Energy and Resources

Home Energy and Resources

Carney sleepwalking Americanization of Canada: Fossil fuels, nuclear, vehicles, military, austerity, immigration and more

Mark Carney won the April 28, 2025, federal election, in part, because many Canadians believed he would be the best to face up to Trump.  Trump often refers to Canada as the 51st state. The irony is since then Carney has engaged in a plethora of initiatives to incrementally sleepwalk Canada towards Americanization of segments of the Canadian political energy and economic landscapes.

Bill C-5: Fast-tracking projects of “national interest”

One of Carney first legislative accomplishments was the hastily adopted Bill C-5 in June 2025, also known as the One Canadian Economy Act.  This Act gives Carney absolute power to approve almost whatever major projects he wants in the “national interest,” a very subjective terminology.

Under the umbrella of the Act, nearly all existing legislation can be ignored, and/or rendered ineffective, for major projects of “national interest.”

The primary objective of C-5 is to fast-track major projects such as very large-scale oil and gas export pipelines.  C-5 is in keeping Carney’s aim from the outset to make Canada an energy superpower, U.S. style.

Priority “national interest” projects, environment shoved aside

On September 11, 2025, Carney announced the first round of major projects on his to do list.  Indications were given that projects for the next round of approvals will occur sometime in November 2025.

Natural gas

One of the first to go major projects high on the agenda is that of a supporting the Phase 2 of the LNG Canada, the liquified natural gas (LNG) export terminal in Kitimat, British Columbia.

For the next round of announcements, the probabilities are good for a LNG terminal northern Manitoba, Churchill on the Hudson Bay.

This speaks to Carney’s fixation with “drill, baby drill” resembling Trump’s fetish and an affirmation that Canada is the sixth largest natural gas exporter in the world.

To this end, Carney discussed possible LNG exports to Germany while with Chancellor Friedrich Merz in Germany in August 2025.

This is incongruent with EU gas consumption down by 20% between 2021 and 2024; and EU LNG demand is expected to peak in 2025.  The EU clean energy goal is that of energy independence, favouring clean energy by 2027.

Likewise decarbonization is a global phenomenon.

Too, it doesn’t seem to phase Mark Carney that methane emission leaks associated with fracking natural gas, through to the LNG export destination and consumption, render LNG as bad as coal.

Methane has a global warming potential 80 times that of CO2 over a 20-year period.

The declining prices of renewables, mean infrastructure for electrical power from gas is headed for stranded assets.

Contrecour

On the first priority “national interest” list is the construction of a second Montreal port terminal at Contrecoeur.   This project has plethora of environmental degradation implications, including contravening the federal legislation, Species at Risk, the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and The Fisheries Act.  While the project was the object of environmental impact approval in 2021, many authorization requirements remain outstanding.

Oil export pipelines

High on the next phase of projects are cross Canada oil export pipelines comprising:

1) Energy East to cross over most of Canada from Alberta to an export terminal on Canada’s Atlantic coast; and

2) the Northern Gateway with a terminal on the Pacific coast.

Carney’s export pipeline contemplations seemingly don’t take into account the experiences of the Canadian government-owned Trans Mountain pipeline twinning project to the Burnaby, British Columbia Pacific coast.  This project, which has been operating under capacity at a loss.  It has cost Canadian taxpayers C$50 billion in federal subsidies so far and costs Canadians C$3 billion annually.

How fitting is it for Carney to appoint in August 2025, Dawn Farrell, the till then chair of the board of directors of Trans Mountain, to head up the new Major Projects Office.

Here again the matter of global decarbonization is ignored.  There is an existing oil and gas glut on global markets which will get worse as more new suppliers enter global markets while China, the European Union, South Korea, Japan, Southeast Asia, South Asia and other traditional oil and gas importers, are decarbonizing.

Decarbonized oil: An oxymoron

Mark Carney’s drill, baby drill thrust would have us believe that there aren’t serious emissions considerations related to his oil export pipelines because Canada would be exporting “decarbonized oil.” Decarbonized oil doesn’t exist, a Trump-like climate hoax!

Carney was alluding to the next set of announcements to include the carbon capture and storage project of the Pathways Alliance.

Not a single CCS project has met its goals regarding emission reductions, costs and timelines.

The Alliance is made up of 6 major oil sands producers for which the combined revenues were C$35 billion in 2022. Does the Pathways Alliance require government subsidization?

And the “decarbonized oil” does not consider that 75% to 80% of CO2 emissions occur during combustion.

Surely Carney has made a political decision without regard to the environment and economics.

Small modular reactors (SMRs), like Trump

Carney is emulating Trump’s fascination with nuclear energy.

In the works is a nuclear renaissance collaboration deal between the U.S and the United Kingdom.  This deal reserves a special focus on small modular reactors (SMRs).

Ontario’s proposal to build 4 SMRs at its Darlington site, are included in the first round of announcements.  SMRs are nascent, still experimental, with a track record on costs per unit of energy produced suggesting it should be a no go.

Governments, with the exception of China and Canada’s Ontario Premier Doug Ford, don’t see the case for SMRs for which the costs are five times that of an onshore wind farm or solar project to produce the same amount of energy.

A 2024 report of CSIRO, Australia’s science and research agency, found SMRs to be the most expensive option for power generation.  CSIRO predicted SMRs would cost US$382 to US$686 per megawatt hour in 2030.

Pedaling backwards on vehicle emissions, like Trump

The Canadian 2026 requirements for automakers to hit 20% of new vehicle sales to be zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) beginning 2026, was dropped in early September 2025.  This adjustment is in line with Trump’s plan for choice between electric and gas-powered vehicles, reversing 2025 vehicle emission rules to 2019 levels.

A Trump conflict with California is ongoing as California’s mandated target market share for ZEVs for 2026 is 35%, with significant incremental increases to 100% by 2035.  In 2025, around 25% of new passenger cars in the state are electric.

Carney and Trump and pedaling backwards on the transportation energy transition.  Global sales of electric vehicles in the first 7 months of 2025 were up 27% over 2024.

Canadian environmental bottom line

Not surprisingly,  the Carney administration cannot commit to meeting the Paris Agreement, according to a statement from the office of Environment Minister, Julie Dabrusin.

 Quadrupling military budget to attain 5% of GDP: Aligning with Trump’s Ministry of War

Responding to Trump’s nagging Canada for not spending enough on military capacity, Carney plans to quadruple Canadian spending on defence by 2030, beginning with an increase federal funding for military support by C$9 billion in the upcoming fiscal year 2026/2027, 2% of Canada’s GDP, as part of incrementally increasing military investments to reach 5% of Canada’s GDP by 2035.  There isn’t any scientific analysis as the why the military sector should be such a major percentage of GDP.

In keeping with the 5% of GDP objective, Carney’s urgent focus includes the purchasing of 12 submarines to patrol Canada’s three coasts.

This military impetus seems to conveniently ignore that the only potentially “dangerous aggressor” country on Canada’s borders is Russia, in Canada’s Arctic region.

However, submarines on Canada’s Atlantic and Pacific coasts may be justified should Canada be preparing for WWIII, with a Department of War.  This resembles Trump’s Department of War with its economic benefits.

Notwithstanding, Carney likes to boast of the economic opportunities, as a sovereign economic agency, associated with new defense spending.  Carney speaks of the economic possibilities for innovation and the creation of good new jobs for Canadians. This is similar to the Trump narrative.

Sure, there will be economic opportunities with any type of major fresh government spending.

Why emulate the U.S. military industrial complex when Canadian spending of huge amounts on cleantech innovation and deployment can close the gap in one of the fastest growing sectors in the world, a sector for which Canada is pitifully weak competitor?

Austerity cuts to government services, Trump “light”

To compensate for the sharp hike in the military budget, Carney will be cutting operational funding for federal services by 7% in fiscal year 2026-27, 10% in 2027-28 and 15% in 2028-29.

This dismisses that federal services are cracking across the board because of insufficient financial resources, people and operational needs, unable to accommodate demand.   Examples are manifold, ranging from inexpedient reviews of each immigrant’s status request to underfunded public transportation, to inadequate transfers of federal funds to support financially tormented provincial healthcare systems.

Targeting immigrants and border security, Trump “light”

Awaiting approval is Mark Carney’s Bill C-2, the Strong Borders Act, which allows for discretionary retrograding of an immigrant’s status and discretionary deporting of immigrants.   This appears to be an “emulation light” of Trump’s chaotic harsh treatments of immigrants.

Other Trump appeasing initiatives

Ceding to Trump’s rants, Carney annulled the implementation of the Digital Services Act, which, like similar Acts in Australia, France and others, would have imposed a 3% tax on digital services such as Netflix, Amazon, Google, Meta, Uber and Airbnb, crossing into Canada, earning revenues in Canada, without paying any taxes.  It has taken almost a decade for Canada to adopt this act in 2024, due to heavy lobbying/bullying.

To avoid rattling the beast, Trump, Canada will not apply retaliatory tariffs on Canadian exports to the U.S. that are impacted by U.S. tariffs and not protected by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

Trump implemented 35% tariff on items not protected by the USMCA anyway.

The Takeaway

Mark Carney is Americanizing segments of the Canadian political landscape, but so gradually that it the cumulative results are missed by most Canadians.

Climate change has taken a back seat to Carney’s Trump-like “drill baby drill” “national interests” to favour major oil and gas projects.

Projects that defy economic and/or environmental considerations are being sanctioned, such as small modular reactors.

Hints have been offered that Canada will not comply with the Paris Agreement.

Zero emission vehicle objectives have been abandoned, emulating Trump in the process.

Canadian military spending will be quadrupled while Carney boasts of economic opportunities for doing so.  This aligns well with U.S. military-industrial complex mindset and Trump’s Department of War.

The stretched thin government services will be cut to compensate for quadrupling in the military budget.  Trump has been shown to be most enthusiastic on cuts to “wasteful” government services.

The Digital Services Act has been abandoned, though long awaited, immediately after Trump threatened more tariffs if the Act was to be implemented.

Discretionary powers to retrograde the status of many immigrants and to deport immigrants are to come, though there is no apparent need for doing so.  This may be described as a pale reflection of Trump policies on immigration.

Carney is sleepwalking the Americanization of Canada and action on climate change has been slaughtered on the altar.

Nearly all of this wasn’t laid out in Carney’s election campaign.

Oil & gas decline: Cracks where light gets in (not Canada)

Cleantech investments outpacing fossil fuels

Trump invaded Venezuela to assert greater global dominance via subordination of the world’s oil sector, and calls climate change a hoax.

Not as well-known, there is a global green revolution is in progress.

Two-thirds of the 2024 record of $3 trillion invested in energy sources was dedicated to cleantech such as renewables, electric vehicles (EVs), grid storage (batteries) and energy efficiency.

For 2025, estimates of global investments in cleantech range from $2.3 trillion to $3.3 trillion, according to BloombergNEF and International Energy Agency (IEA) respectively.

Renewables progress to-date

In 2024, renewables captured 92% of new global power capacity, adding 518 gigawatts (GW), a 15% increase, bringing total capacity to 4.44 terawatts (TW).  Asia, Europe and North America represented 85% of this achievement.

For the period 2010-2023, solar accounted for 80% of the renewables capacity increase.

Ironically, despite Trump, solar and wind were attributable to 94% of U.S. new power capacity installations in Q1 2025 plus an increase of 20% in domestic solar manufacturing. In California where gas is the principle source of power generation, gas consumption between January and August 2025 was 18% lower than for the same period in 2024.  In those first 8 months of 2025, California solar generation increased 17%.

China alone consistently represents 60% of global renewable energy capacity growth.

India is aligned with its 2030 goal for 2.5 times renewables growth.  This would make India the second largest market for renewable capacity expansion.

The EU renewables capacity is anticipated to amount to 71% of EU electricity generation by 2030.

On a global scale, by 2030, the International Energy Agency (IEA) 2025 annual renewable energy report foresees global renewable capacity to be 2.2 times that of 2022 levels reaching 4.6 TW.

The IEA optimistic scenario suggests 2.8 times growth is possible.

Whatever scenario prevails, it translates into renewable power capacity growing more during 2025 to 2030, than in the previous 5 years.  This would be more than China, EU and Japan existing power capacity combined.

Nevertheless, this would not be enough.  Global renewables investments would have to double between 2025 and 2030 to meet climate and energy targets.

EVs

For 2025. the IEA and Ember estimated EVs came in at more than 25% of the world vehicle market, 20 million units.  This will likely rise to 30% in 2026. That’s a big jump from 2024, for which 20% of global vehicle sales were EVs, 17 million EVs.

This is so despite Trump and Canada’s Mark Carney being instrumental in slowing down EV sales in North America.

Of EVs manufactured in China, 95% are equipped with the more affordable lithium-iron phosphate (LFP) batteries, not requiring the expensive nickel or cobalt.  The absence of cobalt addresses ethical considerations.

Other global EV manufacturers are now transitioning to LFP batteries.  This is a critical development as the battery typically comes in at 40% of an EV’s cost.  Those that don’t get onboard for LFP batteries could experience a “Kodak crisis.”  The transition is a challenge since China now produces 99% of LFP batteries in the world.

Ford is preparing to shift to LFP batteries  and Tesla is already equipping its standard range Model 3 and Model Y with LFP batteries.

Volkswagen’s battery affiliate, PowerCo, is currently considering a shift to LFP.

Yet even LFP batteries may soon be history.  Sodium-ion batteries, which don’t require any critical minerals, are now market-ready.  Up to 2025, sodium-ion batteries have been used for energy storage, but in 2027 China’s CATL will be able to mass produce sodium-ion batteries at a cost less than the LFP versions.  EVs so-equipped will be more affordable than gas-powered vehicles and have good cold weather performance.

With advent of more attractively priced EVs, EV sales will take off as is already the case in China.

And China’s BYD is manufacturing highly attractively priced short-haul heavy duty battery electric trucks.

EVs displaced oil demand by 1.5 million barrels/day in 2024.   Petroleum demand for road transportation is expected to peak in 2027.  Peak passenger vehicle oil demand is projected for 2025.

For 2 and 3 wheelers, peak oil consumption has already been reached.

The exceptions are the U.S. and Canada which are not following global EV sales trends as both countries have abandoned regulations and other initiatives supporting EVs.

 Oil exceeding demand

Between January and September 2025, there was an oil glut or surplus of 1.9 million barrels per day, (b/d). The glut is expected to spiral up to an untenable 4 million b/d 2026.  Yet in September 2025, the supply increased by 5.6 million b/d more compared to the preceding year.

China will heavily influence global supply and demand as it represents 25% of global crude oil imports and, as of 2025, these imports peaked and started to decline.

Promising oil financial results will increasingly be harder to achieve because of a combination of oil prices at an all-time low, the least costly to exploit wells now being spent, and inflation/geopolitics.

For a profitable trajectory, the oil price/barrel must increase 5% annually, but this is not happening.  The breakeven oil price is now $47, and for oil sands, $57.

Renewables displacing natural gas market

As of 2025, U.S. liquified natural gas (LNG) export terminals comprise 8 currently operating, 8 under construction and another 10 approved, but not yet under construction.  In addition, the U.S. Dept. of Transportation Maritime Administration is reviewing 5 LNG export terminals.

Globally, there is a plethora of liquid natural gas (LNG) export terminals, approximately 230 are in operation or will be fully operational, within the next few years.

The gas demand side of the equation paints a different picture.

China, the world’s largest energy consumer, experienced a 24% decline in natural gas imports in 2024.  Massive deployment of renewables, together with politically motivated imports of Russian gas are behind this.

Japan, Europe and South Korea, which represent half of the world’s natural gas imports, are likely to undergo a 20% drop in LNG use by 2030.

Japan’s gas consumption has dipped 20% since 2018, peaked in 2024, and has since dipped 25% as a consequence of the recommissioning of nuclear capacity.

Japan resells more imported LNG than it uses, 40% of its imports, due to greater domestic renewables and nuclear capacity.   But with declining markets for natural gas, import markets being oversupplied and low prices prevailing, this economic direction is now considered high risk.

For the EU, which is entirely dependent on imports for gas supplies, gas consumption dropped by 20% between 2021 and 2024, likely peaked in 2024.  By 2030, based on 2024 levels, EU gas use may drop another 29% by 2030, and 67% by 2040.

The U.K., Germany and Chile reduced imports of gas and coal by 1/3 since 2010.

In the U.K., electricity generated by imported fossil fuels dropped from 45% to 25% in the last 10 years.

Bulgaria, Romania and Finland, formerly dependent on gas imports from Russia, have reduced gas imports nearly to zero.

Denmark has cut fossil fuel imports more than half.

Japanese LNG consumption peaked in 2014 after the Fukushima catastrophe,

In India, only 2% of power capacity stems from natural gas. The 32% of power generation from natural gas did not produce any electricity.  Consequently, 8% of India’s gas-fired power supplies have become stranded assets.

Pakistan, once a gleam in the eye of LNG exporters, has halted to LNG projects.   Pakistan has engaged in a radical transition to renewables.  During the last two years Pakistan installed 40 GW of solar.  This is extraordinary since its entire power generation capacity in 2023 was 46 GW.

Pakistan now has enough distributed solar power potential to meet all of its needs, including those of isolated communities. Distributed energy now furnishes more energy to the country than power from the grid.

China leading the way

China’s $942 billion investments in cleantech in 2024, was not far off from global fossil fuel investments in that year, $1.2 trillion.  If the value of cleantech production and services are included in China’s cleantech thrusts, it comes to $1.9 trillion in 2024, or 10% of China GDP.

In 2025, up to July, China’s cleantech export earnings were $120 billion, an amount which exceeded the U.S. earnings on fossil fuel exports, $80 billion.  For 2024, earnings from China’s cleantech exports were $180 billion, and U.S. fossil fuel exports, $150 billion.

And, with critical minerals being the pillars of a green transition, it’s hard to keep up China’s green transition.  In this regard, China is the world’s top refiner for 19 of the 20 top minerals and on average accounts 70% of refining market share.

China produces 80% of world solar PV modules and battery cells.

By the end of April 2025, China had 2.02 TW of installed renewables capacity, up from 1.83 TW reached in 2024.

As well, the impressive Chinese cleantech portrait includes 70% of global EV sales and 40% global EV exports. China’s EVs came in at 54% of domestic EV market share in 2025.

On public transportation, China had 48,000 km of high-speed rail at the end of 2024 and will add another 12,000 km by 2030, 50 subway systems with over 10,000 km of track, substantial light rail and had 542,600 e-buses, 84% pure electric, on its roads in 2022.

Heat pumps are massively being deployed in China, replacing coal for household heating.

The cumulative global impacts of these changes are phenomenal.

The result is China is single-handedly reducing global prices of cleantech, EVs and energy storage, thus changing global energy and economic paradigms.

Trump’s enemy within and Canada’s capitulation to fossil fuel sector

The Trump administration views cleantech as an enemy within.

However, the U.S. business community must plan for competitiveness in the global green economy now.  They cannot afford to delay a catch up after Trump becomes history.

Because the cleantech manufacturing in the U.S. entails commitments of billions to the green revolution, it cannot be reversed.  The timelines for construction of new manufacturing plants are measured in years, and supply contracts can span 5 years.

It is Canada that will be the big loser.

Canada’s “national interest” projects are exempt from other existing legislation, according to Law C-5 and supported by Budget 2025.  National interest projects announced so far include the following:

On November 27, 2025 a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed between Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, for a new oil pipeline from Alberta to the British Columbia (BC) coast, even though the Canadian government-owned Trans Mountain pipeline from Alberta to the BC coast operates under capacity, cost C$50 billion in subsidies plus Canadian taxpayers contribute C$3 billion/year to operate it.

BC opposes the pipeline.

On December 2, 2025, at a meeting of the Assembly of First Nations in Ottawa, a resolution was adopted objecting to the new pipeline.  One should expect other protests to come from First Nations.

The hope is not strong for private industry promoters to step up to the plate.

The MOU also comprises:

Abolition of the regulation not permitting oil tankers along the BC coast:  At the December 2 Assembly of First Nations meeting, there was an unanimous rejection of ending the moratorium on tankers floating on BC coasts.

Weakening the Alberta the industrial carbon price, the Output-base Compliance System, that is supposed to increase the industrial carbon price per tonne from C$95 now, to up to $170 by 2030: Under the MOU, the parties will review a proposed on a carbon price of C$130/tonne on or before April 1, 2026.

An Alberta waiver from the clean electricity regulations that set limits on carbon dioxide pollution from almost all electricity generation sources, targeting fossil fuels: The regulations provide a mix of compliance flexibilities and do not prescribe specific technological solutions. The MOU exemption, strictly for Alberta, may translate into weakening of Alberta’s agenda to phase out coal-fired electrical generation.  This is nice since Alberta placed a 7-month moratorium on permits for wind energy projects ending February 2025.  Nearly half of the projects that were to go ahead before the moratorium have not been placed back on the table.

While both the clean energy regulation and industrial carbon price policies were carved out for Alberta, other provinces would ask for similar treatment.

The abolition of the cap on oil and gas emissions by 2030:  The cap would have allowed a 16% increase in oil and gas production by 2030-32, relative to 2019.  This magic would be achieved with the application of carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) which would supposedly result in a 35% GHG reduction by 2030, based on 2019 levels.  Yet not a single CCUS project has met goals for emissions reduction, costs and timelines.

For the new pipeline, Alberta must support the CCUS project of the Pathways Alliance, an Alliance of the 6 major oilsands producers:

An extension of the timeline on methane reduction, strictly carved out for Alberta.

Support for nuclear power in Alberta.

This MOU is a gift from heaven to Paul St-Pierre Plamondon the populist ethnocentric anti-immigrant leader of the Quebec independence party, Parti-Québecois (PQ).  St-Pierre Plamondon rejects being associated with a fossil fuel state. He considers federalism to be a malicious ideology. The PQ is in first place in the polls for the upcoming Quebec election around October 2026.

Steven Guilbeault, former minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada, afterwards minister of Canadian identity and culture, has resigned as a cabinet minister.

Other national interest projects are presented below:

1) Phase II of the LNG Canada export terminal on the BC Pacific coast;

2) construction of 4 small modular reactors (SMRs) at the Darlington Ontario site, despite SMRs being an unproven technology with poor economies of scale, such that a SMR cost is 5 times the cost of renewables to produce 1 GW of energy;

3) removal of a cap on oil and gas emissions irrespective of the above-mentioned MOU;

4) Pathways Alliance federal support, for a $16.5 billion project, whether or not there is a new oil pipeline;

5) less stringent greenwashing clause in the Competition Act, a regulation that had required companies backup their present and future emission reduction claims, and;

6) the Ksi Lisims Pacific coast offshore LNG project with the terminal to be constructed in South Korea and despite Indigenous opposition to the 800-kilometre Prince Rupert Gas Transmission to transport gas from the northeast BC northwest-Alberta northeast border.

Additional “national interest” projects concern critical minerals, a small northern Canada hydro-electric initiative and a possible BC north coast transmission project. The smorgasbord of projects constitute climate minuses cancelling out the few pluses.

In September 2025, Prime Minister Mark Carney “paused” the 20% for 2026 zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate.  The mandate refers to the percentage of ZEV vehicles each manufacturer must sell in a given year.  It had been set for 20% for 2026.

A July 24, 2023 announcement by the former Minister of the environment on the termination of fossil fuel subsidies had so many exemptions, it changed nothing.

The takeaway

To sum up, the oil and gas market will decline, while supply will go up.

The transition to cleantech is unstoppable because of the attractiveness of low prices and energy security that comes with reducing reliance on foreign fossil fuel imports.

Add to that, two-thirds of fossil fuel energy consumed is wasted, or does not contribute to the intended tasks.

Private sector and general public consumers will make the transition to clean solutions when there are price, choice and environmental advantages at the outset.  These transition attributes are enhanced by the absence of the volatility lottery of fossil fuel prices.

Many COP30 participating nations, subnational governments, cities, the European Parliament and others that want a roadmap for phasing out fossil fuel are planning the First International Conference on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels, April 28-29, in Colombia.  This would leave the fossil fuel export nations out in the cold, while preempting blockage of a phase out roadmap.

As for Canada, the “national interest” projects, especially the federal-Alberta governments’ MOU, are mainly fossil fuel initiatives that head Canada towards stranded assets and national disunity.

Economic and environmental policies among most fossil fuel importing countries are aligned for a global green transition. The remaining nations will have to go with the flow.

China: Largest emitter to green gamechanger, but…

China climate emergency global influence

China is several years ahead of other developed countries on the migration to a green economy, in clean technology production capacity, massive market penetration and green investments. China already has an extraordinary global green export potential. China leads in renewables, electric vehicles and battery production, incrementally regulating plastic solutions, high-speed rail, private clean tech investment, government environmental support and green bonds.  China’s concurrent climate actions are gamechangers destined to have huge global competition impacts on energy, economic, transportation, industrial and other paradigms, perhaps more so than the climate crisis.  But there are simultaneous contradictions. China is the world’s largest liquified natural gas importer, once again ramping up coal production and certainly not a leader on human rights.

Fossil fuel methane climate emergency: Solutions

Methane emissions underestimated

Methane emissions are underrated at one third of global warming gases, largely because fossil fuel sector methane emissions are underestimated by 70 percent.  Current data indicates the energy sector accounts for 40 percent of man-made methane.  Consequently, the COP26 non-binding pledges of over 100 nations for a 30 percent reduction by 2030 are not only dreadfully inadequate, but also, without standardized measuring, reporting and verification standards, oil and gas industry methane greenwashing is rampant.  The draft European Union (EU) plan to reduce methane emissions up to 80 percent by 2030 zeros in on methane accountability norms and establishes transparent extraterritorial requirements to cover imports.  The U.S. too, with the backing of the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, now has the foundation for vigorous proposal to update its regulations and investments in methane reduction.  Sadly, Canada’s methane ambitions procrastinate and are fuzzy.  Lastly, stringent government actions would be less critical if the oil and gas industry applied existing technologies to capture fossil fuel methane and sell it for a net profit.

Renewables, not gas, for Southeast Asia: Vietnam

Rooftop solar surge

The global natural gas industry, including that of Canada, has high hopes for weaning Southeast Asia from coal dependency.  Concurrently, low-cost renewables are swiftly changing the electrical power landscape in this part of the world.  Vietnam, caught in the squeeze between the two competing types of power sources, is favouring a clean energy metamorphosis.  The country now has the greatest installed solar energy capacity in Southeast Asia.  Government policies are both supportive and handicaps.  Grid infrastructure is woefully insufficient.  International support is critical to solidify the transition to clean energy.

Investing responsibly, in the Canadian green economy, not easy: Policy solutions

Canada compares poorly in buttressing clean tech firms.

Reliable standards for environmentally sound investments do not exist and very few Canadian clean tech firms are listed on a stock exchange.  Too often, Canadian clean tech firms must go outside Canada for financial support and/or to enter the stock market.  This article presents solutions for investors and clean tech companies alike, but these solutions require government action. 

Green economy: Financial sector zigzags

Green financing improves but has a long way to go

BlackRock, the world’s largest investment firm, has indicated that those that don’t tackle climate change will lose money in 5 years. Some financial institutions have made multi-trillion commitments from now to 2030 to invest in the green economy while still focusing the majority of investments in fossil fuels. Canadian banks are among the global top fossil fuel investors.

Fossil fuel sector contrasts: Green transition engaged, but not enough

Not all fossil fuel companies the same

Not all Big Oil firms are alike. Some are engaged in a rapid green migration, many are sitting on the fence and others are still in climate denial. Meanwhile, the value of fossil fuel assets are declining but the industry is camouflaging this by selling assets and debt financing to keep shareholders happy.

Trudeau’s climate greenwashing mayhem

Justin Trudeau announced another of his Liberal government’s green plans in December. I have lost track of how many green plans we have had, but not a single one has met its targets. With the prime minister set to officially meet with the new U.S. president Tuesday, the Liberals’ environmental agenda looks embarrassingly unambitious by comparison.

Raising the price of carbon is one of the pillars of the government’s latest plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But there are no magic bullets and piecemeal measures don’t work.

The new U.S. administration has announced plans for an international climate conference led by President Biden on April 22, which is Earth Day.

In other regions that have carbon pricing mechanisms, such as the European Union and China (with its pilot schemes), climate change abatement plans consist of many complementary measures, including stringent legislation.

Why coal can’t make America great again

0

Among the ways Donald Trump vows to “make America great again” is reviving the US coal industry. That’s a stretch considering the plight coal faces today in the US. 

The combined value of the top four US coal companies fell from $33 billion in 2011 to $150 million in 2015. Coal’s declining role in the US power supply saw it go from 50% in 2006 to 42% in 2011, to 30% in 2016. US coal production dropped 19% in 2016 alone. In 2015, between 11 gigawatts (GW) and 14 GW of US coal capacity went off line.

As Big Oil tanks, why is Canada so slow to adapt?

The business model of Big Oil has already started to collapse.  The model is premised on strong growth to fuel high prices and render economically viable the exploitation of expensive-to-develop, non-conventional fossil fuels, including the tar sands and shale oil and gas.

Note to Justin: Pipelines don’t help transition to green economy

When Justin Trudeau talks of oil pipeline projects as part of an energy transition, what exactly is he talking about?

That we will be on the path to reducing our dependency on fossil fuels by increasing our oil dependency in the short term? And that by immaculate conception we will reduce these very same dependencies over the long term? Supposedly, we will switch to a green economy sometime between now and when we are all dead, with the help of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand”.

Despite Trump & Trudeau’s pipeline fetish, green economy will keep booming

US President-Elect Trump (Flickr/Gage Skidmore) and Canadian PM Trudeau (Flickr/Canada 2020) are both big on pipelines

Forces at play suggest there will continue to be significant advancements in the global migration to a green economy.  Trudeau and Trump are rowing against the current.

Electric Vehicles are set to take off…so why is Trudeau still pushing pipelines?

Tesla Model 3 at March 2016 unveiling (Steve Jurvetson/Flickr)

In my previous March 2016 article “Pipelines to Nowhere“, I made the point that the proposed Canadian pipelines are about increasing the international supply of petroleum when all the signs are that demand fossil fuels are levelling off over the longer term.

Trudeau abandons green election promises, lacks real climate plan

Justin Trudeau talking a good game at the Global Progress summit (Canada 2020/Flickr)

“Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.” -Albert Einstein

With the recent National Energy Board approval of the Kinder Morgan pipeline and Justin Trudeau’s enthusiastic post-election remarks to the effect that Canada can build pipelines and address climate change concurrently, it is time to take stock of just where the current government is heading us. 

China’s war on coal means lots more renewable energy…and fracking

Shale gas is a big component of China’s future energy plans

China has declared war on coal and coal consumption is down as a result. But this coal war offers some good news, some not so good news for Canada, and some bad news, all at the same time.

Green jobs see huge growth globally: Why is Canada missing out?

There are those like Stephen Harper who repeatedly say we must choose between economic development and sustainable development.

And there are those who, concerned about the environment and the latest reports from the International Panel on Climate Change, suggest that economic development and sustainable development should be reconciled.  Countries such as Germany are often cited as cases in point.  Most environmental organizations fall into this latter reconciliation category.

Europe leads the way on building a green economy

The European Union has fast become the global leader on migrating to a green economy, with its Emissions Trading System (cap and trade scheme) in place since 2005. Canada has much to learn from the current and future EU debates on establishing new targets for 2030 – particularly how to fast-forward its badly lagging green economy following the next federal election in 2015.

Germany shows a thriving green economy is possible

When Prime Minister Harper is challenged on his environmental record, one of his standard replies is that between economic development and sustainable development, he must give priority to the economy. While it suits Harper’s ideological agenda to imply that economic and environmental objectives are opposing forces, the facts suggest otherwise.

China’s chaotic leap forward to a green economy

When most people talk of China and its environmental and energy challenges, they tend to paint a very bleak picture.  While this view is historically justified, things are changing fast in today’s China.

Criticism of China’s environmental record has been traditionally well-justified. After all, China:  1) displaced the US as the world’s largest energy consumer as of 2009 – doubling its energy consumption between 2000 and 2009; 2) produces the world’s  highest pollution levels, with 16 of the top 20 most-polluted cities in the world being in China; and 3) now has total annual vehicle sales higher than that of the US.