More than $1 trillion in gross domestic product (GDP) and 151,000 jobs by 2040. Not just in Alberta.That’s how much Ottawa’s emissions cap on oil and gas production would cost the Canadian economy if implemented as proposed. Not to mention that arbitrarily imposing one would be unconstitutional.“If implemented, this cap would have a devastating impact on the economies of Alberta and all of Canada,” Alberta Environment Minister Rebecca Schulz said in a Monday letter to federal counterpart Guilbeault detailing Alberta’s official position on the issue.“Oil and gas production would be curtailed, tens of thousands could be out of work and the economic impact would be felt from coast to coast.”Schultz is in Ottawa Monday to meet with Guilbeault and unveil Alberta’s technical response to the plan as the comment period comes to a close. The cap was the centrepiece of Guilbeault’s submissions to the COP 28 climate conference in Dubai last December..First and foremost, it’s unconstitutional. “The proposed oil and gas cap is not reconcilable with the constitutional division of powers and unduly violates provincial jurisdiction,” it says.Second, it’s unnecessary given the steps that government and industry have already taken consistent with Canada’s commitments to reduce emissions in accordance with international agreements including the Paris Accord.The regions most affected by the cap — Alberta and Saskatchewan — already have effective and efficient greenhouse gas emission limits in place that are consistent and amenable to the goals of the Paris Agreement.Third, it’s not an emissions cap as much as as “a clear cap on production” that will have the unintended consequence of harming investments in new technologies to actually reduce emissions and instead make the eastern oil consuming regions of Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes more reliant on imported oil from countries such as Saudi Arabia, Nigeria and even the US.“The proposed federal cap is inefficient, ineffective and unfair. The cap targets and penalizes one sector and one region of the country disproportionately. Instead of managing emissions consistently across all regions and sectors, the federal government is targeting the oil and gas sector, Alberta and Western provinces,” it said.“As noted by international and Canadian experts, this federal cap approach is among the most restrictive, least flexible means to achieve greenhouse gas emission reductions.”.No other country or region — including the EU — has proposed a cap on oil and gas emissions as a practical or even necessary means of implementing the Paris Accord. Even in the EU, oil and gas presently falls outside of the scope of its Carbon Border Adjustment regime. .That’s notwithstanding that it’s a “risky” policy that will do little to achieve its stated purpose of reducing emissions in Canada or abroad.“This policy is the most significant departure from efficient climate policy yet as it effectively…reinforces the erroneous idea that some emissions are more damaging than others,” it said. “That goes against the entire rationale for carbon pricing, which is to effectively and efficiently lower greenhouse gas emissions through consistent treatment of emissions across all regions and sectors.”In addition, no other country or region — including the EU — has proposed a cap on oil and gas emissions as a practical or even necessary means of implementing the Paris Accord.According to UK-based consultants Carbon Counts: “No country or region is currently placing emissions caps on specific sectors. Singling-out one sector appears to run counter to the… importance of economy-wide strategies to reduce emissions, like carbon pricing, to enable Canada to reduce emissions in the most flexible and cost-effective way.” Even in the EU, oil and gas presently falls outside of the scope of its Carbon Border Adjustment regime. .In short, “all greenhouse gas emissions have the same global impact, regardless of the sector or region in which they are produced,” it concludes. .“Instead of pursuing this unconstitutional cap, we are calling on your government to immediately halt further development and begin meaningful collaboration within established provincial regulatory regimes on oil and gas regulation and emissions reduction.”
More than $1 trillion in gross domestic product (GDP) and 151,000 jobs by 2040. Not just in Alberta.That’s how much Ottawa’s emissions cap on oil and gas production would cost the Canadian economy if implemented as proposed. Not to mention that arbitrarily imposing one would be unconstitutional.“If implemented, this cap would have a devastating impact on the economies of Alberta and all of Canada,” Alberta Environment Minister Rebecca Schulz said in a Monday letter to federal counterpart Guilbeault detailing Alberta’s official position on the issue.“Oil and gas production would be curtailed, tens of thousands could be out of work and the economic impact would be felt from coast to coast.”Schultz is in Ottawa Monday to meet with Guilbeault and unveil Alberta’s technical response to the plan as the comment period comes to a close. The cap was the centrepiece of Guilbeault’s submissions to the COP 28 climate conference in Dubai last December..First and foremost, it’s unconstitutional. “The proposed oil and gas cap is not reconcilable with the constitutional division of powers and unduly violates provincial jurisdiction,” it says.Second, it’s unnecessary given the steps that government and industry have already taken consistent with Canada’s commitments to reduce emissions in accordance with international agreements including the Paris Accord.The regions most affected by the cap — Alberta and Saskatchewan — already have effective and efficient greenhouse gas emission limits in place that are consistent and amenable to the goals of the Paris Agreement.Third, it’s not an emissions cap as much as as “a clear cap on production” that will have the unintended consequence of harming investments in new technologies to actually reduce emissions and instead make the eastern oil consuming regions of Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes more reliant on imported oil from countries such as Saudi Arabia, Nigeria and even the US.“The proposed federal cap is inefficient, ineffective and unfair. The cap targets and penalizes one sector and one region of the country disproportionately. Instead of managing emissions consistently across all regions and sectors, the federal government is targeting the oil and gas sector, Alberta and Western provinces,” it said.“As noted by international and Canadian experts, this federal cap approach is among the most restrictive, least flexible means to achieve greenhouse gas emission reductions.”.No other country or region — including the EU — has proposed a cap on oil and gas emissions as a practical or even necessary means of implementing the Paris Accord. Even in the EU, oil and gas presently falls outside of the scope of its Carbon Border Adjustment regime. .That’s notwithstanding that it’s a “risky” policy that will do little to achieve its stated purpose of reducing emissions in Canada or abroad.“This policy is the most significant departure from efficient climate policy yet as it effectively…reinforces the erroneous idea that some emissions are more damaging than others,” it said. “That goes against the entire rationale for carbon pricing, which is to effectively and efficiently lower greenhouse gas emissions through consistent treatment of emissions across all regions and sectors.”In addition, no other country or region — including the EU — has proposed a cap on oil and gas emissions as a practical or even necessary means of implementing the Paris Accord.According to UK-based consultants Carbon Counts: “No country or region is currently placing emissions caps on specific sectors. Singling-out one sector appears to run counter to the… importance of economy-wide strategies to reduce emissions, like carbon pricing, to enable Canada to reduce emissions in the most flexible and cost-effective way.” Even in the EU, oil and gas presently falls outside of the scope of its Carbon Border Adjustment regime. .In short, “all greenhouse gas emissions have the same global impact, regardless of the sector or region in which they are produced,” it concludes. .“Instead of pursuing this unconstitutional cap, we are calling on your government to immediately halt further development and begin meaningful collaboration within established provincial regulatory regimes on oil and gas regulation and emissions reduction.”
