Search Climate Insights Directory

The Alberta-Canada Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) implementation agreement is criticized for cementing low stringency in industrial carbon pricing, which the author argues will limit emissions reductions and investment in low-carbon projects. While the MOU introduces a minimum market price and joint carbon contracts for difference to stabilize credit markets, the price floor of $60 per tonne by 2030 and $110 by 2040 is deemed too low to meet Canada's net-zero 2050 commitment. The author contends that this agreement sets a low de facto minimum standard for other provinces and that strengthening the system to $130 per tonne would have a negligible impact on oil sands competitiveness, adding less than 50 cents per barrel to the cost of Western Canada Select crude oil.

The statement argues that the Alberta government's $46 million investment in tailings remediation is inadequate given the 1.7 trillion litres of tailings and billions in toxic liabilities. The signatories claim the funding is used to justify industry expansion and express concern that treated tailings may be released into watersheds, potentially harming downstream Indigenous communities. They further highlight discrepancies in water use data and reports of significant underreporting of toxic pollution from dried tailings.

The author asserts that industrial carbon pricing is designed to provide emissions reduction incentives while maintaining low costs for industry. For Alberta's oil sands, current average out-of-pocket costs are 9 cents per barrel, and are projected to rise to approximately 50 cents per barrel by 2030 if the policy is strengthened to ensure credits trade at $130 per tonne. The Canadian Climate Institute's analysis of 17 years of provincial trade data across 10 provinces and 19 sectors found no statistically significant evidence that carbon pricing caused export contraction.

The document argues that industrial carbon pricing in Canada has a negligible impact on consumer costs and household consumption due to the nature of global commodity markets and the design of the pricing systems. It highlights that these systems target only the largest emitters and that a significant portion of their output is exported, preventing costs from being passed to domestic consumers. Specific examples include minimal price increases for consumer goods like refrigerators and pickup trucks, and low per-barrel costs for oil sands producers.

The Canadian Climate Institute asserts that industrial carbon pricing has almost no impact on average Canadian household spending, with a projected effect on consumption of nearly 0% in 2025 and only a 0.1 percentage point reduction by 2030. The document attributes this to the fact that these systems target large emitters—such as oil sands, steel mills, and cement plants—rather than individuals, and that many of the affected products are exported to global markets. For example, nearly 80% of oil sands production is exported, and the cost added to a refrigerator by carbon pricing on steel mills is estimated at only $0.12. Additionally, the report finds that the policy has almost no effect on food prices or the agricultural sector, with a predicted cumulative GDP effect on agriculture of 0.08% by 2030. For businesses, costs are limited because they only pay for emissions exceeding set limits; for oil sands producers, current costs average 9 cents per barrel, and are projected to remain around 50 cents per barrel by 2050 (inflation-adjusted) under the Canada-Alberta memorandum of understanding.

The Canadian Climate Institute asserts that industrial carbon pricing is designed to incentivize emission reductions while minimizing costs to industry. For oil sands producers, current average costs are 9 cents per barrel, and projected costs under a strengthened policy (targeting $130 per tonne by 2030) would rise to approximately 50 cents per barrel. Analysis of 17 years of provincial trade data across 10 provinces and 19 sectors found no statistically significant evidence that carbon pricing has contracted exports.

The report finds that Canada is highly exposed to economic risks due to overinvestment in oil and gas relative to the global energy transition. Using IEA demand scenarios, it estimates that between 5% (Stated Policies Scenario) and 66% (Net Zero Emissions scenario) of projected capital investment from 2025 to 2040 could be stranded. The analysis indicates that Canadian oil is among the world's most expensive to produce, making it particularly vulnerable to price drops. The report argues that restricting the development of new fields and engaging in international diplomacy to reduce global supply could protect the industry's overall value and increase government revenues by preventing oversupply and price deflation. It also notes that U.S. tariffs on energy imports would likely amplify these risks by making Canadian production less competitive.

The report finds that global banks significantly increased fossil fuel financing in 2024, totaling $869 billion, with $429 billion specifically directed toward fossil fuel expansion. This trend persists despite climate pledges and the Paris Agreement goals. The analysis highlights a retreat from voluntary climate commitments, such as the collapse of the Net Zero Banking Alliance, and identifies major financiers including JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Citigroup. It also documents the human rights and environmental harms caused by these investments in regions such as the Amazon, the Arctic, and Southeast Asia.

The document identifies concentrated carbon capture as a "safe bet" for industrial processes with high-concentration CO2 streams, such as cement and ammonia production, while categorizing non-concentrated applications (e.g., natural gas power) as "risky bets." It highlights the technology's potential role in Canada's net-zero pathways, noting that while it could reduce oil and gas emissions by 17 to 50 megatonnes by 2030, its large-scale deployment depends on long-term policy certainty and government financial support, including investment tax credits.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) asserts that reconciliation is a collective national responsibility, emphasizing that environmental and health outcomes depend on justice for Indigenous and racialized people. CAPE is implementing this through internal decolonization, the launch of an Indigenous Caucus on October 1st, and partnerships like the Place-Based Power Project, which addresses health and climate impacts from fossil fuel extraction in Northern BC, Alberta, and the Northwest Territories. The organization also advocated for Bill C-226 and updates to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) to recognize the right to a healthy environment and address disproportionate exposures on Indigenous lands.

The document reports a global trend of governments criminalizing environmental protests to protect corporate interests and maintain public order. It details specific crackdowns in Latin America, Asia, Europe, and North America, noting that activists face charges ranging from trespassing to terrorism. The text highlights that this trend extends to international COP conferences and is criticized by the United Nations, which argues that activists perform a vital function in advocating for environmental reforms.

The 2024 Banking on Climate Chaos report reveals that the 60 largest global banks committed $705.8 billion to fossil fuel companies in 2023, with $347.5 billion directed toward companies with active expansion plans. JPMorgan Chase is identified as the worst financier of fossil fuels, while Japanese megabanks like Mizuho and MUFG are prominent in methane gas (LNG) financing. The report highlights significant policy gaps, noting that many banks use intensity-based metrics rather than absolute emissions targets and that some North American banks have rolled back previous exclusions for coal and Arctic oil and gas. It argues that current 'net zero' targets often serve as loopholes for continued investment in fossil fuel infrastructure, particularly in Southeast Asia.

The Canadian Climate Institute's analysis indicates that CCS projects in the oilsands sector are economically viable under current and proposed federal and provincial policies, including carbon pricing and investment tax credits. The study finds that these projects can generate substantial private returns, suggesting that additional public subsidies beyond those already announced are unnecessary and could lead to excessive corporate profits. While CCS can improve carbon competitiveness and reduce the risk of stranded assets in a declining global oil market, it does not eliminate long-term transition risks associated with the Paris Agreement goals.

The analysis finds that CCS projects in Canadian oil sands are economically viable under current and proposed climate policies, such as carbon pricing and investment tax credits, potentially offering private returns of up to 21%. Consequently, the authors argue that additional public funding beyond what is already announced is unnecessary and could lead to excessive corporate profits. While CCS improves the carbon intensity of oil sands production, it does not eliminate the long-term transition risk associated with declining global oil demand.

The briefing argues that ExxonMobil's climate strategy lacks the transparency and ambition required to align with a 1.5°C pathway. It finds that the company's projected 2030 oil and gas production levels significantly exceed IEA NZE requirements, while its financial allocations remain heavily skewed toward fossil fuels with no reported investments in renewable power generation.

The report finds that Lloyd’s of London's fossil fuel guidelines are inadequate and lack enforcement, leading to a wide disparity in climate policies among its top 20 managing agents. While some agents have adopted best-in-class exclusions, many others ignore Lloyd's recommendations entirely, continuing to provide insurance for coal, oil, and gas expansion. The document highlights specific 'carbon bomb' projects—including pipelines in Canada and East Africa and mines in Australia—that continue to receive market support, and calls for Lloyd's to implement mandatory enforcement mechanisms and strengthen its exclusions to align with a 1.5°C pathway.

The report details CAPE's 2023 efforts to reduce toxic exposures in Canada, highlighting the passage of Bill S-5 to modernize the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and the launch of the Place-Based Power Project focusing on extraction impacts in Northern B.C., Alberta, and the Northwest Territories.

The author contends that Canada's attempt to claim emission credits for low-carbon exports is incompatible with the territorial GHG accounting system used by the UNFCCC. While Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes (ITMOs) under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement allow for credit transfers, the author argues these are unlikely to apply to commercial transactions like LNG sales, as importing countries are unlikely to voluntarily surrender credits for products they already pay for at market price. Furthermore, the document asserts that changing global accounting rules to include export effects would be resisted by other nations and could potentially penalize Canada due to its high-emission exports, such as oil sands products.

The document argues that Canadian oil producers are highly vulnerable to declining global demand and falling prices. While the heavy reliance on U.S. refineries provides a temporary buffer, this will not shield Canada from global price volatility or the long-term decline in petroleum consumption. The author contends that ESG credentials and production costs will not allow Canada to compete against lower-cost Middle Eastern producers in a shrinking market. Consequently, the brief warns of an existential threat to the sector, including job losses and reduced tax revenues, urging the Canadian government to diversify its economy.

The research paper presents the 'Two-Roads Approach' and the 'Intercultural Reclamation and Closure Framework' as methods to address the exclusion of Indigenous rights holders from oil sands mine closure planning in Canada. Developed through a partnership between Fort McKay First Nation and academic researchers, these tools aim to bridge Western scientific perspectives with Cree and Dene knowledge. Key outputs include the 'Cycle of Respect'—an intercultural code of conduct—and a six-stage framework for co-reclamation. The document emphasizes that restoring peatlands (muskeg) and forests is a critical climate mitigation action and that inclusive reclamation serves as a form of reconciliation for the degradation of traditional territories.