Janetta McKenzie, manager of the Pembina Institute’s oil and gas program, discusses the federal emissions cap with Alberta Primetime host Michael Higgins.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Michael Higgins: You are a supporter of the draft regulation. What makes these regulations realistic?

Janetta McKenzie: Finally, we know that oil and gas emissions are a problem in this country. Oil and gas emissions contributed nearly a third of Canada’s total greenhouse gas emissions last year, according to the national inventory report.

What the federal government has proposed here is a regulation that gives industry time to start planning, but will also require some action when it comes to stepping up decarbonization activities to comply with the cap.

It is designed to be complementary to regulations already on the table, including industrial carbon pricing, such as Alberta’s tiering program, or draft methane regulations, which are also slated to be finalized next year.

MH: What level of impact do you think an emissions cap has on oil and gas production in Alberta?

JM: It’s a name of sorts: this regulation is a cap on pollution, not production. The sector has several options available to reduce emissions. Between reducing and mitigating methane from oil and gas production, which is a relatively low-cost option, to completing and advancing the Pathways Alliance’s proposed carbon capture and sequestration project in Alberta.

In addition, there are also compliance flexibilities included in this proposed regulation that provide more flexibility to the industry, particularly in the first few years after implementation of the regulation, as well as the absolute level of the cap.

The absolute megaton level of the cap will be set based on data collected in 2026, so there is this fairly gentle ramp to ensure that this is in fact a cap on pollution and emissions, not production.

MH: The Alberta government is announcing a 52 percent cut in methane emissions by oil and gas producers since 2014. It’s a message it plans to take to COP 29 this week in Baku.

How do you rate the energy sector’s efforts to reduce emissions and meet targets so far?

JM: There have certainly been some successes, particularly when it comes to methane reduction in the oil and gas sector in Alberta, BC and across Canada.

Many of these methane reductions came as a result of existing provincial methane regulations that were deemed equivalent by the federal government.

What has now been put on the table by the federal government for oil and gas methane is the next step in methane reduction, targeting a 75% drop in oil and gas methane by 2030, which is very much in line with international energy. The agency’s recommendations, as well as some of that low-hanging fruit when it comes to reducing emissions from the sector.

It will be quite critical in meeting this proposed emissions cap as well.

MH: As for the response from the other side of the coin, the Calgary Chamber of Commerce is calling for Ottawa to withdraw the emissions cap, saying it will do absolutely nothing in the global effort to reduce emissions.

How do you respond to the voices, whether business or political, that support such voices?

JM: I think there are a few things to keep in mind here. First, when it comes to the global energy transition, it really is a global energy transition.

The reason why most countries, the vast majority of countries, came together in 2015 to agree that there must be a coordinated effort and coordinated targets to reduce emissions is that it’s a bit like turning a very large ship into the water.

Second, Canada, in absolute terms, contributes fewer emissions globally than China, the United States or the European Union per capita, although we emit quite a lot and have a responsibility to reduce these emissions for the sake of avoiding those more severe effects of climate change, which have a real financial cost to our country and to Canadians.

But also to set up Canadian industry, including the Canadian oil and gas industry, to compete in that low-carbon future and that low-carbon economy as the rest of the world moves on climate.

MH: What do you see will happen from the political environment around emissions when Donald Trump returns to the White House?

JM: I think it’s a little early to speculate exactly what kind of energy policy the Trump administration will implement and exactly what it will look like.

Obviously, there is a lot of speculation at this point when it comes to the Canadian approach. It’s important to look at what our trading partners are doing and what our neighbors to the south are doing, but it’s also important to design a made-in-Canada approach that works to reduce emissions and also works with the existing policy that we put on the table.

We have a multi-pronged approach to reducing emissions in this country. We have industrial carbon pricing, like Alberta’s tiered program or the federal output-based pricing system, we have methane regulations, mandates to sell electric vehicles, and all of those things work together to make the Canadian approach to reducing emissions and to establish the economy to compete. in the net-zero economy.

We will have to watch closely what the new Trump administration does and perhaps make adjustments, but what has been put on the table is a multi-pronged approach.