In Parliament: Continuing to Press for CCUS to Reduce Emissions

The Liberals continue to talk a good game on pretending to support Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage, but have yet to take one step forward beyond announcements. They also appear to plan to exclude Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) from their policy. That's a bad idea for a couple of reasons.

One of our challenges is that Canada is competing with the US for CCUS investment, and their 45Q regime encompasses Enhanced Oil Recovery. EOR is also a way to put cleaner conventional oil into the overall mix of responsible Canadian oil products. Oil produced through CO2 EOR is amongst the least carbon-intensive in the world, up to 60% lower in emissions than conventionally produced oil. In addition, EOR projects provide local jobs and generate royalties and taxes for provincial and federal governments. And injecting waste carbon into old oil reservoirs means that not only can that oil be harvested, but the waste carbon is stored forever in the now-empty reservoirs. It is a win-win-win, but only if the Liberals include EOR as part of their CCUS tax credit plan.

On April 4, I asked the Ministers of Environment and of Natural Resources to explain their strategy on CCUS and whether they will wisely include EOR in their policy, or not.



April 4th, 2:55 p.m.

Mr. Speaker, the International Energy Agency has stated that carbon capture, utilization and storage is the most near-term available technology to mitigate climate change. Deployment will amount to approximately 7% of the world’s GHG reduction targets. Canada was at the forefront of developing carbon capture. Billions of dollars have been spent by industry and governments to advance the technology, making it a Canadian technology champion.

Will the government commit to ensuring that this environmental leadership remains in Canada, or will we see more inaction that will move more jobs to the United States?

 April 4th, 3 p.m.

 Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources told delegates at the IEA meeting that he would be implementing a 45Q-type regime to capture carbon in Canada. The American 45Q tax credit has pulled investment away from Canada because it includes enhanced oil recovery, yet the same minister co-wrote an article saying that EOR should not be part of our carbon capture regime.

There is one story for people who know what is required and another when pandering to special interests at home.

 Which side of his mouth will the minister be talking out of now, and how many more jobs do we have to lose to the United States?