logo
Government adviser slams Mark Carney for promoting ‘decarbonized' oil pipelines

Government adviser slams Mark Carney for promoting ‘decarbonized' oil pipelines

OTTAWA — The co-chair of the federal government's climate action advisory group is slamming Prime Minister Mark Carney for using fossil fuel 'marketing speak' at Monday's summit with provincial leaders, when he endorsed the idea of building new pipelines for 'decarbonized' oil.
Simon Donner, a climate scientist at the University of British Columbia who co-chairs the Liberal government's Net Zero Advisory Body, alleged the term is misleading because it falsely suggests there is a way to burn fossil fuels without creating greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change.
'There is no such thing as decarbonized oil and gas. Oil contains carbon. It is high school chemistry. And they emit carbon dioxide when they're used,' Donner told the Star.
Prime Minister Mark Carney says there are discussions about building new pipelines to ship what he called decarbonized barrels of oil. But he says the range of the discussion is about more than just pipelines, involving the Western-Arctic corridor to move a broader number of products. (June 3, 2025 / The Canadian Press)
'The government is going to embarrass itself by using such industry and marketing speak.'
Leaving a cabinet meeting on Parliament Hill Tuesday, Natural Resources Minister Tim Hodgson and Environment Minister Julie Dabrusin ignored questions about what the government means by 'decarbonized' oil.
Carney made the statement at Monday's meeting with the premiers in Saskatoon, where his plan to fast-track development projects 'of national interest' took centre stage. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith — a staunch promoter of the fossil fuel sector who has long opposed federal climate policies like carbon pricing and regulations to limit emissions — said she was encouraged by the new government's approach.
That included what she called a 'compromise' to allow new fossil fuel infrastructure to be built outside the current federal review process, which critics have blamed for blocking projects. Smith also said there was a 'grand bargain,' where the federal government would make it easier for the private sector to build new fossil fuel pipelines, while supporting plans under the 'Pathways Alliance' of oilsands companies to build a huge carbon capture project.
During question period in the House of Commons on Tuesday, Hodgson referred to Smith's comments, describing the 'grand bargain' as a plan to 'build our energy superpower in an … environmentally responsible way, in consultation' with Indigenous Peoples.
'We support new pipelines if there is a national consensus,' Hodgson added.
With billions of dollars in
federal tax credits
on the table, the
Pathways carbon capture project
is meant to reduce emissions from the extraction of fossil fuels, a process that is responsible for the largest share of any economic sector, as measured in Canada's
most recent national tally
of greenhouse gas pollution.
In an emailed statement, Pathways president Kendall Dilling said the group is 'encouraged' by recent signs, including at this week's first ministers' meeting.
'We need every industry, including the oilsands, thriving and making vital contributions to the economy,' Dilling said.
Janetta McKenzie, director of oil and gas at the Pembina Institute, a climate and environmental policy think tank, said Tuesday that it's important for Canada to press to reduce emissions from the production of oil, as greenhouse gas pollution from oil and gas extraction has increased by 70 per cent from 2005 to 2023, according to the national emissions tally.
But with questions about when the Pathways project could come online, McKenzie said policies like carbon pricing and regulations to limit emissions are needed if high levels of production can continue without blowing Canada's effort to hit its emissions targets over the next decade.
'If we do want decarbonized barrels to be moving through this pipeline, there's something missing,' McKenzie said.
The discussion highlights a political tightrope for the federal government on climate and energy policies, with pressure from environmentalists and those concerned about climate change to help the global crisis by reducing emissions, and demands from others to promote Canada's lucrative oil and gas sector. The industry generated $187 billion of economic activity in 2022, when it accounted for 30 per cent of Canada's total exports and employed almost 172,000 people, according to
Natural Resources Canada
.
The government has said it remains committed to fighting climate change, but early signals of support for potential fossil fuel projects have prompted environmentalists to urge Carney to '
pick a lane
' between increased oil production and serious commitment to reducing emissions.
Carney suggested last month that his government could change previous policies like the plan to create a
regulatory cap
to limit and start reducing emissions from the oil and gas sector to at least 19 per cent below 2019 levels between 2030 and 2032.
Carney removed the national requirement for provinces and territories to have a consumer carbon price, while promising to strengthen industrial carbon pricing and other measures to ensure Canada hits its emissions targets.
Canada is responsible for 1.41 per cent of global emissions in 2023, according to
European Union figures
. It has pledged to slash national emissions to 40 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, and at least 45 per cent below 2005 levels by 2035.
Emissions were 8.5 per cent below 2005 levels in 2023, according to the most recent government tally.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Nevada public lands likely a target again when Senate takes up Trump's ‘one big, beautiful bill'
Nevada public lands likely a target again when Senate takes up Trump's ‘one big, beautiful bill'

Yahoo

time26 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Nevada public lands likely a target again when Senate takes up Trump's ‘one big, beautiful bill'

LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — Nevada's lone Republican in Congress failed in an effort to sell off public lands in the state, but a Utah senator might revive the tactic as President Trump's 'one big, beautiful bill' progresses this summer. A late-night amendment by U.S. Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Nev.) was heavily criticized by Nevada's Democratic representatives. It ended up dying, a casualty of political dealing after Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke, the former Interior secretary during Trump's first term, threatened to vote no on the giant House funding bill. Zinke called out Amodei's amendment as the vote drew near, and Republicans weren't sure if they could pass the spending bill without him. Now, Republican Sen. Mike Lee is working on selling public lands as the Senate prepares to take up the spending bill. While he hasn't said which states will be targeted, he has taken Montana off the list. A Thursday report from The Hill indicated that Republicans could be in a similar position when the Senate vote arrives. Trump wants the Senate to pass the bill by July 4, but that's already looking unlikely. The Congressional Budget Office projected Wednesday that spending bill passed by the House will add $2.4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade, and some senators are saying they can't accept that. Amodei's move to sell public lands was among the proposals to come up with money to pay for the renewal of tax cuts passed under Trump in 2017. Lee said his plan is expected to be released on Monday, according to a Bloomberg report. With 63% of the state federally-owned, Utah is second only to Nevada. More than 80% of Nevada is federally owned — nearly 57 million acres. Most of the land is under the control of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (63%, 47 million acres), followed by the U.S. Forest Service (5.7 million acres), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2.3 million acres), the National Park Service (797,000 acres) and the Department of Defense (60,000 acres), according to a 2020 report. That report didn't account for the Nevada National Security Site (formerly the Nevada Test Site), which covers 880,000 acres in southeastern Nye County or the Tonopah Test Range, 370,000 acres farther north in Nye County. Next is Idaho at 61.9%, Alaska at 60.9% and Oregon at 52.3%. Western states dominate the list. Utah Republican Gov. Spencer Cox has challenged federal decisions about land in the state, objecting to expansions of national monuments. Bears Ears and Grand Staircase Escalante expansions were disputed in years past. Now, the Trump administration is opening up more federal land to oil and gas exploration, fast-tracking geothermal projects and looking at mineral deposits on national park land. Gov. Joe Lombardo cited the Biden Administration's move creating the Avi Kwa Ame National Monument south of Las Vegas. He said it would prevent development at a time when Nevada needs federal land to address a housing crisis. Housing has been at the center of the public land debate recently in the Las Vegas valley. An agreement with the BLM under Biden provided opportunities to buy federal land within the valley for $100 an acre, an incentive to get builders to deliver affordable housing. Nevada Gov. Lombardo unveils $1 billion affordable housing plan: 'We have to expand'? Rural Nevadans have had a sometimes-strained relationship with federal landowners. It's only been 11 years since Cliven Bundy's armed standoff with BLM officers along Interstate 15 northeast of Las Vegas, near the town of Bunkerville. Ranchers were angry after the BLM rounded up their cattle a tense battle over grazing rights. The cattle were eventually released, diffusing the situation, but prosecutors pursued a court case against Bundy and his family. Before that, the Sagebrush Rebellion in the 1970s and 1980s traces its roots to Nevada and other western states. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Supreme Court blocks Mexico's lawsuit against U.S. gunmakers
Supreme Court blocks Mexico's lawsuit against U.S. gunmakers

Axios

timean hour ago

  • Axios

Supreme Court blocks Mexico's lawsuit against U.S. gunmakers

The Supreme Court rejected on Thursday Mexico's $10 billion lawsuit against U.S. gun makers that alleged the companies' loose controls allowed for the weapons to be illegally trafficked in the Latin American nation. Why it matters: The unanimous ruling ends a years long legal battle in the first-of-its kind suit that saw the Mexican government try to hold U.S. gunmakers accountable for drug cartels' high rates of gun violence in parts of the country. State of play The Supreme Court ruled that the six gun manufacturers, including Smith & Wesson and Glock, and a distributor were shielded under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). Congress enacted this law in 2005 "to halt lawsuits attempting to make gun manufacturers pay for harms resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearms," wrote Justice Elena Kagan. "In asserting that the manufacturers intentionally supply guns to bad-apple dealers, Mexico never confronts that the manufacturers do not directly supply any dealers, bad-apple or otherwise." Kagan said the Mexican government had not pinpointed, "as most aiding-and-abetting claims do, any specific criminal transactions that the defendants" were alleged to have assisted." What they're saying: Smith & Wesson in a statement Thursday called the ruling a" big win for Smith & Wesson," the weapons industry, "American sovereignty and, most importantly, every American who wishes to exercise his or her Second Amendment rights." The company added, "This suit, brought by Mexico in collaboration with U.S.-based anti-Second Amendment activist groups, was an afront to our nation's sovereignty and a direct attack on the Constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans." The other side: Mexico's Foreign Ministry said in a statement it "strongly disagrees" with the Supreme Court's decision and it will continue to do "everything in its power to curb illicit arms trafficking, exhausting all available legal and diplomatic remedies."

Douglas Murray: Liberals turn killers, racists, and haters into martyrs
Douglas Murray: Liberals turn killers, racists, and haters into martyrs

New York Post

time2 hours ago

  • New York Post

Douglas Murray: Liberals turn killers, racists, and haters into martyrs

Why do parts of the left and the media keep asking for sympathy in all the wrong places? In recent months we have had to put up with crazed activists like Taylor Lorenz claiming that Luigi Mangione is a 'revolutionary' and a 'morally good man' because she finds him 'handsome.' Unfortunately he is also on trial for gunning down a father of two in cold blood on Sixth Avenue. In the eyes of many people that still counts against a man. And then there has been the bizarre defense of absolutely anybody who ICE has tried to deport. It doesn't matter whether the people being deported are gang members, violent criminals or serial abusers, if ICE wants them out then the illegals must be defended. In quick succession we went from protestors and Democrat lawmakers objecting to ICE taking illegal aliens from their homes, then to protesting when they are taken to a courtroom. Above the law? Then there was the case of Hannah Dugan, the Milwaukee judge who was arrested in April. She is accused of aiding an illegal alien to evade arrest. But rather than see the law take its course, Democrats kept suggesting that it was the Trump administration that had broken the rules, not the judge, and the judge who deserves our sympathy. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers claimed that the Trump administration was 'undermining the judiciary' and Chuck Schumer called her arrest 'an attack on the separation of powers.' But isn't it a bad idea for a judge to try to help someone evade the law? Doesn't it 'undermine the judiciary' for a judge to apparently help a man accused of battery to slip out of her courtroom through a side door so that waiting federal agents could not detain him? And if you think so, then why make a hero of Dugan? Why pretend that what she is accused of doing is in any way excusable? Why not at least wait for the law to take its course — and not make heroes of people who have done deeply unheroic things? It is the same here in New York, where the authorities, student groups and others continue to try to make a 'free speech martyr' out of Mahmoud Khalil. In their estimation, Khalil was simply an exemplary student, even though he wasn't a student. And he apparently has to be given all the rights of a US citizen, even though he isn't a US citizen. Just because all he did was spend 18 months helping to cause civil unrest and bring about what his group called 'the total eradication of Western civilization.' 'But' — so many people said — 'Khalil has a pregnant wife.' In which case you might have thought that Khalil would have tried to be on better behavior while enjoying the hospitality and benefits of this country. But no — it is he that has to be made into the martyr, he and his family who have to be given the sympathy, and he and his family who have to be said to have suffered so much. Bizarre new height This week this strange desire to extend sympathy to the worst people reached a bizarre new height. Habiba Soliman is the daughter of Mohamed Soliman. He is, the man who was in this country illegally and who last week firebombed Jewish Americans while they were protesting peacefully in Boulder, Colo. You might have thought in the wake of that gruesome attack — an attack that Soliman had apparently been planning for a year — sympathy might go to a number of people. Most obviously you might think that it would go toward the 12 people who were badly injured in Soliman's attack — victims including a Holocaust survivor, set on fire on the streets of a US city. By a man who should never have been here. And who seems to have had links with Hamas. But, oh, no. The real victims — we are now being told — are Soliman's family. Because the immigration authorities have looked at Soliman's illegal status and now arrested his wife as well as Habiba and her four siblings. Why should the sympathy go to them? Well, take the title of USA Today's story on the case: 'Habiba Soliman wanted to be a doctor. Then, her father firebombed Jewish marchers in Boulder.' Oh, no! If only that little stumbling block hadn't arisen we could have had another doctor in about a decade. What a bummer. CNN chose to go with a similar angle, saying that, 'The family's arrest threatens to derail what looked to be a promising academic career for Soliman's oldest daughter, who graduated days before her father's attack and had recently won a 'Best and Brightest' scholarship from the Colorado Springs Gazette.' Pity for 'terrorist's kin We have been told that before the attack, Habiba Soliman apparently wrote an application for a scholarship in which she said that being in the US: 'I learned to adapt to new things even if it was hard. I learned to work under pressure and improve rapidly in a very short amount of time. Most importantly, I came to appreciate that family is the unchanging support.' And then her dad decided to carry out a terrorist attack. As a result, it is Soliman's family who are now being pitied. While the victims of their family member, ranging in age from 25 to 88, are swiftly passed over. The Trump administration has repeatedly said that it wants to prioritize the deportation of people who are in the US illegally, who have committed crimes and who support terrorism. It is an effort not only to clear up the open borders mess left by Biden — or whoever was in charge of the autopen in those years. It is also an effort to dissuade violent criminals and terrorists from thinking this country is an entirely safe space to operate from. But there is a cost to committing crimes. And there are costs for carrying out acts of terrorism. If one of those costs is inconvenience to your loved ones, then perhaps you should think twice about it first. Because the sympathies of the American public have been stretched quite far enough.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store