Energy exports continue to fuel the Canadian economy

Without exports of oil, natural gas and other energy goods, Canada’s cumulative trade deficit with the rest of the world—which stood at $130 billion in the decade ending in 2023—would have ballooned to $1 trillion.

Energy sits at the heart of Canada’s export economy, even though some federal policymakers and provincial governments appear to be discomfited by that fact.

In recent years, energy has supplied 20–25 percent of Canada’s total international exports (goods plus services combined), with crude oil, refined petroleum products, and natural gas making up the lion’s share of our energy-related shipments to other countries. Canada’s energy export basket also includes coal, uranium, and electricity.

In the last two decades, energy has become Canada’s leading export sector, mainly owing to higher oil production volumes, rising hydrocarbon exports, and still-robust global demand for fossil fuels (which provide 80 percent of the world’s primary energy). Measured in millions of barrels of oil equivalent (BOE), Canadian conventional oil and gas production rose from 4.5 million BOE per day in 2015 to 5.4 million/day last year, with most of the additional output destined for the United States. With the completion of pipeline expansion projects and the looming start-up of liquefied natural gas (LNG) production on the West Coast, oil and gas are set to play an even bigger role in Canada’s economy and export portfolio in the coming years.

A May 2024 modelling study by S&P Global Commodity Insights predicts a further jump in conventional oil and gas output of between 0.5 and 1.0 million BOE/day by 2035, assuming the federal government doesn’t impose draconian caps on production in the sector as part of its shambolic climate policy agenda. Based on that scenario, S&P estimates that production, capital and operating spending in Canada’s conventional oil and gas industry will add up to $1.3 trillion to Canada’s gross domestic product by 2035. This forecast is premised on a modest (8 percent) increase in output and further declines in the sector’s greenhouse gas emissions intensity due to efficiency measures, advances in technology, greater use of carbon capture, and other factors.

To illustrate the contribution that energy makes to Canada’s prosperity, the Coalition for A Better Future recently estimated that without exports of oil, natural gas and other energy goods, Canada’s cumulative trade deficit with the rest of the world—which stood at $130 billion in the decade ending in 2023—would have ballooned to $1 trillion.

Thanks to energy production, Canada garners up to $200 billion of additional export receipts each year—and the figure is set to rise significantly in the next decade. This outsized stream of export earnings furnishes the means to pay for imports, supports hundreds of thousands of high-paying jobs, and generates tens of billions of dollars of extra revenues for Canadian governments.

In Canada’s case, it is also worth noting that energy reliably produces the largest trade surplus of any sector, by a wide margin. And, as noted above, that surplus will increase in size over the rest of this decade and possibly beyond, mainly due to oil and gas output and exports climbing from current levels.

Averaged over the period 2022-23, Canada’s two-way trade in energy goods yielded a net annual surplus of almost $150 billion. This dwarfs the surpluses posted in other natural resource-based sectors such as metal ores, non-metallic minerals, agri-food, and forest products. Large trade surpluses in energy—and, to a lesser extent, in other natural resource industries—offset chronic Canadian trade deficits in consumer goods, machinery and equipment, electronic products, and other high-tech goods. Canada also runs a trade deficit of $35-40 billion in motor vehicles and parts.

Trudeau government ministers are fond of talking up (and subsidizing) Canadian non-fossil fuel energy industries, like (carbon-free) electricity, biofuels, hydrogen (production of which currently is almost non-existent in Canada) and the “clean tech” sector. However, except for electricity, these segments of the Canadian energy sector are very small in size and export little. And while the “clean tech” industry does hold considerable promise over the medium term, today it accounts for less than one percent of Canada’s international exports.

When it comes to energy exports, the reality for Canada is that oil, natural gas, and other fossil fuel products dominate the picture—and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

Author:

Jock Finlayson

Up Next

Opioid seizures exploded by 3,000% in Ontario city after “safer supply” experiment

Don't Miss

Provinces should be cautious about cost-sharing agreements with Ottawa

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

CBC journalist quits, accuses outlet of anti-Conservative bias and censorship

Business / 3 hours ago

Cannabis Legalization Is Starting to Look Like a Really Dumb Idea

International / 10 hours ago

Secret Service suspends six agents nearly a year after Trump assassination attempt

Business

‘Experts’ Warned Free Markets Would Ruin Argentina — Looks Like They Were Dead Wrong

Published on July 10, 2025

Todayville

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Melissa O’Rourke

The current state of Argentina’s economy is a far cry from what “experts” predicted when they warned that President Javier Milei’s pro-free market leadership would devastate the country.

The chainsaw-wielding libertarian rose to power on promises to slash government spending, implement free-market policies and lift strict currency controls to rescue a nation crippled by inflation, debt and entrenched poverty. Though the pundit class warned that Milei’s policies would spark an economic collapse, the results so far have been a rebuke to those warnings.

Just days before the November 2023 presidential election, 108 economists from around the world signed an open letter claiming that Milei’s “simple solutions” were “likely to cause more devastation in the real world in the short run, while severely reducing policy space in the long run.”

“His policies are poorly thought through. Far from building a consensus, he would struggle to govern,” The Economist’s editorial board wrote in a September 2023 piece describing “Javier Milei’s dangerous allure.”

Well over a year into Milei’s presidency, Argentina is showing its strongest economic performance in years. The country’s gross domestic product (GDP) jumped 7.7% in April compared to the same month in 2024, far exceeding expectations.

The GDP is expected to rise by 5.2% in 2025, compared to declines of 1.3% in 2024 and 1.9% in 2023, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

Inflation, a long-standing hallmark of Argentina’s economic dysfunction, dropped to 1.5% between April and May, reaching a five-year low. Annual inflation has plunged from 160.9% in November 2023 — just before Milei took office — to 43.5% in May.

Meanwhile, poverty rates have also declined sharply, falling from 52.9% in the first half of 2024 to 38.1% in the second half of the year.

Argentina’s rental housing supply also increased by 212% between December 2023 and June 2024, after Milei repealed the country’s rent control laws, according to the Cato Institute.

“Against the background of a difficult legacy of macroeconomic imbalances, Argentina has embarked on an ambitious reform process, starting with an unprecedented upfront fiscal adjustment. Reforms have started to pay off. Inflation has receded and the economy is set for a strong recovery,” the OECD noted in its new analysis of the Argentinian economy. “Maintaining the reform momentum will be key to restore confidence, boost investment and productivity growth.”

Milei — a self-described anarcho-capitalist — has been an ardent supporter of President Donald Trump’s efforts to downsize the U.S. government, including the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) push to cut spending.

“I come from a country that bought all of those stupid ideas that went from being one of the most affluent countries in the world to one to one of the [poorest],” Milei said in a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2024. “If you don’t fight for your freedom, they will drag you into misery … Don’t surrender.”

Automotive

Federal government should swiftly axe foolish EV mandate

Published on July 9, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Kenneth P. Green

Two recent events exemplify the fundamental irrationality that is Canada’s electric vehicle (EV) policy.

First, the Carney government re-committed to Justin Trudeau’s EV transition mandate that by 2035 all (that’s 100 per cent) of new car sales in Canada consist of “zero emission vehicles” including battery EVs, plug-in hybrid EVs and fuel-cell powered vehicles (which are virtually non-existent in today’s market). This policy has been a foolish idea since inception. The mass of car-buyers in Canada showed little desire to buy them in 2022, when the government announced the plan, and they still don’t want them.

Second, President Trump’s “Big Beautiful” budget bill has slashed taxpayer subsidies for buying new and used EVs, ended federal support for EV charging stations, and limited the ability of states to use fuel standards to force EVs onto the sales lot. Of course, Canada should not craft policy to simply match U.S. policy, but in light of policy changes south of the border Canadian policymakers would be wise to give their own EV policies a rethink.

And in this case, a rethink—that is, scrapping Ottawa’s mandate—would only benefit most Canadians. Indeed, most Canadians disapprove of the mandate; most do not want to buy EVs; most can’t afford to buy EVs (which are more expensive than traditional internal combustion vehicles and more expensive to insure and repair); and if they do manage to swing the cost of an EV, most will likely find it difficult to find public charging stations.

Also, consider this. Globally, the mining sector likely lacks the ability to keep up with the supply of metals needed to produce EVs and satisfy government mandates like we have in Canada, potentially further driving up production costs and ultimately sticker prices.

Finally, if you’re worried about losing the climate and environmental benefits of an EV transition, you should, well, not worry that much. The benefits of vehicle electrification for climate/environmental risk reduction have been oversold. In some circumstances EVs can help reduce GHG emissions—in others, they can make them worse. It depends on the fuel used to generate electricity used to charge them. And EVs have environmental negatives of their own—their fancy tires cause a lot of fine particulate pollution, one of the more harmful types of air pollution that can affect our health. And when they burst into flames (which they do with disturbing regularity) they spew toxic metals and plastics into the air with abandon.

So, to sum up in point form. Prime Minister Carney’s government has re-upped its commitment to the Trudeau-era 2035 EV mandate even while Canadians have shown for years that most don’t want to buy them. EVs don’t provide meaningful environmental benefits. They represent the worst of public policy (picking winning or losing technologies in mass markets). They are unjust (tax-robbing people who can’t afford them to subsidize those who can). And taxpayer-funded “investments” in EVs and EV-battery technology will likely be wasted in light of the diminishing U.S. market for Canadian EV tech.

If ever there was a policy so justifiably axed on its failed merits, it’s Ottawa’s EV mandate. Hopefully, the pragmatists we’ve heard much about since Carney’s election victory will acknowledge EV reality.