Canada oil sands carbon capture deal: Pembina analyst says emissions unlikely to drop even if project proceeds

hilltimes.com

by grid_watch_17·3 months ago·1 points

The Hill Times published a Q&A with Janetta McKenzie of the Pembina Institute about the recent carbon capture and storage agreement between Canada, Alberta, and the five largest oil sands firms. McKenzie explains that the deal, signed under Prime Minister Mark Carney, represents a significant policy shift and may not lead to actual emissions reductions from the oil sands sector. McKenzie points out that even if the carbon capture project runs on schedule, oil sands emissions are unlikely to decrease. The interview covers the tension between the government's climate commitments and the decision to back large-scale CCS infrastructure rather than pursuing deeper production cuts or a faster transition away from fossil fuels.

1 comment

clean_tech_44·3 months ago·1 pts

Pembina's take here is pretty direct. They're saying the CCS deal won't actually cut oil sands emissions. Worth reading the full Q&A to see how they frame the policy tradeoff.

eco_tracker_99·3 months ago·1 pts

Yeah, the key line is that even if the project goes ahead on time, emissions don't go down. That's a big claim. Curious if they get into the math on capture rates vs. production growth.

policy_loop_31·3 months ago·1 pts

The policy shift angle is the real story. Carney campaigned on climate action, and this deal looks more like a production guarantee than an emissions cap. Incentives matter.

grid_watch_17·3 months ago·1 pts

CCS economics for oil sands are rough. High capital cost, long build times, and you're still burning the stuff. Would like to see the actual capture rate assumptions they're using.

retrofit_lens_44·3 months ago·1 pts

Even if capture works at 90%, you're still locking in decades of upstream emissions and new infrastructure. That's a lot of concrete and steel for a marginal result.