Business
Ottawa’s emissions cap another headache for consumers and business

From Resource Works
Ottawa’s emissions cap for oil and gas aims to cut emissions but risks raising costs for consumers and disrupting industry stability.
Ottawa has brought down a new emissions cap for the oil and gas industry, with a mandate to reduce emissions by 35 percent from 2019 levels by 2030 to support the federal government’s climate targets. While the federal government is celebrating the cap as a big step towards a more sustainable future, it is going to make life harder for consumers and businesses alike.
This cap is coming in at a time when the oil sector is finally gaining greater stability due to the expanded Trans Mountain pipeline (TMX), and the mandate would undermine that progress and press greater costs upon households and industries that are already adjusting to high inflation and uncertainty in world markets.
Now that TMX is operational, Canada’s oil producers have grown their access to international markets, most importantly in Asia and the West Coast of the United States. Much-needed price stability now exists for Western Canadian Select (WCS), cutting the discount against the U.S. West Texas Intermediate benchmark, enabling Canadian oil to compete more effectively.
Newfound stability means that Canadian consumers and businesses have benefited from slightly lower prices, and that industry has grown less dependent on a more limited domestic demand. However, Ottawa’s emissions cap does threaten this new balance, and the sector now has to deal with compliance costs that could be passed down to consumers.
In order to meet the cap’s targets, Canadian oil producers must heavily invest in carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies, which is costly but essential. Major CCS projects include Shell’s Quest and the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line, both of which are already operational.
The Pathways Alliance is a coalition of six major oil sands companies and is preparing to invest in one of the world’s largest networks for carbon storage. These efforts are crucial for reducing emissions, despite requiring vast amounts of capital.
Those in the industry are worrying that the emissions cap will push resources away from production and, instead, towards compliance, adding costs that will be borne by fuel prices and other consumer products.
Ottawa has portrayed the cap as an essential measure for meeting the federal government’s climate goals, with Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson labeling it “technically achievable.” Nonetheless, industry players argue that the timeline does not align with the practicalities of scaling CCS and other strategies aimed at decarbonizing.
Strathcona Resources executive chairman Adam Waterous pointed out the “stroke-of-the-pen” risk, in which shifting political landscapes imperil ongoing investments in carbon capture. Numerous oil producers feel that without certainty in carbon price stability, Ottawa’s cap will result in an unstable business environment that will push investment away from production.
Business leaders do not share the federal government’s optimism about the cap and see it as a one-sided approach that fails to reckon with market realities. The Pathways Alliance, which includes companies like Suncor Energy and Canadian Natural Resources, has been frustrated in its multiple attempts to get federal support to fund its $16.5-billion CCS project.
Rather than imposing these new limits, energy industry advocates argue that the government should provide targeted incentives like “carbon contracts for difference” (CCfDs), which help to stabilize carbon credit prices and reduce financial risk among investors. These measures would enable the energy sector to decarbonize without putting a greater burden on consumers.
The cap’s timing also raises concerns about the Canada-U.S. relationship. Canada has traditionally been a stable supplier of energy and helps to bolster U.S. energy security. However, as the U.S. increases its reliance on Canadian oil, the cap could disrupt this trade relationship. Lowered production levels would leave the economies of both the U.S. and Canada vulnerable, potentially disrupting energy prices and supply stability.
For households across Canada, the emissions cap could mean further financial strain. The higher costs of compliance passed to oil producers will mean higher prices at the pump and more expensive heating costs at a time when Canadian consumers are already struggling financially.
Businesses will also face increasing operating costs, which will be passed down to consumers via more expensive goods and services. Furthermore, higher costs and reduced production will erode Canada’s competitive advantage in the global energy market, slowing economic growth and risking job losses in the energy sector.
So, while Ottawa can laud its emissions cap as a necessary action on the climate, the implications for consumers and businesses are tremendous. Working with industry to find pragmatic, collaborative solutions is how Ottawa can avoid creating more financial burdens for Canadians.
Business
Trump Admin reports 75K federal workers have accepted buyout offer

Quick Hit:
The Trump administration confirmed that 75,000 federal employees have accepted its Deferred Resignation Program, a buyout offer allowing them to retain benefits and receive pay through September.
Key Details:
- The Trump administration announced that approximately 75,000 federal employees have accepted its buyout offer.
- The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) confirmed the number, which accounts for less than 5% of the federal workforce of 2.3 million.
- The program, which provides extended benefits and pay through September, excluded military personnel, national security, immigration, and postal workers.
Diving Deeper:
The White House confirmed Wednesday night that around 75,000 federal employees opted into the Trump administration’s Deferred Resignation Program, a buyout initiative designed to reduce government workforce numbers while providing extended benefits for those who voluntarily resign.
The program, administered by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), originally set a February 6 deadline but was temporarily paused due to legal challenges from federal employee unions. However, a federal judge ruled on Wednesday that the unions lacked the legal standing to block the initiative, allowing the buyout deadline to proceed.
“As of 7:00 PM tonight, the program is now closed,” OPM spokesperson McLaurine Pinover said in a statement. “There is no longer any doubt: the Deferred Resignation Program was both legal and a valuable option for federal employees. This program was carefully designed, thoroughly vetted, and provides generous benefits so federal workers can plan for their futures.”
While the 75,000 participants represent less than 5% of the federal workforce, the move aligns with the Trump administration’s broader efforts to streamline government operations and reduce bureaucratic redundancy. The program was not open to military personnel, national security workers, immigration officers, or postal employees.
Despite initial resistance from federal employee unions, the White House and OPM argue that the program provides financial security and flexibility for those choosing to leave their positions. With the legal battle now settled, the administration considers the initiative a success in its push for a leaner and more efficient federal government.
Business
Trump Admin ends Biden’s war on gas stoves

Quick Hit:
The Trump administration has officially ended a Biden-era review that threatened restrictions on gas stoves, marking a decisive victory for consumer choice and energy freedom. The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) confirmed it will no longer pursue regulations targeting gas-powered stovetops, shutting down a controversial effort spearheaded by Biden-appointed officials.
Key Details:
- CPSC acting chairman Peter Feldman stated the agency is “out of the gas-stoves-banning business” and reaffirmed that the federal government should not dictate household appliance choices.
- The Biden administration’s push to scrutinize gas stoves began in 2023, triggering widespread backlash from consumers, lawmakers, and industry leaders.
- President Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office to reverse Biden-era energy efficiency regulations and protect Americans’ freedom to choose their appliances.
Diving Deeper:
The Biden administration’s quiet war on gas stoves became public in early 2023 when then-CPSC Commissioner Richard Trumka Jr. suggested that gas stoves posed a “hidden hazard” and floated the possibility of banning them. His remarks ignited a firestorm of opposition, with critics decrying the move as government overreach. While the CPSC later claimed it was merely seeking public input on the matter, the review process persisted for nearly two years, leaving open the possibility of future regulatory action.
However, that possibility is now dead. CPSC acting chairman Peter Feldman, appointed after President Trump’s inauguration, told the Washington Free Beacon that the agency has no intention of banning gas stoves. “In electing President Trump, the American people spoke loudly that the United States has no business telling American families how to cook their meals,” Feldman stated, effectively closing the door on any federal intervention against gas appliances.
The decision is another major blow to climate activists and progressive Democrats who have sought to phase out gas stoves in favor of electric alternatives. Several Democrat-led states, including New York, have already implemented bans on gas appliances in new constructions, citing environmental concerns. But at the federal level, Trump’s administration is taking swift action to roll back Biden-era regulatory overreach.
On his first day back in office, President Trump signed an executive order protecting consumers’ rights to choose their household appliances, part of his broader push to restore energy independence and dismantle Biden’s green energy mandates. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), a vocal opponent of the gas stove crackdown, praised the move, noting that left-wing activists were behind the initial push for restrictions. Cruz’s Gas Stove Protection and Freedom Act, introduced in 2023, sought to prevent any future attempts at a federal ban.
-
Business2 days ago
Crazy government spending
-
illegal immigration2 days ago
Trump border czar dismisses Pope’s attack on immigration policy
-
Business2 days ago
Hegseth welcomes DOGE to the Pentagon, says national debt a security issue
-
Energy2 days ago
Bipartisan groups in Congress introduce bill to protect strategic petroleum reserve
-
Business2 days ago
Ottawa Appoints Former Trudeau Intelligence Adviser as “Fentanyl Czar”
-
armed forces1 day ago
Pierre Poilievre promises to cut Canada’s funding of global projects overseas
-
International2 days ago
“Trump is a hero”: Marc Fogel lands in U.S. after release from Russian captivity
-
Business2 days ago
Lower taxes will help increase living standards for Canadian families