economic ripple effect is massive. The Kitimat build created 50,000 jobs at its peak, generated $5.8 billion in Indigenous and local contracts and left behind more than 300 permanent positions. Provincial revenues are projected in the tens of billions. In an era of anaemic growth, this is real stimulus and has staying power.
Predictably, critics raise environmental concerns. But this critique ignores global realities. Exporting Canadian natural gas to countries still burning coal is not a step backward—it’s a practical advance. Natural gas is up to 25 per cent cleaner than coal when comparing full lifecycle emissions (that is, from extraction to combustion). Global emissions don’t respect borders. If Canada can displace dirtier fuels abroad, we’re part of the solution, not the problem.
And this is only the beginning. Cedar LNG and Woodfibre LNG are already under construction. Atlantic Coast projects are in the queue. We must now defend this momentum against bureaucratic delays, activist litigation and ideological roadblocks.
LNG is not a climate villain. It’s a bridge fuel that cuts emissions, creates wealth and helps fund our national future.
Marco Navarro-Genie is vice-president of research at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and co-author, with Barry Cooper, of Canada’s COVID: The Story of a Pandemic Moral Panic (2023).
Alberta
Cross-Canada NGL corridor will stretch from B.C. to Ontario

Keyera Corp.’s natural gas liquids facilities in Fort Saskatchewan. Photo courtesy Keyera Corp.
From the Canadian Energy Centre
By Will Gibson
Keyera ‘Canadianizes’ natural gas liquids with $5.15 billion acquisition
Sarnia, Ont., which sits on the southern tip of Lake Huron and peers across the St. Clair River to Michigan, is a crucial energy hub for much of the eastern half of Canada and parts of the United States.
With more than 60 industrial facilities including refineries and chemical plants that produce everything from petroleum, resins, synthetic rubber, plastics, lubricants, paint, cosmetics and food additives in the southwestern Ontario city, Mayor Mike Bradley admits the ongoing dialogue about tariffs with Canada’s southern neighbour hits close to home.
So Bradley welcomed the announcement that Calgary-based Keyera Corp. will acquire the majority of Plains American Pipelines LLP’s Canadian natural gas liquids (NGL) business, creating a cross-Canada NGL corridor that includes a storage hub in Sarnia.
“As a border city, we’ve been on the frontline of the tariff wars, so we support anything that helps enhance Canadian sovereignty and jobs,” says the long-time mayor, who was first elected in 1988.
The assets in Sarnia are a key piece of the $5.15 billion transaction, which will connect natural gas liquids from the growing Montney and Duvernay plays in B.C. and Alberta to markets in central Canada and the eastern U.S. seaboard.
NGLs are hydrocarbons found within natural gas streams including ethane, propane and pentanes. They are important energy sources and used to produce a wide range of everyday items, from plastics and clothing to fuels.
Keyera CEO Dean Setoguchi cast the proposed acquisition as an act of repatriation.
“This transaction brings key NGL infrastructure under Canadian ownership, enhancing domestic energy capabilities and reinforcing Canada’s economic resilience by keeping value and decision-making closer to home,” Setoguchi told analysts in a June 17 call.
“Plains’ portfolio forms a fully integrated cross Canada NGL system connecting Western Canada supply to key demand centres across the Prairie provinces, Ontario and eastern U.S.,” he said.
“The system includes strategic hubs like Empress, Fort Saskatchewan and Sarnia – which provide a reliable source of Canadian NGL supply to extensive fractionation, storage, pipeline and logistics infrastructure.”
Martin King, RBN Energy’s managing director of North America Energy Market Analysis, sees Keyera’s ability to “Canadianize” its NGL infrastructure as improving the company’s growth prospects.
“It allows them to tap into the Duvernay and Montney, which are the fastest growing NGL plays in North America and gives them some key assets throughout the country,” said the Calgary-based analyst.
“The crown assets are probably the straddle plants in Empress, which help strip out the butane, ethane and other liquids for condensate. It also positions them well to serve the eastern half of the country.”
And that’s something welcomed in Sarnia.
“Having a Canadian source for natural gas would be our preference so we see Keyera’s acquisition as strengthening our region as an energy hub,” Bradley said.
“We are optimistic this will be good for our region in the long run.”
The acquisition is expected to close in the first quarter of 2026, pending regulatory approvals.
Meanwhile, the governments of Ontario and Alberta are joining forces to strengthen the economies of both regions, and the country, by advancing major infrastructure projects including pipelines, ports and rail.
A joint feasibility study is expected this year on how to move major private sector-led investments forward.
-
Business2 days ago
103 Conflicts and Counting Unprecedented Ethics Web of Prime Minister Mark Carney
-
illegal immigration1 day ago
ICE raids California pot farm, uncovers illegal aliens and child labor
-
Energy1 day ago
LNG Export Marks Beginning Of Canadian Energy Independence
-
Business20 hours ago
Carney government should apply lessons from 1990s in spending review
-
Entertainment20 hours ago
Study finds 99% of late-night TV guests in 2025 have been liberal
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy9 hours ago
Canada’s New Border Bill Spies On You, Not The Bad Guys
-
Business1 day ago
Trump to impose 30% tariff on EU, Mexico
-
Uncategorized8 hours ago
CNN’s Shock Climate Polling Data Reinforces Trump’s Energy Agenda