Canada's LNG Touted-And Doubted-as a Green 'Transition' Fuel
LNG Canada said Monday that the vessel GasLog Glasgow has departed the northern port of Kitimat, British Columbia, full of ultra-chilled natural gas, The Canadian Press reports. LNG Canada hasn't confirmed the overall price tag for the project. But the federal government has billed it as the biggest private sector investment in Canadian history-$40 billion between the Kitimat operation, the northeast B.C. gas fields supplying it and the pipeline in between.
Shell and four Asian companies are partners in LNG Canada, the first facility to export Canadian gas across the Pacific in the ultra-chilled state using specialized tankers. A handful of other projects are either under construction or in development on the B.C. coast.
"Cleaner energy around the world is what I think about when I think about LNG," Shell Canada country chair Stastia West said in an onstage interview at the Global Energy Show in Calgary earlier this month.
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith told the energy show that Canadian oil and gas exports can be an "antidote" to the current geopolitical chaos.
"And it comes with an added benefit: lower global emissions. By moving more natural gas, we can also help countries transition away from higher emitting fuels, such as coal."
Smith cited a recent Fraser Institute study that suggested if Canada were to double its gas production, export the additional supply to Asia and displace coal there, it would lead to an annual emissions cut of up to 630 million tonnes annually.
"That's almost 90% of Canada's total greenhouse gas emissions each year," Smith said.
The authors of the Fraser Institute study, released in May, argued that Canada's ability to reduce emissions elsewhere should be factored into its climate policy.
View our latest digests
"It is important to recognize that GHG emissions are global and are not confined by borders," wrote Elmira Aliakbari and Julio Mejia.
"Instead of focusing on reducing domestic GHG emissions in Canada by implementing various policies that hinder economic growth, governments must shift their focus toward global GHG reductions and help the country cut emissions worldwide by expanding its LNG exports."
Some experts see a murkier picture.
Most credible estimates suggest that if LNG were to indeed displace coal abroad, there would be some emissions reductions, said Kent Fellows, assistant professor of economics with the University of Calgary's School of Public Policy.
But the magnitude is debatable.
"Will all of our natural gas exports be displacing coal? Absolutely not. Will a portion of them be displacing coal? Probably, and it's really hard to know exactly what that number is," he said.
Fellows said there's a good chance Canadian supplies would supplant other sources of gas from Russia, Eurasia and the Middle East, perhaps making it a wash emissions-wise. He said the Canadian gas could actually be worse from an emissions standpoint, depending on how the competing supply moves. LNG is more energy intensive than pipeline shipment because the gas needs to be liquefied and moved on a ship.
In China, every type of energy is in demand. So instead of displacing coal, LNG would likely just be added to the mix, Fellows added.
"Anyone who's thinking about this as one or the other is thinking about it wrong," Fellows said.
A senior analyst with Investors for Paris Compliance, which aims to hold Canadian publicly traded companies to their net-zero promises, said he doubts a country like India would see the economic case for replacing domestically produced coal with imported Canadian gas.
"Even at the lowest price of gas, it's still multiple times the price," said Michael Sambasivam. "You'd need some massive system to provide subsidies to developing countries to be replacing their coal with a fuel that isn't even really proven to be much greener."
And even in that case, "it's not as if they can just flip a switch and take it in," he added.
"There's a lot of infrastructure that needs to be built to take in LNG as well as to use it. You have to build import terminals. You have to refit your power terminals."
What LNG would be competing head-to-head with, Sambasivam said, is renewable energy.
If there were any emissions reductions abroad as a result of the coal-to-gas switch, Sambasivam said he doesn't see why a Canadian company should get the credit.
"Both parties are going to want to claim the emissions savings and you can't claim those double savings," he said.
There's also a "jarring" double-standard at play, he said, as industry players have long railed against environmental reviews that factor in emissions from the production and combustion of the oil and gas a pipeline carries, saying only the negligible emissions from running the infrastructure itself should be considered.
Devyani Singh, an investigative researcher at Stand.earth who ran for the Greens in last year's B.C. election, said arguments that LNG is a green fuel are undermined by the climate impacts of producing, liquefying and shipping it.
A major component of natural gas is methane, a greenhouse gas about 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide over a 20-year time frame, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Methane that leaks from tanks, pipelines and wells has been a major issue that industry, government and environmental groups have been working to tackle.
"Have we actually accounted for all the leakage along the whole pipeline? Have we accounted for the actual under-reporting of methane emissions happening in B.C. and Canada?" asked Singh.
Even if LNG does have an edge over coal, thinking about it as a "transition" or "bridge" fuel at this juncture is a problem, she said.
"The time for transition fuels is over," she said. "Let's just be honest-we are in a climate crisis where the time for transition fuels was over a decade ago."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 29, 2025.
Source: The Energy Mix
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Canada News.Net
15 minutes ago
- Canada News.Net
Family doctor crisis: 7 options to find the physicians Canada needs
Canada faces a massive shortage of physicians. According to recent reports, Canadians require about 23,000 family doctors to meet current and emerging needs. In the absence of effective solutions, mayors and municipal councils across the country are competing with each other to entice doctors to their communities. It seems insurmountable, but options do exist and, no doubt, multiple approaches will be needed. What's possible? My clinical, administrative and educational roles over the years have provided an opportunity to work within and examine the doctor "pipeline" from multiple perspectives. There's a disconnect between that pipeline and the urgent and growing need for doctors, which was a major motivation for my book The Doctors We Need: Imagining a New Path for Physician Recruitment, Training, and Support. Based on all this, at least seven approaches seem possible. All have their pros and cons. Medical education and training is available in most countries. The number of doctors available varies widely. In fact, some countries appear to have a surplus of medical school graduates who are unable to find employment. In Canada, doctors are in demand and enjoy an excellent standard of living. Immigration to Canada, if offered, would likely be seen as a very attractive option. However, medical training globally is highly variable and assessing qualifications relative to Canadian standards is challenging. There would also be no assurance that such doctors would be interested in taking on needed roles or remaining in those practices once settled. Finally, there is an ethical concern - we may be robbing other countries of their needed physicians. Many foreign-trained doctors have already immigrated to Canada and are working at non-medical jobs, hoping to gain residency status that would allow them to undertake examinations or complete their training. This approach would have many of the same disadvantages as above, but at least ensures these individuals already have some familiarity with Canadian work environment and a better awareness of the expectations facing physicians. It's generally acknowledged that there are at least as many Canadians studying medicine outside Canada as within. These are people who were unsuccessful or chose not to engage in our highly competitive admission processes that annually turn away thousands of highly qualified students. They tend to enrol in well-established medical schools in countries such as Australia, Ireland and England. Although no rigorous analysis or statistics are available, it's increasingly recognized that the majority remain and practise in the countries where they trained, having established relationships and support structures. In fact, many are actively recruited to take up much needed primary care positions in those countries. Attracting them back to Canada will require a targeted recruitment strategy and expansion of available post-graduate training positions. All that being said, this is potentially a workforce already prepared and willing to address Canadian health-care needs. All doctors, particularly family physicians, face a burden of paperwork and administrative tasks that drastically reduces their capacity to assess and treat patients. Developing innovative processes and collaborations that allow them to focus their time on direct patient care will expand their impact and reduce the number of physicians required. We're already seeing this strategy play out with nurses and pharmacists providing some primary care that was previously provided only by physicians. This approach has many merits and can allow physicians to concentrate on key essential roles, as for Option 4, above. The keys will be to ensure that the health-care teams co-ordinate and integrate their work effectively, and that all essential services are provided. If we're not able to train sufficient physicians through our own medical school structure, we could partner with foreign, well-functioning medical schools to promote access for Canadians who wish to return to Canada and engage the types of practices that are in such demand. This would require identifying appropriate schools and developing partnerships ensuring that the admission standards, curriculum and clinical training meet Canadian standards. The most obvious and intuitively appealing approach would be to simply ramp up the training pipeline within Canada's medical schools. After all, we have excellent schools and certainly no shortage of very willing and capable applicants. There are currently 18 medical schools in Canada. Plans are in place to expand to 20 schools over the next few years, but this will not be effective unless we change the current processes of training. The supply of family doctors provided by our current admission and training processes falls far short of our needs. Recent studies also demonstrate that graduates from our current training programs are increasingly turning away from the comprehensive and community-based practices so much in need. Consequently, even a dramatic expansion within the current training paradigm will fall far short of addressing our needs. To be effective, expansion must occur in conjunction with new approaches to admissions and training. The new program developed by Queen's at Lakeridge in Oshawa, which is dedicated to admitting and training family doctors, is an example of such innovative programming. The major drawback of this approach, of course, is that it will take time to even begin to address the shortfall. However, it addresses the fundamental problem most directly and establishes a framework for ongoing sustainability. While there is no single perfect solution, there are a number of approaches, all of which have potential to relieve Canada's medical workforce crisis. It's time to explore and pursue them all. It's time to develop and empower a multi-disciplinary, pan-Canadian panel to decide which mix of the options will build the reliable, sustainable physician workforce that Canada needs and deserves.
Winnipeg Free Press
39 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Canada to take steps to protect vanishing North Atlantic right whales from ships
The Canadian government says it is taking steps this summer to protect a vanishing species of whale from lethal collisions with ships in its waters. The whale is the North Atlantic right whale, which numbers only about 370. The whales give birth off the southeastern U.S. in the winter and spring and migrate north to New England and Canada to feed. Along the way, the whales face dangers including ship strikes and entanglement in commercial fishing gear. Environmental groups have long faulted the U.S. and Canadian governments for not doing enough to protect the critically endangered animals. Canada is enforcing mandatory protection measures for the whale this summer, Transport Canada said in a June 27 statement. All vessels of 42.7 feet (13 meters) in length or more must comply with speed restrictions in designated areas of the ocean to avoid whale strikes, the agency said. Transport Canada said it is also requesting voluntary slowdowns in other parts of the ocean. The restrictions reflect the agency's commitment 'to the protection and conservation of endangered North Atlantic right whales,' the agency said. 'Transport Canada has been taking action to help protect this iconic species from vessel collisions in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, a high-traffic area where right whales are often seen,' the statement said. The restrictions are being enforced at a time when scientists are voicing concern about a lack of right whale reproduction. The New England Aquarium in Boston said earlier this year that this year's calving season produced only 11 mother-calf pairs. U.S. government authorities have said the whales need to have at least 50 calves per season to start recovering the population. The U.S. government decided earlier this year to withdraw a proposal that would have required more ships to slow down in East Coast waters to spare the whale. The move came in the final days of President Joe Biden's administration and federal ocean managers said there was no way to implement the rules before President Donald Trump took office in January. The whale was once abundant off the East Coast, but it was decimated long ago during the commercial whaling era. It has been protected by the U.S. Endangered Species Act for decades, but has been slow to recover.
Global News
42 minutes ago
- Global News
Supply management law not enough to shield system from Trump, experts warn
A new law meant to protect supply management might not be enough to shield the system in trade talks with a Trump administration bent on eliminating it, trade experts say. 'It's certainly more difficult to strike a deal with the United States now with the passage of this bill that basically forces Canada to negotiate with one hand tied behind its back,' said William Pellerin, a trade lawyer and partner at the firm McMillan LLP. 'Now that we've removed the digital service tax, dairy and supply management is probably the number 1 trade irritant that we have with the United States. That remains very much unresolved.' When Trump briefly paused trade talks with Canada on June 27 over the digital services tax — shortly before Ottawa capitulated by dropping the tax — he zeroed in on Canada's system of supply management. Story continues below advertisement In a social media post, Trump called Canada a 'very difficult country to TRADE with, including the fact that they have charged our Farmers as much as 400% Tariffs, for years, on Dairy Products.' Canada can charge about 250 per cent tariffs on U.S. dairy imports over a set quota established by the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement. The International Dairy Foods Association, which represents the U.S. dairy industry, said in March the U.S. has never come close to reaching those quotas, though the association also said that's because of other barriers Canada has erected. When Bill C-202 passed through Parliament last month, Bloc Québécois MPs hailed it as a clear win protecting Quebec farmers from American trade demands. 2:17 Quebec dairy farmers fuming over Trump's trade war The Bloc's bill, which received royal assent on June 26, prevents the foreign affairs minister from making commitments in trade negotiations to either increase the tariff rate quota or reduce tariffs for imports over a set threshold. Story continues below advertisement On its face, that rule would prevent Canadian trade negotiators from offering to drop the import barriers that shield dairy and egg producers in Canada from price shocks. But while the law appears to rule out using supply management as a bargaining chip in trade talks with the U.S., it doesn't completely constrain the government. Get daily National news Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy Pellerin said that if Prime Minister Mark Carney is seeking a way around C-202, he might start by looking into conducting the trade talks personally, instead of leaving them to Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand. Carney dismissed the need for the new law during the recent election but vowed to keep supply management off the table in negotiations with the U.S. Pellerin said the government could also address the trade irritant by expanding the number of players who can access dairy quotas beyond 'processors.' '(C-202) doesn't expressly talk about changing or modifying who would be able to access the quota,' he said. Expanding access to quota, he said, would likely 'lead to companies like grocery stores being able to import U.S. cheeses, and that would probably please the United States to a significant degree.' Carleton University associate professor Philippe Lagassé, an expert on Parliament and the Crown, said the new law doesn't extend past something called the 'royal prerogative' — the ability of the executive branch of government to carry out certain actions in, for example, the conduct of foreign affairs. That suggests the government isn't constrained by the law, he said. Story continues below advertisement 'I have doubts that the royal prerogative has been displaced by the law. There is no specific language binding the Crown and it would appear to run contrary to the wider intent of the (law that it modifies),' he said by email. 'That said, if the government believes that the law is binding, then it effectively is. As defenders of the bill insisted, it gives the government leverage in negotiation by giving the impression that Parliament has bound it on this issue.' 2:01 Canadian farmers still uneasy despite dodging Trump's new tariffs He said a trade treaty requires enabling legislation, so a new bill could remove the supply management constraints. 'The bill adds an extra step and some constraints, but doesn't prevent supply management from eventually being removed or weakened,' he said. Trade lawyer Mark Warner, principal at MAAW Law, said Canada could simply dispense with the law through Parliament if it decides it needs to make concessions to, for example, preserve the auto industry. Story continues below advertisement 'The argument for me that the government of Canada sits down with another country, particularly the United States, and says we can't negotiate that because Parliament has passed a bill — I have to tell you, I've never met an American trade official or lawyer who would take that seriously,' Warner said. 'My sense of this is it would just go through Parliament, unless you think other opposition parties would bring down the government over it.' While supply management has long been a target for U.S. trade negotiators, the idea of killing it has been a non-starter in Canadian politics for at least as long. Warner said any attempt to do away with it would be swiftly met with litigation, Charter challenges and provinces stepping up to fill a federal void. 'The real cost of that sort of thing is political, so if you try to take it away, people are screaming and they're blocking the highways and they are calling you names and the Bloc is blocking anything through Parliament — you pay a cost that way,' he said. 2:12 Canada's dairy, lumber supply under threat by Trump as trade war escalates But a compromise on supply management might not be that far-fetched. Story continues below advertisement 'The system itself won't be dismantled. I don't think that's anywhere near happening in the coming years and even decades,' said Pellerin. 'But I think that there are changes that could be made, particularly through the trade agreements, including by way of kind of further quotas. Further reduction in the tariffs for outside quota amounts and also in terms of who can actually bring in product.' The United States trade representative raised specific concerns about supply management in the spring, citing quota rules established under the CUSMA trade pact that are not being applied as the U.S. expected and ongoing frustration with the pricing of certain types of milk products. Former Canadian diplomat Louise Blais said that if Canada were to 'respect the spirit' of CUSMA as the Americans understand it, the problem might actually solve itself. 'We jump to the conclusion that it's dismantlement or nothing else, but in fact there's a middle ground,' she said.
