Tag Archives: LNG

Roundup: Asking about Canadian LNG like it’s a free cookie

Posted on by

Once again, CTV’s Vassy Kapelos asks a visiting European leader if they’d like Canadian LNG, and spins a whole story out of the fact that they say yes, while absolutely ignoring all of the many reasons why it’s never going to happen. This has happened with at least three leaders now, the latest being the president of Poland, who was visiting Canada last week (the taped interview aired over the weekend), and predictably, the story is making rounds with people insisting that Trudeau is wrong to say there’s no business case for it.

To wit: There is no ready supply of natural gas to be liquified on the East Coast, because they get it shipped from the north-eastern US. Blaine Higgs’ ambitions aside, nobody wants to be fracking in New Brunswick (not the First Nations, not the people who live in the region), and that would mean either paying even more to import American gas to liquefy, or build a pipeline from Alberta (and just as a reminder, Energy East was killed by the proponent because they didn’t have enough contracts to fill it and Keystone XL, and the latter was the surer bet at the time), and it costs money to ship gas across the country in a pipeline like that, which would increase the selling price. Then they would have to build a new export terminal to liquefy said gas, (there is one existing import terminal that could theoretically be converted), but all of this takes years, billions of dollars, and would need guaranteed operations for about 45 years to pay off, which is going to put them past the 2050 Net Zero date for a rapidly decarbonizing Europe to still want the LNG—which would be at a higher price than they can get it from Algeria or the Persian Gulf. That’s why there is no business case. There have been proposals to build terminals on the east coast before, and nobody in Europe wanted to sign a contract to make it a worthwhile investment to pursue. Hell, there are plenty of fully permitted projects on the west coast not moving ahead because nobody wants to sign contracts for the product.

But Kapelos and the CTV team keep ignoring all of these issues when they ask this question, which as one reply on Twitter stated, is like asking someone if they want a free cookie. The most the story says about the feasibility of east coast LNG is “There has been political debate for years around whether Canada could or should plan to export to European countries, as well.” That’s it. Seriously? This is malpractice at this point, and no, this is not because she or anyone is “in the pocket of Poilievre,” or anyone. It’s just lazy journalism, plain and simple. It’s not serving anyone, and frankly, is distracting from the actual issues.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian drones struck a hotel in Mykolaiv on the Black Sea, severely damaging it and local energy infrastructure, but fortunately there were no casualties. Another Russian oil refinery has suspended operations after a Ukrainian drone attack. While Ukraine waits on the arrival of more American aid, their forces have had to fall back from three more villages northwest of Avdiivka.

Continue reading →

Roundup: No, east cost LNG won’t happen (redux)

Posted on by

Because we never seem to learn, and because certain interviewers in legacy media refuse to take a hint or to learn about how this works, we got yet another incident of a European leader being asked about Canadian LNG, this time the prime minister of Greece, who is in Canada for a couple of days. “Of course,” they’d be interested, if it was available “at competitive prices.” Which is the real trick, isn’t it? Because that’s not going to happen, particularly on the east coast where there is no ready access to a supply of natural gas to liquify, and where on the west coast, plenty of fully permitted projects are not moving ahead because nobody wants to sign commitments to buy the product if they build the project. That’s kind of a big deal.

So, here’s University of Alberta energy economist Andrew Leach with some necessary sarcasm for this latest round.

And because Alberta decided to enter the group chat…

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russia launched new missile barrages that have gone as far into western Ukraine as Lviv, and one missile appears to have entered Polish airspace. Ukraine has launched its own attack on occupied Crimea, and hit two Russian warships and a communications centre in the process. Meanwhile, the weekend was spent disavowing any connection to the ISIS attack on the theatre in Moscow, which Russian officials keep trying to draw.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1771864087267291183

Continue reading →

Roundup: No, LNG sales aren’t being blocked

Posted on by

It seems that Pierre Poilievre, and by extension other members of his caucus like Michael Chong, are trying to sell another false narrative to the Canadian people, and this time, they are claiming that the prime minister is “blocking” LNG sales to Germany. This is patently false, but that’s not surprising considering that this is coming from Poilievre, and he is without any sense of shame when it comes to outright lying at all times. His “proof” is a National Post article with a framing device claiming that Canada “snubbed” Germany on LNG, so they are signing a deal with Qatar.

The federal government has not blocked any LNG projects. We did not “snub” Germany either because they know full well we don’t have the export infrastructure, and by the time we could build it, it would be too late for Europe, hence why they came looking for hydrogen and got it. It wasn’t the government blocking any LNG terminals from being built—it was the market. There is very little supply along the East Coast to try and tap into for supply for export (indeed, there is one import terminal in New Brunswick), so unless you’re piping it all the way from Alberta or the United States, at an increased cost, there has been little sense in constructing it (and no, fracking is not going to happen in New Brunswick). There are terminals being constructed on the West Coast, where there is supply, but they are still being built, because it took a long time for them to secure the export contracts to make construction viable. If Trudeau was really “blocking the sale” then why would these projects still be allowed to proceed? It makes no sense.

There is also the consideration that Canadian LNG is more expensive than that coming from Qatar, which is a large part of why it has been unattractive to the European market (especially when it was coming pretty cheaply from Russia). It’s why most of the proposals aren’t getting off the ground–these projects won’t make their money back for thirty or forty years, by which time we will be deep in decarbonizing and reaching Net Zero targets. Even if we could somehow build an export terminal and a pipeline to supply it, the market for the product is likely to rapidly decrease, which means we’d be stranding those assets and have billions of dollars in these terminals going nowhere. The market doesn’t want to invest for a reason, and it’s not the Canadian government.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 283:

In a rare admission, a top aide to president Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that between 10,000 to 13,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed since Russia’s invasion began in February. (The Russian losses have been much higher). The International Atomic Energy Agency says a deal aimed at safeguarding the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant is almost completed. Here is a look at how school children in Kyiv are faring between Russian bombardments and blackouts. Meanwhile, here’s a look at a Canadian-funded work doing de-mining work in Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Counting on LNG

Posted on by

The federal and BC provincial governments made a big ballyhoo yesterday about the fact that a consortium of companies have come together to make a $40 billion investment in Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) in BC, and it’s a project that not only did Indigenous consultation correctly, but got buy-in from the communities. It’s seen as a study in contrasts for other pipeline projects – but it’s also worth noting that natural gas isn’t bitumen, and you’ve got vastly different environmental consequences to a spill or breach. It’s also a major energy project at a time when the dominant narrative is that we apparently can’t get anything built in this country, or that investment is fleeing (not actually true), and that what we need to do is to end carbon pricing (despite the fact that energy companies have been calling for it), gutting environmental legislation (never mind that the regime Harper put into place created far more problems than it solved), and that Indigenous consultation is just a fleeting goalpost that keeps shifting. This project seems to prove otherwise – even if BC promised breaks on provincial and carbon taxes to sweeten the deal (though one could say that it shows there’s enough flexibility in the system as opposed to the whole system being hopelessly broken). Suffice to say, it makes the Conservatives’ talking points far less tenable (not that the truth has really mattered to them).

One of the more interesting questions in all of this is how it will affect emissions – not only locally, but globally, and that’s really the big question. While the local emissions would be high enough that it appears that BC would likely need to virtually decarbonise their economy otherwise, there is the potential that this LNG would be a major help in reducing emissions in Asian economies that are reliant on coal-fired generation – but that’s only if the LNG displaces coal and not other renewables instead. In all likelihood, LNG would be used alongside renewables as a backup or stopgap, but it may be some time before we see if that’s really what happens. Suffice to say, it has the potential to have a major impact on global emissions, if applied in the right way.

More New NAFTA fallout:

  • Justin Trudeau says that despite that notification clause in the new NAFTA, Canada will still pursue a deeper trading relationship with China.
  • Kim Campbell says it’s a bit cheeky for the Conservatives to suggest that they could have gotten a better deal given the American leadership.
  • In Vancouver, Bill Morneau praised the new NAFTA, but also said that dairy and steel sectors still need help. So, there’s that.
  • The new NAFTA includes a specific clause to insist that Canadians not be able to watch the American broadcast of the Super Bowl. No, seriously.
  • Here’s a deeper dive into the Supply Management issue as it relates to the new NAFTA, including the fears of hormone-laced milk coming in from the US.
  • Here’s a look at the government’s efforts at trade diversification, given that NAFTA is more or less renegotiated.
  • Here’s a look at next steps when it comes to ratification of the new NAFTA.

Continue reading →