Connect with us

Energy

How Trump Can End Europe’s Reign Of Terror On American Oil And Gas

Published

9 minute read

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Audrey Streb

The Trump administration has an opportunity to free the U.S. of draconian climate regulations and directives the European Union (EU) has imposed on American oil and gas companies for years, energy sector experts and industry insiders told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Though the Trump administration made a major trade deal with the EU in July that benefitted American energy, the EU still imposes a number of climate regulations and directives that drive up U.S. energy costs, according to some energy policy experts. The Trump administration is positioned to pressure the EU into a fairer trading atmosphere and ease burdens on the American energy sector, industry insiders told the DCNF.

“It’s going to take the pressure of the Trump administration in the trade negotiations to get the EU to back down from these extraterritorial regulations imposed on American companies, including U.S. oil and natural gas producers,” Vice President of Corporate Policy at the American Petroleum Institute (API) Aaron Padilla told the DCNF. “The EU should not make it more difficult for companies to provide the energy that their consumers need.”

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

Energy sector experts and insiders specifically pointed to the Critical Entities Resilience Directive (CER), the EU methane regulation and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). The CSDDD requires companies to have a net-zero transition plan and the EU methane regulation places additional stringent emissions standards on the oil and gas industry, while the CER requires companies to report a whole host of risks that add red tape, according to energy insiders.

Trump has threatened the EU with tariffs to buy American oil and gas, and part of the major July trade deal required the EU to purchase $750 billion in American energy by 2028.

“The Administration continues to address trade barriers against every American industry with our trading partners, and commitments from the EU, Japan, South Korea, and other countries to buy hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of American energy over the next few years reflect how President Trump is delivering on his agenda of fair trade and drill, baby, drill,” White House spokesman Kush Desai told the DCNF.

Tammy Nemeth, a strategic energy analyst, told the DCNF that the climate regulations and directives are burdensome to American oil and gas companies. Nemeth argues that these regulations increase costs on U.S. businesses and Americans as companies hoping to do business in the EU have to wrestle with layers of red tape and adopt a net-zero transition plan. It is difficult to estimate, but compliance with EU climate regulations and directives can add significant costs, according to Nemeth.

“I think if companies are approaching [these non-tariff barriers] with open eyes, they’ll say we need the government to help us maybe eliminate some of these non-tariff barriers, because if the compliance costs [equate to a] 10 to 30% increase, then that’s something that they have to pass on, not just to those to whom they’re exporting, but also domestically, because those are costs that are borne by the entire company,” Nemeth told the DCNF. “[These non-tariff barriers] could therefore increase costs to Americans, not just passing it on only to the Europeans, because all of those bureaucratic structures have to be established within the company, and that’s cost they have to absorb or pass on in some way.”

If American oil and gas companies decide to not comply with the climate regulations, they can be heavily fined or essentially forced out of trading with the EU, Nemeth said.

“It’s really quite absurd,” Nemeth said, noting that the EU already requires a significant amount of red tape and environmental reporting paperwork. Nemeth added that all the reporting also can open companies up to environmental litigation.

API has generally supported President Donald Trump’s energy policy and praised his April decision to exempt oil and gas from new reciprocal tariffs, however, the trade association argues that now is the time to force the EU into relaxing its non-tariff barriers. API has asked the Trump administration to negotiate EU non-tariff barriers, including the CSDDD and the EU methane regulation, to ease burdens on American oil and gas companies hoping to do business in the EU, Padilla noted.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio rejected the International Maritime Organization’s net-zero framework on Tuesday, stating that the U.S. “will not tolerate any action that increases costs for our citizens, energy providers, shipping companies and their customers, or tourists.”

An EU official told the DCNF that negotiations with the U.S. are still ongoing, though any amendments to EU legislation would represent a non-negotiable boundary for the EU.

Energy costs have been a major concern for European officials following the 2022 spike in prices, which hit the continent’s economies after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and weaponization of its natural gas supply. Many European countries are also devoted to a green energy transition as the continent faces high electricity prices and grid instability.

Notably, several European countries have recently moved to rethink or reverse their anti-nuclear pledges in search of a sustainable energy resource.

“We say to the Europeans, you don’t need to put these non-tariff barriers into place. The only result of them is going to be to make it more expensive and difficult for Europeans to import the energy that they need from the United States. Don’t bite the hand that feeds you,” Padilla said. “You need oil and you need natural gas from the United States, especially in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. So, don’t make it more difficult to get that energy that you need from the United States.”

Nemeth and other energy policy experts argued that these non-tariff barriers work to benefit EU oil and gas companies and disincentivize American companies from competing in the European market.

“For years, the European Union has used trade policy as a backdoor to impose its climate agenda on American businesses. Their reporting rules and carbon tariffs aren’t about saving the planet, they’re about controlling markets and kneecapping competitors,” CEO and founder of the American Energy Institute Jason Isaac told the DCNF. “As President Trump negotiates with the EU, the first order of business must include a clear commitment to scrap these schemes. The United States should set the terms and not let European bureaucrats punish American energy.”

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

Alberta

Alberta’s number of inactive wells trending downward

Published on

Aspenleaf Energy vice-president of wells Ron Weber at a clean-up site near Edmonton.

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Deborah Jaremko

Aspenleaf Energy brings new life to historic Alberta oil field while cleaning up the past

In Alberta’s oil patch, some companies are going beyond their obligations to clean up inactive wells.

Aspenleaf Energy operates in the historic Leduc oil field, where drilling and production peaked in the 1950s.

In the last seven years, the privately-held company has spent more than $40 million on abandonment and reclamation, which it reports is significantly more than the minimum required by the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER).

CEO Bryan Gould sees reclaiming the legacy assets as like paying down a debt.

“To me, it’s not a giant bill for us to pay to accelerate the closure and it builds our reputation with the community, which then paves the way for investment and community support for the things we need to do,” he said.

“It just makes business sense to us.”

Aspenleaf, which says it has decommissioned two-thirds of its inactive wells in the Leduc area, isn’t alone in going beyond the requirements.

Producers in Alberta exceeded the AER’s minimum closure spend in both years of available data since the program was introduced in 2022.

That year, the industry-wide closure spend requirement was set at $422 million, but producers spent more than $696 million, according to the AER.

In 2023, companies spent nearly $770 million against a requirement of $700 million.

Alberta’s number of inactive wells is trending downward. The AER’s most recent report shows about 76,000 inactive wells in the province, down from roughly 92,000 in 2021.

In the Leduc field, new development techniques will make future cleanup easier and less costly, Gould said.

That’s because horizontal drilling allows several wells, each up to seven kilometres long, to originate from the same surface site.

“Historically, Leduc would have been developed with many, many sites with single vertical wells,” Gould said.

“This is why the remediation going back is so cumbersome. If you looked at it today, all that would have been centralized in one pad.

“Going forward, the environmental footprint is dramatically reduced compared to what it was.”

During and immediately after a well abandonment for Aspenleaf Energy near Edmonton. Photos for the Canadian Energy Centre

Gould said horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing give the field better economics, extending the life of a mature asset.

“We can drill more wells, we can recover more oil and we can pay higher royalties and higher taxes to the province,” he said.

Aspenleaf has also drilled about 3,700 test holes to assess how much soil needs cleanup. The company plans a pilot project to demonstrate a method that would reduce the amount of digging and landfilling of old underground materials while ensuring the land is productive and viable for use.

Crew at work on a well abandonment for Aspenleaf Energy near Edmonton. Photo for the Canadian Energy Centre

“We did a lot of sampling, and for the most part what we can show is what was buried in the ground by previous operators historically has not moved anywhere over 70 years and has had no impact to waterways and topography with lush forestry and productive agriculture thriving directly above and adjacent to those sampled areas,” he said.

At current rates of about 15,000 barrels per day, Aspenleaf sees a long runway of future production for the next decade or longer.

Revitalizing the historic field while cleaning up legacy assets is key to the company’s strategy.

“We believe we can extract more of the resource, which belongs to the people of Alberta,” Gould said.

“We make money for our investors, and the people of the province are much further ahead.”

Continue Reading

Energy

Canada Cannot Become an Energy Superpower With its Regulatory Impediments

Published on

From Energy Now

By Yogi Schulz


Get the Latest Canadian Focused Energy News Delivered to You! It’s FREE: Quick Sign-Up Here


Prime Minister Carney wants Canada to become an energy superpower. It’s a worthy goal because Canada has rich, undeveloped energy resources. Many Canadians happily endorse his goal because it achieves these benefits:

  • Economic growth and prosperity for Canadians.
  • Reduce the adverse consequences of American tariffs.
  • Additional tax revenue that reduces the mountain of Canadian public debt.
  • Improved energy security and reduced cost for Canadians in Eastern Canada.
  • Improved energy security for Canada’s international energy customers.
  • Alternative energy supply options for NATO allies to replace Russian energy.
  • Greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions that occur when Canadian high ESG energy replaces other energy sources.

However, Canada can achieve these benefits only by overcoming multiple regulatory impediments, including those described below.

Interprovincial trade barriers

Interprovincial trade barriers impose costs on all industries. Consumers, not companies, bear these costs. A Macdonald-Laurier Institute study estimated that eliminating interprovincial trade barriers could boost Canada’s economy by between 4.4 and 7.9 percent over the long term or between $110 and $200 billion per year. Examples of interprovincial trade barriers that affect the oil and gas industry include:

  • Pools that cross provincial boundaries: Producers must build two higher-cost processing facilities, one on each side of the border.
  • Gathering systems that cross provincial boundaries: Producers must obtain a federal pipeline permit, which requires a multi-year approval process, to build a pipeline that crosses a provincial border.
  • Many minor technical differences: Provinces set their own rules, standards, and certifications for topics such as vehicle weight, length, and safety protocols. These differences increase producer operating costs.
  • Professional licensing: Individuals, such as those in skilled trades, must undergo a lengthy, costly process to obtain a license to work in another province, even if they are already certified elsewhere.
  • Administrative hurdles: Producers operating in multiple provinces face a complex web of permit, license, and reporting requirements that vary from one province to the next.
  • Geographical barriers: The dimensional limitations of tunnels in the Rocky Mountains create a shipping barrier for producers, adding costs when importing large facility components.

For Canada to achieve energy superpower status, reducing interprovincial trade barriers will be necessary to enhance its competitiveness. The Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) and the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act are encouraging federal initiatives to reduce interprovincial trade barriers. The outrageous Trump tariffs have also provided some provinces with a new incentive to lower or eliminate some of their barriers. However, the “mutual recognition” approach may be more symbolic than substantive.

Provincial regulatory incompatibilities

Oil and natural gas producers face slightly different regulations in every province and territory. These incompatibilities incur avoidable operational costs and erode Canada’s competitiveness in the global investment capital market.

Energy industry regulators operate in every province and territory where oil and natural gas are produced. These regulators have independently produced large volumes of regulations that are similar but far from identical. Most of these regulations are derived from those first written in Alberta and various US jurisdictions. Alberta created the first Canadian energy industry regulator because most of the resources are located within its borders.

So far, energy industry regulators have only harmonized the following:

  • Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Z662 Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems. British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan have adopted this standard.
  • Directive 017 – Measurement Requirements for Oil and Gas Operations. Alberta and Saskatchewan have adopted this directive.

Unfortunately, only these two documents, among many dozens, have been harmonized. Parochial thinking appears to be a significant impediment to more harmonization. For example:

  • Some Canadian regulators participate in the Western Regulators Forum (WRF). However, the WRF has yet to harmonize any regulations.
  • Over two decades ago, the Alberta Department of Energy and Minerals sponsored the development of Petrinex with a vision of energy industry-government data management cooperation across multiple provinces. However, the vision has not been realized because the provinces built individual, incompatible systems to protect their turf.

“Producers write more government submissions than technical papers – ten times more. Submissions consume significant effort from technical professionals and include specific oil and gas technical information such as fracking schemes, SAGD operations or facility modifications,” says Granger Low, of Regaware Systems Ltd. “When producers can easily search previous submissions using the artificial intelligence of AppIntel AI, they take advantage of Alberta’s uniquely remarkable oil and gas technical advances, and avoid the delays related to over-regulation and resubmission.”

For Canada to achieve energy superpower status, harmonizing more provincial and territorial oil and natural gas industry regulations will be required to improve its competitiveness.

Provincial regulatory issues

Dealing with regulations is a cost that all oil and natural gas producers bear. Regulations are desirable and necessary to a point. Issues where the energy industry regulators could improve performance include:

  • Reducing and simplifying the enormous number of directives. The issue is that the directives contain extensive related best practices that, while valuable, become indistinguishable from regulatory requirements.
  • Reducing and simplifying the permit application processes for wells, facilities and pipelines. How the current complexity helps regulators fulfill their mandate is unclear.
  • Simplifying reporting and compliance assessment would reduce administrative costs for both producers and regulators.
  • Eliminating the APMC in Alberta would reduce producers’ administrative costs and increase Crown royalty revenue. This article describes the details: It’s Time to Retire the APMC – The APMC Mandate Has Expired, Its Cost is Now Avoidable.
  • Failing to address data quality issues for wells, digital well logs, and cores undermines one of Alberta’s competitive advantages.

For Canada to achieve energy superpower status, reducing the cost of regulatory applications and compliance is a component of improving its competitiveness.

Taxation disparities

Oil and natural gas producers encounter taxation disparities across provinces. The following disparities affect geographic investment decisions:

  • Crown Royalty and Freehold Production Tax calculations and related settlement processes vary considerably by province and type of production.
  • Corporate income tax rates and reporting vary by province.
  • The combined GST and PST/HST rate varies from 5% in Alberta to 15% in some other provinces.
  • Oil and natural gas facility property tax rates and reporting vary by province.

Simplifying these taxation disparities would reduce administrative costs for both producers and the Crown. The combination of taxes and fees that producers pay in Canada is enough to cause some to invest in more profitable jurisdictions.

For Canada to achieve energy superpower status, reducing and harmonizing taxation disparities is a prerequisite to encourage more investment in production.

Additional costs that every producer accepts

Overcoming impediments is particularly important to Canadian competitiveness because the Canadian oil and gas industry incurs higher operating costs than the industry does in most other jurisdictions. The higher cost categories include:

  • Wages and benefits.
  • Health, safety and environmental standards.
  • Abandonment standards.
  • Disclosure of intellectual property in publicly-accessible permit application documents.
  • Lower staff productivity and added heating costs due to lower winter temperatures.

No one is suggesting lowering these Canadian standards and expectations. However, the associated costs increase the urgency of reducing other regulatory impediments to maintain Canada’s competitiveness.

Conclusions

Canada has the resources to become an energy superpower and realize the immense economic, strategic, and environmental benefits that are available. Policymakers can contribute by harmonizing regulations and removing interprovincial trade barriers to ensure investment in Canadian energy is competitive on world financial markets.


Yogi Schulz has over 40 years of experience in information technology in various industries. He writes for Engineering.comEnergyNow.caEnergyNow.com and other trade publications. Yogi works extensively in the petroleum industry to select and implement financial, production revenue accounting, land & contracts, and geotechnical systems. He manages projects that arise from changes in business requirements, the need to leverage technology opportunities, and mergers. His specialties include IT strategy, web strategy, and systems project management.

Continue Reading

Trending

X