
Exclusive: Alberta blew past gas flaring ceiling in 2024 as province eliminates limit
CALGARY, June 23 (Reuters) - Energy producers in Alberta, Canada's top oil-producing province, blew past the province's self-imposed limit on annual natural gas flaring in 2024 for a second year in a row, Reuters calculations show.
Late last week, Alberta's energy regulator said it was ending the limit on flaring. Reuters is the first to report the change, which the regulator quietly published in a bulletin on its website.
On Monday, the regulator confirmed the removal of the limit and said it was responding to direction from the provincial government.
Oil production is booming in Canada, the world's No. 4 producer, which has been trying to diversify exports away from the U.S. since President Donald Trump took office and began imposing tariffs on many Canadian exports.
Canadian energy companies hope Prime Minister Mark Carney will be more accommodative to the industry than his predecessor Justin Trudeau.
A tally by Reuters of Alberta Energy Regulator data shows oil and gas producers in the province flared approximately 912.7 million cubic metres of natural gas in 2024, exceeding the annual provincial limit of 670 million cubic metres by 36%.
The province had exceeded the limit in 2023, with regulatory data showing total annual flare volumes of 753 million cubic metres that year.
Flaring is the practice of burning off the excess natural gas associated with oil production. If the volumes of gas byproduct are small, and there are no pipelines nearby to transport the gas, companies often choose for economic reasons to dispose of it through flaring instead of capturing it and storing it.
Eliminating the practice would cut at least 381 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in environmentally harmful emissions released into the atmosphere, the World Bank has said.
Ryan Fournier, spokesperson for Alberta's Environment Minister Rebecca Shulz, said in an email that the province launched a review of its flare gas policy after the oil and gas industry exceeded the limit for the first time in 2023.
He said the province determined the 20-year-old flaring limit no longer served as an effective policy for reducing flaring and the ceiling did not account for increased oil production in the province or new emissions-reduction strategies.
The federal energy and environment ministries did not immediately reply to requests for comment.
Alberta's crude oil production set an all-time record in 2024 at 1.5 billion barrels, a 4.5% increase over 2023.
A 2022 report by the Alberta Energy Regulator showed flaring volumes in the province have been increasing since 2016.
A 2024 report by the World Bank — which has been advocating for a global end to the practice of routine flaring by 2030 — found that flaring by oil and gas companies worldwide rose in 2023 even as crude oil production rose only 1% over the same time.
While flaring is better for the environment than some other methods of gas disposal such as venting, it still releases a variety of byproducts and greenhouse gases into the atmosphere as well as black soot which can be harmful to human health, said Amanda Bryant, senior oil and gas analyst for the clean energy think-tank the Pembina Institute.
She said companies have alternatives available to them, such as investing in equipment that can be used to capture flare gases at site and redirect them back into production for use as fuel.
"Getting rid of the rule doesn't get rid of the problem," Bryant said in an interview. "The role of a regulator really needs to be to prevent harmful impacts of industry and to ensure that our resources are developed responsibly."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Auto Blog
an hour ago
- Auto Blog
Will California Still Offer EV Rebates in the Future?
The future of EVs is under threat If the current administration's plans come to fruition, federal EV tax credits could be eliminated as early as mid‑2025 under proposed legislation. Not only would this hurt the future of EV adoption, but some automakers might backtrack on their EV transition plans and harm the progress made thus far on cleaner vehicles. If you're planning to buy an EV soon, here are a few important things to keep in mind. Chargepoint DC Fast Charger — Source: Chargepoint What's next if federal support disappears? A Senate Republican bill is proposing ending the $7,500 new EV tax credit within 180 days of enactment and eliminating the $4,000 used-EV credit within 90 days. This poses a serious challenge for the national EV market. According to California officials, the state is committed to launching new state-level EV rebates if federal support ends. These future programs will likely be targeted, focusing on low-income buyers, specific vehicle types or brands, and models with lower market share, potentially excluding brands like Tesla to boost competition. In November 2024, Governor Gavin Newsom confirmed that California would propose restoring EV rebates—possibly funded through cap-and-trade revenues—should federal EV tax credits be eliminated. Nissan LEAF What's still available in California? Even with the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project (CVRP) closed, multiple programs remain active in the state: 1. Clean Cars 4 All (CC4A) & Driving Clean Assistance Program (DCAP) Up to $12,000 for EV purchase/lease + $2,000 for home charger Focused on low- to moderate-income households Available for new and used EVs Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. 2. Utility Rebates PG&E, Southern California Edison (SCE), and others offer rebates for used EVs: $1,000 for all eligible applicants Up to $4,000 for income-qualified buyers 3. Home Charging Incentives Rebates for Level 2 (240V) charging stations Covers equipment and installation Available through local utilities and clean energy programs GM's Factory ZERO, Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly Center Final thoughts As of now, the situation remains fluid. Automakers, labor unions, government officials, and consumers are all seeking greater clarity on the future of EV incentives and policies. What is clear, however, is that many manufacturers are continuing to invest heavily in electric vehicle production and infrastructure. Despite policy uncertainty, momentum in the EV sector remains strong, and with ongoing discussions at both the state and federal levels, we can expect a clearer picture to emerge in the coming months. If you're considering an EV in the near future, you should act now to leverage existing state and utility rebates and watch for new state-level incentives, especially if federal support ends. The Clean Vehicle Grants Project is a useful resource for money-saving opportunities, while DriveClean is California's official state resource website for buying a non-combustion-powered vehicle.


Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
Goldman names Aek Shyam head of M&A in global real estate group
NEW YORK, June 24 (Reuters) - Goldman Sachs (GS.N), opens new tab has appointed Aekloveya Shyam as head of mergers & acquisitions (M&A) in the Global Real Estate Group, according to an internal memo seen by Reuters. Shyam previously served as a managing director in the Healthcare Group within Investment Banking, where he participated in several multi-billion dollar transactions across the U.S., Europe and Asia. Shyam will focus on strategic transactions and advisory services, reporting to Mike Graziano and Andy Jonas, co-heads of the global Real state group. He joined Goldman in 2011 as an associate, and was named managing director in 2019. A Goldman spokesperson has confirmed the content of the memo.


Times
3 hours ago
- Times
Iran crisis is putting our special relationship to the test
Sir Keir Starmer is being left in the dark by President Trump SIMON DAWSON/NO 10 DOWNING STREET S peaking in Kananaskis, Alberta, last Tuesday, Sir Keir Starmer offered his thoughts on Donald Trump's intentions towards Iran. 'There is nothing the president said that suggests he's about to get involved in this conflict,' said the prime minister confidently. Sir Keir had spent the previous evening sat next to the president of the United States at a G7 dinner, so he should have known if Mr Trump was considering some form of military intervention. Yet, within only a few days, that assessment was shown to be hopelessly wrong. Heedless of Sir Keir's pleas for de-escalation, Mr Trump ordered in the stealth bombers to destroy Iran's subterranean nuclear sites. Despite all the talk in British circles in recent months of a warm relationship between London and Washington, cultivated assiduously by Sir Keir and his new ambassador to the US, Lord Mandelson, Downing Street has clearly been left in the dark about the intentions of this country's most consequential ally. US actions against Iran have a material impact on the safety of British military personnel in the Middle East, who are vulnerable to retaliatory attacks of the kind mounted on Monday against America's giant Al Udeid base in Qatar. Yet, Sir Keir and his foreign secretary, David Lammy, are clearly out of the loop, When Mr Trump decided that enough was enough and ordered Operation Midnight Hammer, the unprecedented B-2 raid on uranium enrichment facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, the United Kingdom was given barely any notice. The White House's reticence may have owed something to its belief that Britain was no longer the steadfast ally of the Thatcher, Major and Blair years. The warnings of Lord Hermer, Britain's attorney general, that supporting US action could amount to a breach of international law may have convinced the US administration that its supposedly closest ally might be a hindrance rather than a help if hostilities ensued. As late as Monday Mr Lammy was unable to offer America definitive British support, repeatedly refusing to deny that the B-2 strike was a violation of international law. • How did Britain get it so wrong on Trump and Iran? Relief in Whitehall that Britain dodged a bullet in not having to authorise US use of its base on Diego Garcia for Midnight Hammer must now have been replaced by the chilling realisation that its view on how to handle Iran is irrelevant to the Trump administration. Not that London's view is especially clear. While Sir Keir has warned of the danger of escalation following Israeli and US strikes, Mr Lammy has insisted that the UK is 'doing everything we can to stabilise the situation', whatever that means. The Americans were content for Britain, together with France and Germany, to engage in talks with Iran in Geneva, even as they were preparing to bomb its nuclear estate. Being strung along by your closest ally is the price you pay for offering lukewarm support when the chips are down. The Iranian missile attack on Al Udeid, America's biggest airbase in the Middle East, must now put an end to Labour's fence-straddling. It appears to have been a performative, face-saving exercise for Iran, involving a tip-off to the US via diplomatic channels. But, having first suggested in the wake of the B-2 strike that he was not interested in regime change in Tehran, Mr Trump may now have concluded that the mullahs and their henchmen in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps must go, or their power be so degraded that they can no longer present any kind of threat, nuclear or conventional, to the region. As with the Falklands in 1982, the bombing of Libya in 1986, the first Gulf War in 1990-91 and in the aftermath of 9/11, this crisis is another acid test of the special relationship. At the moment, it is one the government is failing. If Britain wants to be an ally worthy of close consultation with the US, it should start acting like one.