Nuclear power helped Ontario eliminate the use of coal in power generation and facilitated the expansion of wind and solar energy supplies.Don White/Getty Images
David MacNaughton was the Canadian ambassador to the United States from 2016 to 2019.
Prime Minister Mark Carney and the premiers recently agreed to expedite a list of “nation building” energy projects as part of efforts to strengthen the Canadian economy. Polling shows a large majority of Canadians agree with that goal. But if the Liberal government is serious about leveraging our energy superpower, they have to set aside flawed ideology that stands in the way of building our economic sovereignty. In their own words, we need to shift from “whether to build” to “how we build.”
Make no mistake, being an energy superpower is complex: the Carney administration must balance our climate commitments, our domestic energy security, that of our allies, the prosperity of our people and our sovereignty. This is especially true at a time of unexpectedly rising global electricity demand, and in turn, a resurgence in global coal usage.
Given this complexity and urgency, one would think that ideologically simplistic solutions would be seen for what they are. Yet many environmentalists have severely weakened the possibility of Canada becoming an energy superpower with the false narrative that killing a valuable industry would save the planet and somehow create prosperity.
A fixed emissions cap on Canada’s oil and gas industry is an example of that thinking. By limiting production, it will clearly eliminate thousands of Canadian jobs, exacerbate regional tensions, cede market share to enemies such as Russia, do nothing to reduce our dependence on the United States and have almost no impact on global GHG emissions.
Opinion: For the G7, natural gas is destiny. Let’s embrace it as the bridge to energy security
Opinion: The real G7 story is the quiet reassertion of Canadian energy
Research from S&P found U.S. gas exports significantly reduce global carbon emissions by displacing coal. Canadian LNG, which emits even less than the American version, could have done more for the climate movement than any other export. Instead, Canada’s coal exports are at record highs thanks to growing global energy demand. Plus, the gap in LNG supply has enriched Russia – directly subsidizing their arms buildup.
While industry must not ignore climate change, it is simultaneously true that Canada’s years of hesitancy over the LNG industry, courtesy of green ideology, has allowed us to be leapfrogged by production in the U.S. Natural gas was still produced and sold; just not by Canadian workers or Canadian companies. At a global LNG conference in Vancouver more than a year ago, 15 Indigenous chiefs from Canada attended, supporting LNG projects. Also in attendance were many senior representatives of countries anxious to buy LNG to reduce coal usage. The most senior representative of the Government of Canada was an assistant deputy minister.
To be clear, some environmentalists aren’t just opposed to fossil fuels; many have opposed other forms of baseload energy.
Green ideology was behind the closing of Germany’s nuclear plants that led to a substantial increase in natural gas imports. That in turn increased global emissions and enriched Russia, helping it to build up its armaments. Fortunately, Greenpeace was unsuccessful in shutting down nuclear plants in Ontario, where 50 per cent of the province’s baseload energy comes from nuclear power. That power source, along with a new natural gas plant, enabled Ontario to eliminate the use of coal in power generation and facilitated the expansion of wind and solar energy supplies.
As Canadian families feel the pain of a trade war, we have an obligation to defend our economy, our sovereignty and our energy. The Prime Minister has made it clear that he is prepared to do that and more. The easiest first step would be to get shovels in the ground for more LNG export facilities. If the second phase of LNG Canada’s expansion is built, Canada would double our LNG exports without having to build an entirely new pipeline.
At the same time, we must follow through with the more difficult work of reforming our regulatory system so we can build the critical infrastructure our country will need in the near future. Ideology can no longer steer policy, instead we need to implement a globally competitive project assessment process that will encourage the private sector to invest, build and create productive jobs right here.
As the new Carney government moves to address complex issues like energy, we should ensure that realism and pragmatism – not ideology – guides implementation.