Help us raise $150,000 by December 31
This was not the election result that most Canadians hoped for. According to a Leger poll taken in late October, 64 per cent of Canadians wanted to see Kamala Harris win, and only 21 per cent rooted for Donald Trump. Alberta, perhaps unsurprisingly, had the highest level of support for Trump with 29 per cent backing the Republican nominee. Ironically, that province is about to bear the brunt of his administration’s decisions — some of which could meaningfully alter Alberta’s economic and political trajectory.
Much of this pro-Trump sentiment in Alberta is tied to the idea that he’ll re-approve the Keystone XL pipeline, which was torpedoed by Joe Biden when he came to power in 2021. But there’s no guarantee that TC Energy would want to proceed, given how many times that football has been yanked away in the past. They don’t even have the materials anymore: the steel that had been procured for Keystone XL was just sold to Cadiz Inc., which will use it to build a new groundwater banking project in the Mojave Desert. And Trump seems far more interested in increasing U.S. oil production than importing more oil from Canada.
“They’re going to dust off the ’drill, baby, drill’ playbook and do everything they can to push oil, natural gas and coal production,” said Ryan Bernstein, an industry consultant with McGuireWoods who served as chief of staff for North Dakota Republican Sen. John Hoeven, in an interview with Politico. All things being equal, more oil production in the US means lower prices for everyone — including, of course, Canadian companies. “My goal will be to cut your energy costs in half within 12 months after taking office,” Trump said in September. “We can do that.” To get there, according to Kpler lead oil analyst Matt Smith, oil prices would need to drop below $40 a barrel, a price that would destroy the profitability of almost every oilsands project going.
Then there’s Trump’s repeated pledge to hit all imports into America with a 10 per cent tariff that if applied to energy exports, would cost Canada an estimated $16 billion. And while business leaders in both countries insist Trump won’t actually hit Canadian oil exports with these tariffs because they’d increase fuel prices paid by Americans, they seem to be overlooking his negotiating position. As energy analyst Rory Johnston said during a panel for the Canadian Global Affairs Institute on Wednesday, “Canada is uniquely vulnerable to market pressure posed by U.S. refineries given our lack of alternative egress.”
Translation: Trump has us over a barrel of oil and he knows it. He might not be a deep thinker when it comes to, say, foreign policy, but Trump is a genius at sniffing out weakness on the part of others and then exploiting it without fear or favour. If anyone in Alberta thinks he won’t use that to his advantage, well, they’re about to learn a hard lesson.
Even if Trump doesn’t hit Canadian oil exports with tariffs, his broader tariff war against China and Europe will almost certainly reduce global economic activity and the overall demand for oil. As Tom Kloza, the global head of energy analysis at OPIS, told CNBC, “If we do get a trade war — and a lot of economists think that a trade war is possible, and particularly against China — we could see much, much lower prices.”
That’s without accounting for the behaviour of the OPEC cartel, which has been holding millions of barrels per day off the market in an attempt to prop up prices. With Trump pledging to massively increase America’s production, and OPEC nations losing market share by the day, the cartel — and Saudi Arabia in particular — may tire of helping other oil companies make money. As the Financial Times’s Tom Wilson wrote back in September, “the kingdom has decided it is not willing to continue ceding market share to other producers.”
These are all considerable near-term headwinds for Alberta and its oil and gas industry. And yet, the biggest one coming from the return of Trump is the open lane it will create for China in the energy transition. With its growing dominance in clean technologies and America’s apparent intention to abandon its own efforts there, China could double down on the investments and technologies that will erode global demand for fossil fuels. “If China wants to build the alliances that it will need to acquire the status of a global hegemon,” Bloomberg’s David Fickling writes, “it has the perfect opportunity now to present itself as the clean alternative to an oil-stained and declining American empire.”
That might be good news for the climate, all things considered. But it would be very bad for Alberta, which has yet to take the work of reducing the emissions coming from its oil and gas industry seriously. Yes, its UCP government and the Conservative voters in the province will delight in the prospect of Trump returning to torment Justin Trudeau. What they don’t seem to realize yet is that they’re the ones who will feel the most pain.
Comments
This is a strange location on the Internet to gin up sympathy for the poor, beleaguered Canadian oil industry. Normally, this publication is all in favour of them having economic headwinds, having reason to curtail activity.
Not sure it was that at all Roy.
I doubt that too many interested in reducing emissions in Canada have a lot of patience or sympathy for Danielle Smith. My two big takeaways are: if Trump is Trump (very likely)
China may have a lane to totally lead and dominate the clean energy revolution worldwide.
Secondly, while Danielle Smith may cherish the idea of Trump hounding J.T., the actual outcome may be a huge price drop in oil which would not make anybody in Alberta happy.
But man oh man, would Canada's emission ever drop.
Agree w Michael. No one trying to gin up sympathy
I also read Max's piece similarly. Essentially, handing a double shot espresso to Alberta voters and inviting them to take a break and have some sober second thought about blind political allegiances.
Max's analysis is accurate, in my view. There are parallels to the war in Ukraine, or more concisely, Russia's total economic dependency on oil, and the gross miscalculation that one dictator can build another huge Russian empire with economic feet of clay.
Russia is in deep shit and the chief indicators of that are the submarining value of its currency, its one horse extractive economic structure and its declining population and workforce. Sacrificing between 500,000 and 700,000 soldiers and 2/3 of its land-based military equipment, and its recent deep dependency on outside military forces certainly pushes Russia deeper into the mire, especially considering all that effort was to gain little more than 30 km on the frontlines in three years.
Putin struck a deal with OPEC a couple of years ago to slow oil production in order to maintain higher oil prices. But then it cheated by secretly sending cheap oil to India and China in part using unregistered ghost ships. Saudi Arabia was pissed, so it decided to uncouple itself from Putin's lying duplicity. Meanwhile Europe went on a crash course to largely wean itself from Russian fossil fuels, but with some exceptions.
Enter Trump and his promise to drill baby drill. Ergo lower oil prices yet again through classic supply-demand manipulation. Couple that with Ukraine's smart tactic to hit Russian oil production with cheap drones.
Putin may have been smart enough once to encourage Europe to become heavily addicted to Russian fossil fuels, but today his Stalinesque ulterior motive is completely exposed, and he is obviously struck by a counterpunch of great stupidity, especially considering that his entire power base stems from less than 1,000 oligarchs stealing about a trillion dollars from Russia's former oil wealth and causing yet more poverty to befall average Russian citizens. How long before the Russian federation breaks up is anybody's guess. But the fact is that it is closer than before February 2022 when Putin tried to conquer Ukraine in three days.
One noticable irony is that Ukrainian cities are now rapidly installing rooftop solar to keep the lights on while Russia sends several missile barrages a week to destroy Ukraine's centalized civilian power generation capacity. Russia will no doubt get a taste of its own medicine this winter. Can you blame Ukraine?
The irony with Trump's oil madness is that lower prices will not help USA oil companies either. There are five shale formations in play, and some analysts determined that two of them already peaked a few years ago. High depletion rates are a fact of life with fracked shale oil and gas, which, according to Canadian geoscientist David Hughes, averages 53% a year, with some wells hitting 90% after the first year. Drilling faster is necessary, and that only brings the inevitable falldown closer. Moreover, frackers are ladden with remarkably high debt loads.
Between Trump and Putin, not to mention certain oil industry captured Canadian politicos, China is sitting in a very good position to assume a superior role in renewables, especially when it's known that China's efforts have now matured into solar being the cheapest energy on the planet and its batteries and PV panels are the most techologically advanced.
Not bad for an undemocratic dictatorship.
Meanwhile, Danielle Smith and Pierre Poilievre are blissfully ignorant of such international trends. Neither are known to be capable of critical thinking.
Here's an optimistic view on the effect Trump may or may not have on the clean energy transition in the US. Basically, it gets down to to huge level of investment and jobs already in play.
"The death of clean, green energy in the USA? Not a chance!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MY7ZFb26PwA