china – My Climate Change Website

Canadian oil stocks slide following Maduro capture

U.S. planning to take over Venezuela’s reserves

This article was written by Lauren Krugel and was published in the Toronto Star on January 6, 2026.

Shares in Canada’s biggest oilsands producers came under pressure Monday after the U.S. military captured the Venezuelan leader and U.S. President Donald Trump announced plans to put that country’s oil industry into the hands of American companies.

Cenovus Energy Inc. and Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. were each down about five per cent and Suncor Energy Inc. dropped 1.4 per cent. Enbridge Inc., which operates a vast crossborder oil pipeline network it plans to expand, and South Bow Corp., whose Keystone system ships crude to the U.S., each fell around three per cent.

Overall, the TSX energy subindex was down more than three per cent.

Refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast are set up to process heavy crude like that produced in Alberta’s oilsands and in Venezuela. But U.S. sanctions on the South American country have meant virtually none of its supplies go to the U.S. market today.

“If those restrictions were lifted, then Canada may have more competition right away in terms of Venezuelan oil that now technically can access the U.S. Gulf Coast,” said Jackie Forrest, executive director of the ARC Energy Research Institute.

But Forrest said any discounts on Canadian heavy oil prices would be “modest” — in the $2 to $3 (U.S.) per barrel range — so the market reaction Monday “seems a bit overdone.”

Canada sends about 400,000 barrels a day of crude to the world’s largest refining complex on the Gulf Coast, a relatively small portion of the roughly four million barrels a day of oil Canada supplies to the U.S. overall. Most currently goes to refineries in the Midwest region, which is deeply integrated with pipeline networks originating in Alberta, like Enbridge’s Mainline and South Bow’s Keystone.

Cenovus Energy Inc. and Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. were each down about five per cent and Suncor Energy Inc. dropped 1.4 per cent

There are ways to offset some of that pricing pressure by exporting crude abroad, via the Gulf Coast or from the Trans Mountain pipeline on the West Coast, Forrest added.

Not much has changed in oil markets nearterm and it could be months or even years before the fate of sanctions and Venezuela’s production shakes out, said Dane Gregoris, managing director of Enverus’s oil and gas research group.

“Political changes happen quickly, but industrial changes happen very slowly,” he said.

But he said there’s a “reasonable case to be made” for investors to reduce their exposure to Canadian energy names under the assumption that more heavy oil may eventually flow to the U.S. market and weigh on Canadian prices.

“I think that’s why you’re seeing a broad selloff of oil and gas equities today,” he said. “Some of that seems a little bit overstated or kind of snap reaction.”

Up until 2000, Canada and Venezuela each sent about the same amount to the U.S., but Venezuela’s exports have since dwindled to virtually nothing while the Canadian share has grown, Derek Holt, head of capital markets economics at Scotiabank wrote in a report Monday.

It’s clear Trump wants to take control of Venezuela’s oil reserves — 300 billion barrels or about 17 per cent of the world’s total, Holt wrote.

“It’s a hostile takeover in the global energy sector, the only difference being that guns were used instead of shareholder tactics.”

But he cautioned against leaping to the conclusion “this will unleash a torrent of new supply on world markets with effects that allegedly include snowing under Canada’s oil industry.”

Meanwhile, the United States’ own production has been crowding out imports and the world is awash in supply, putting pressure on global prices.

The price of West Texas Intermediate crude, the key U.S. light oil benchmark, saw a bump on Monday, but it was still below the $60 per barrel mark and about 20 per cent lower than it was at this time last year.

“What do you think unleashing three billion barrels of reserves in Venezuela would do to world oil prices relative to production breakevens? U.S. Big Oil isn’t that dumb,” Holt wrote, adding domestic and Canadian infrastructure is also well established in the U.S. market.

“Nevertheless, the prudent thing for Canada to do would be to act with a greater sense of urgency in terms of building capacity to export oil to Asia (arguably ditto for Mexico),” Holt wrote.

It could take five to 10 years for Venezuela to meaningfully ramp up its production if it were to get a stable government and attract investment, Forrest said. But long term, it makes sense for Canada to send more of its oil to Asia, Forrest said.

“Hopefully it increases our motivation,” she said. “We need new outlets for our crude oil to diversify our export markets to protect us from threats like this.”

Want to build a new pipeline? Don’t look to oil markets for support

This opinion was written by Andrew Willis and was published in the Globe & Mail on January 6, 2026.

On Monday, the market said – loud and clear – we are heading into an oil glut. The market did not say – in any way, shape or form – it is time to build another pipeline to get more Alberta bitumen to the British Columbia coast.

Investors knocked the stuffing out of oil sands producers such as Athabasca Oil Corp. and Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. on Monday. The price of shares in both Calgary-based companies dropped more than 6 per cent as part of a broad decline in the domestic energy sector triggered by the U.S. government’s capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro on Saturday.

Canadian energy companies didn’t sell off because Venezuela is about to begin pumping crude at levels not seen in more than two decades. Bitter experience in Iraq and Libya shows there’s rarely a straight line between deposing dictators and rebuilding the economies of the countries they ran.

Athabasca, Canadian Natural and other domestic producers sold off because investors are coming to grips with the fact that OPEC, Russia, the United States, Canada and maybe Venezuela are poised to produce just enough oil to keep prices in the US$50 to US$60-per-barrel range for the foreseeable future.

That’s a consumer-friendly outcome, one sure to please U.S. President Donald Trump. However, low oil prices undermine the economic case for another pipeline in B.C.

That didn’t stop Alberta Premier Danielle Smith from using the chaos in Venezuela, and the potential for increased shipments of its heavy oil to U.S. refineries at the expense of provincial producers, as a reason to repeat her call for a second pipeline, in addition to the federal government-owned Trans Mountain pipeline.

“Recent events surrounding Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro emphasize the importance that we expedite the development of pipelines to diversify our oil export markets,” said Ms. Smith in a post on X.

What happened over the weekend in Venezuela complicates the Alberta government’s already complex analysis of pipeline economics by a group that includes three major operators – Enbridge Inc., South Bow Corp. and Trans Mountain Corp.

Over the next year, eliminating U.S. sanctions on Venezuela’s oil industry could increase exports by several hundred thousand barrels a day, according to RBC Capital Markets head of global energy research Greg Pardy. And that oil may go to U.S. refiners, rather than customers in China who built links to the Maduro regime. However, what the U.S. military did over the weekend doesn’t ensure Venezuela regains its former stature as a major oil exporter, on par with Canada.

“Restoring the country’s production back toward the three million barrels-per-day range would require years of annual investment of some US$10-billion anchored by a stable security environment, both of which are tall orders,” Mr. Pardy said in a report.

Expanding the Trans Mountain pipeline has served Canadians well by narrowing the gap between the price domestic producers receive and world oil prices. Along with increased industry revenues, both the Alberta and federal governments are benefiting from higher royalties.

On Monday, analysts published worse-case scenarios that showed the discount on Alberta heavy oil price could increase, as U.S. refiners play off Canadian producers against Venezuelan rivals, who produce the same kind of oil. These rivals include U.S. companies such as Chevron Corp., which is still operating in the South American country.

Athabasca and Calgary-based Strathcona Resources Ltd. are the domestic companies most exposed to any increase in the discount – the difference between the price fetched by West Texas Intermediate oil and heavier grades – on what American producers pay for Alberta oil.

However, it’s far from clear these worst-case scenarios will come to pass.

“The oil pundits may be getting way ahead of themselves,” said Derek Holt, head of capital markets economics at Bank of Nova Scotia, in a report on Monday.

“Greater caution is required before leaping to their conclusions that this will unleash a torrent of new supply on world markets with effects that allegedly include snowing under Canada’s oil industry,” Mr. Holt said.

Plucking Mr. Maduro and his wife from their beds changed the political picture in Venezuela. It didn’t fundamentally change the economics of the energy market. Current oil prices reflect more supply than demand for crude.

There may be a business case for another oil pipeline from Alberta to the West Coast. What happened in Caracas over the weekend failed to make that case.

2026 forecast: M&A, AI, EVs, (and more)

This opinion was written by Eric Reguly and was published in the Globe & Mail on January 2, 2026.

**Canada could strike a deal this year to build the Swedish Saab Gripen E-series fighter jet and the Saab GlobalEye surveillance plane on Canadian soil.**

The Globe’s European bureau chief predicts there will be less free trade and more mergers and acquisitions this year

In gambling casinos, the house edge, depending on the game, is typically one to five per cent. With that in mind, I will be happy if half of my predictions for 2026 prove accurate, or even largely accurate. Here goes, and happy new year from snow-free Rome.

PLANE LOGIC

Canada will do a deal to build the Swedish Saab Gripen E-series fighter jet and the Saab GlobalEye surveillance plane on Canadian soil, presumably at a Bombardier factory in Ontario or Quebec. The Canadian military has not warmed to the Gripen, largely because it fears the expense of running a dual-fighter fleet. It wants Canada to stick with the U.S.made F-35 stealth fighter jets, of which 16 are on their way, with options for another 72.

The generals are betting that Prime Minister Mark Carney doesn’t have the courage to anger U.S. President Donald Trump by adding the Gripen at the expense of some or many F-35 orders. But Saab has said that building the Gripen and GlobalEye in Canada would create 10,000 jobs, or possibly more if the Canadian factories pump them out for Ukraine and other export customers.

The chance to develop the largest military aerospace R&D talent pool and supply chain since the death of the Canadian developed Avro Arrow interceptor in 1959 will be too hard to pass up. Yes, Mr. Trump will get angry and possibly retaliate, but so what? Anger and retaliation are his default positions.

LESS FREE TRADE

The Trump-directed trade wars won’t flare up again in 2026, since tariffs are not a universal win for the U.S. They trigger retaliation from other countries and put upward pressure on consumer prices; the U.S. President wants inflation to fall in the run-up to the midterm elections in November. But a tariff lull does not mean the trade storm is over, at least in North America.

The U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement is up for review in 2026. Mr. Trump and his MAGA backers will demand a U.S.-centric replacement. No surprise there; the 25-per-cent tariffs on Canadian autos, steel and aluminum that hit in 2025 were a forewarning that Canada is doomed on the trade front. The USMCA won’t go without a fight, but it will go.

MERGER MANIA REDUX

Mergers and acquisitions are coming off a banner year. Harvard’s 2025 M&A review said that compared to 2024, deal volume is expected to rise by almost half in the U.S. alone to US$2.3-trillion, equivalent to Canada’s gross domestic product. Global volumes should rise by about a quarter. There is every reason to believe the frenzied pace will continue in 2026.

Interest rates in the U.S. and elsewhere are coming down, making financing costs cheaper. The U.S.’s anti-consolidation stance is vanishing (which is not to say antitrust reviews are history). Europe is practically begging for global champions in defence, banking, pharmaceuticals, energy and other industries, meaning regulatory reviews will be given the light touch there, too.

My guess is that mining and banking are the sectors to watch. The lunge for critical metals, especially copper, means that megadeals will remain on the agenda. A blockbuster merger between Glencore of Switzerland and Britain’s Rio Tinto is not out of the question, nor is the takeover of Anglo American , considering its purchase of copperheavy, Vancouver-based Teck Resources has received shareholder approval.

On the resources front, my other guess is that once-mighty BP , the former British Petroleum, is not long for this world as an independent player. The company has had too many value-destroying reversals (black-togreen and vice versa) to play in the big leagues – its market value is less than one-fifth of Exxon’s .

In the financial world, watch out for the Canadian banks. They are huge, even by global standards. Royal Bank of Canada is worth US$240-billion, closing in on Wells Fargo’s value. It’s only a matter of time before RBC and its Canadian rivals pounce on big targets in the U.S.

AI’S SOCIAL BACKLASH

The joy of the artificial intelligence industry’s stunning growth and investment returns will be replaced in 2026 by fear and loathing over job losses. Nothing puts a smile on the faces of CEOs and company shareholders more than sinking labour costs, and AI is putting the curve in the right direction for them.

The Financial Times reported this week that Morgan Stanley forecasts the European banks alone will eliminate 200,000 banking jobs, equivalent to 10 per cent of their payrolls, by 2030, as AI takes over. The job cuts are expected to come within the central services divisions, such as back-office roles. Repeat in other industries.

I predict that AI-related job cuts will see strikes in 2026, as employees demand contracts insulated from the technology. Automation has sparked labour agitation in the past, including the Luddite rebellions in the early 19th century and, in 2023, the Hollywood strikes, where writers and actors demanded work clauses that curtail AI use.

TESLA’S BATTERY WILL DRAIN

Elon Musk’s Tesla had a pretty good year. The shares were up nine per cent, giving the electric vehicle giant a market value of US$1.5-trillion. A repeat performance in 2026 is highly unlikely. Mr. Trump has no love for EVs, even if his bromance with Mr. Musk seems to have been restored. The U.S. federal tax credits for EVs are on their way out, and rules to reduce or eliminate vehicle emissions are being scrapped.

In the European Union, gas and diesel cars were given a new lease on life just a few weeks ago with the dilution of the 2035 zeroemissions requirement. Meanwhile, Chinese EVs are coming on strong pretty much everywhere except Canada and the U.S., where 100-per-cent tariffs banish them from showrooms. They have moved up the quality chain fast and are cheaper than Teslas.

Musk’s nightmare scenario – a Chinese ban on Tesla sales on national security grounds, because the cars are equipped with all sorts of cameras and sensors – has gone from the unimaginable to the possible.

China’s crude buying and storage strategy sets the bounds of oil prices

This article was written by Clyde Russell and was published in the Globe & Mail on December 24, 2025.

Conventional wisdom in the crude oil market is that producers such as OPEC+ largely determine the price by altering output levels to achieve a desired outcome.

That shibboleth was challenged in 2025 by China, which used its status as the world’s biggest oil importer to provide an effective price floor and ceiling by either increasing or decreasing the volume of crude it sent to storage tanks.

Production cuts in 2022 by OPEC+, which groups the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and allies led by Russia, did shore up prices. Those gains faded once it began reversing the cuts in April this year. Now, facing a looming oil glut, OPEC+ has decided to sit tight and hold production levels steady in the first quarter of next year.

That leaves China to mop up the excess.

What China does in 2026 is now the biggest known unknown in crude markets. Other participants are likely to set their strategies in response to Beijing.

What was clear in 2025 is that China was buying more crude than it needed for domestic consumption and exports of refined products.

China does not disclose the volumes of crude flowing into or out of its strategic and commercial stockpiles, but an estimate can be made by subtracting refinery throughput from the total crude available from imports and domestic output.

It is worth noting that not all of the surplus crude was likely to have been added to storage, with some being processed in plants not captured by the official data.

For the first 11 months of 2025, the surplus crude amounted to about 980,000 barrels per day (b/d), given that imports and domestic output combined were 15.8 million b/d, while refinery processing amounted to 14.82 million b/d.

The surplus has been built up since March and came after refiners made a rare draw on inventories in January and February, when processing rates exceeded available crude by about 30,000 b/d.

There is a solid correlation between the volume of surplus crude and the price of oil, with China adding barrels when prices dip but cutting back when they rise.

This was in evidence in September, when the surplus crude dropped to 570,000 b/d after hitting 1.10 million b/d in August.

Cargoes arriving in September would largely have been arranged at the time of the IsraelIran conflict in June, when crude prices were elevated. Global benchmark Brent futures spiked to a six-month high of US$81.40 a barrel on June 23.

With prices easing since June, China’s refiners resumed buying excess crude, with a surplus of 1.88 million b/d seen in November, the biggest since April and up from 690,000 b/d in October.

It could be argued that China’s storage flows are the main reason that crude prices were locked in a fairly narrow range in the second half of 2025, with Brent anchored either side of US$65 a barrel.

The key question for 2026 is whether China will, and can, continue to buy excess crude when prices drop, effectively providing a floor.

Estimates vary as to how much crude China already has stored, with a range from around 1 billion barrels to as much as 1.4 billion barrels.

If the assumption is that a country should have 90 days of import cover, and China’s base imports are around 11 million b/d, then 1 billion barrels would be sufficient.

But at least 700 million barrels are likely commercial inventories, implying a strategic reserve closer to 500 million barrels.

That in turn suggests that Beijing may wish to add about another 500 million barrels to the strategic stockpile, though the timeline is uncertain.

China is building more storage, with state oil companies including Sinopec and CNOOC adding at least 169 million barrels across 11 sites in 2025 and 2026.

Assuming a storage flow of somewhere around 500,000 to 600,000 b/d, this would add in the region of 200 million barrels over the course of a year.

If Beijing does continue to add to strategic inventories at this rate, it would imply that much of the forecast surplus of supply in 2026 will simply go into Chinese tanks.

If this does happen, then it is likely that crude prices will once again enjoy a Chinese-supported floor, but also a cap as China will simply trim imports if prices rise too high.

Of course, there are a number of “ifs” in the above paragraphs, but the recent history suggests that China will continue to build inventories in 2026, and probably into 2027 as well.

What is also clear is that China is quite prepared to use inventory flows as a pricing mechanism.

Given China’s seaborne crude imports of around 10 million b/d are about a quarter of the global seaborne total, it is possible that Beijing’s policies are now the most important factor in oil markets.

China doesn’t release public information on its strategic or commercial stockpiles, making it challenging not only to assess physical flows, but also to determine what policies are likely to be followed. What was clear in 2025 is that China was buying more crude than it needed for domestic consumption and exports of refined products.

The EV industry needs to prove it can survive without subsidies and incentives

This opinion was written by Gus Carlson and was published in the Globe & Mail on December 8, 2025.

**A visitor looks at a Ford electric pickup truck at the Essen Motor Show in Germany on Thursday. Ford reported that sales of its EVs fell more than 60 per cent in November.**

The nosedive in U.S. sales of electric vehicles since the elimination of the federal EV tax credit at the end of September is the latest moment of truth for the sector.

And that truth, when free market forces determine the true value of a product stripped of artificial sweeteners and incentives for buyers, is harsh.

Ford’s report last week was a grim reminder of how precarious the way forward for EVs has become. Sales of its EVs fell more than 60 per cent last month, continuing a downward trend from October. Ford said that due to weak demand, it had paused production of its F-150 Lightning EV pickups to focus on gas-powered trucks.

Despite strong EV sales in the third quarter – when buyers raced to make purchases before the tax credits expired – Ford said its EV business lost US$1.4-billion in the period.

But Ford was not alone. Sales of Hyundai’s Ioniq EV models dropped 50 per cent in November, as did sister company Kia’s EV sales. Honda EV sales dropped 80 per cent.

The post-tax-credit tumble exposes the wide valley of death between the ideological aspirations of early EV adopters and the economic reality holding back the next wave of buyers.

Prices of EVs are still too high. Charging infrastructure is still inadequate to ease range anxiety. The quality of the products made by legacy automakers continues to lag that of pure-play manufacturers such as Tesla. And the development of new models has been slow and inconsistent.

Even Tesla’s not looking at a particularly bright future. As was the case with Ford, its U.S. sales were juiced in the third quarter by buyers trying to beat the expiry of the rebate, but its international numbers were down sharply.

Many blame U.S. President Donald Trump for hobbling the sector by eliminating the tax credits as part of his crusade to dismantle the green agenda of his predecessor, Joe Biden, which included incentives of US$7,500 for new EVs and US$4,500 for used vehicles.

But Mr. Biden had a golden opportunity to advance the EV ball and fumbled. Early in his term he earmarked nearly US$8-billion to build a nationwide network of EV changing stations. By the time he left office, the program had created only a handful.

The EV faithful also complain that legacy automakers are partly to blame because gas and hybrid models are more profitable and there is no incentive for manufacturers to fast-track EV design and production – and no penalty for not doing so.

But automakers are not charities, and altruism is not a winning corporate strategy in a competitive global marketplace, especially with high-quality, competitively priced Chinese models gaining share.

Like any business, automakers prosper, grow and create jobs based on their ability to meet customer demand. And the economic reality is that there is a huge universe of car buyers out there who remain unconvinced that EVs are right for them.

Two recent moves by big legacy automakers in Canada underline the point.

Ford’s decision to shelve plans to convert its Oakville, Ont., assembly plant to EVs was made well before Mr. Trump imposed tariffs on Canadian-made vehicles. The rationale for the move was market-driven – weak demand for its EVs – and the company made the call to convert the plant to build strong-selling heavy-duty trucks instead.

Stellantis blamed tariffs in part for its recent decision to halt the conversion of its Brampton, Ont., plant to EV production, but it is worth noting that the company’s redeployment of resources and people from Canada to several U.S. plants is not focused on EVs.

The hard truth is this: The EV sector needs to start standing on its own. For it to grow and avoid becoming a footnote, legacy automakers in particular must step up and address the deficiencies themselves.

Recent history has shown that it is hard enough to push forward with an administration such as Mr. Trump’s that doesn’t favour EVs. But having an ineffectual champion such as Mr. Biden has been no help, either.

Prices need to come down, charging station deployment needs to become a priority, model refreshment must keep customer engagement high, and quality must at least match that of Chinese rivals.

For too long, the EV sector has been living the charmed life of an adolescent whose mom and dad (in this case, taxpayers) have paid the freight. When the tax incentives expired, it was akin to the teenager being kicked out of the house and forced to make it on his own. He stumbled, and even recent rebates from automakers did not soften the fall.

The EV sector is out of the nest now, at least in North America. It needs to prove it is a viable, sustainable business that can survive and thrive without being propped up in an artificial environment of subsidies and incentives. Simply put, it needs to grow up – and quickly.

Rollback of Europe’s green agenda is boost for China’s electric vehicle industry

This opinion was written by Eric Reguly and was published in the Globe & Mail on December 6, 2025.

**Workers assemble Zeekr 001 EV models at the Chinese automaker’s Ningbo plant in April. China’s battery and hybrid cars are racing ahead pretty much everywhere except Canada and the U.S.**

German carmakers have always used a peculiar mix of solid, retro engineering and dazzling technology to create machines that were built like safes but loaded with features that, if not invented by the Germans, were refined by them – anti-lock braking, all-wheel drive, stability control, adaptive suspension and other gadgets. The combo turned Germany in the postwar decades into an automotive superpower.

The German automotive minds were less adept at leadingedge drivetrain technology. They were slow to mass produce pure electric vehicles (EVs) and hybrids, handing that market to Tesla in the United States and, lately, to the Chinese auto giants, among them BYD, Geely and SAIC Motor. Of course, the German automakers’ showrooms are full of EVs, but they are neither mass produced nor bargains for average families.

The most “affordable” Volkswagen EV, for instance, is the compact, and not especially luxurious, ID.3, which starts at about €30,000 ($48,000) and can top out at a hefty €48,000 ($77,000). No wonder VW is in trouble and, for the first time in 88 years, closing domestic factories.

The sales and profits crisis in the German car industry has sent the technocrats and politicians in Berlin and Brussels into a lowgrade panic as auto jobs disappear, not just in Germany, but also in France and Italy. Their response is to dilute the European Union’s green agenda.

The upshot is that old-tech cars – those powered by gasoline and diesel engines – may live on for another decade or two, or three. Aside from the obvious outcome that Europe’s air will be less clean as the death sentence for internalcombustion-engine cars is lifted, the less obvious outcome is that it will take some of the pressure off Europe’s car companies to develop advanced technologies (which may or may not use batteries) simply because they can keep relying on the old ones.

Talk about a gift to China, whose battery and hybrid cars are racing ahead pretty much everywhere except Canada and the U.S., where 100-per-cent tariffs on Chinese EVs shut them out of the market.

The green rollback is picking up momentum in many big markets. In the U.S., President Donald Trump, no fan of EVs in spite of his bromance with Telsa boss Elon Musk, this month gutted the tight new fuel efficiency and tailpipe emission rules for cars and trucks. The U.S. automakers cheered the move, with Ford chief executive officer Jim Farley calling it a “victory for common sense and affordability.”

In the European Union, rightwing party gains in recent elections have amplified the shouts to “stop the Green New Deal.” At the moment, the EU’s environmental agenda calls for the phase-out by 2035 of new cars powered by internal-combustion engines. That deadline is expected to be delayed if those engines are powered by low-emission fuels, such as biofuels, or highly efficient combustion technology. Details should be known on Dec. 10, when the EU is to unveil a new package of automotive policies.

At the same time, holes are also being poked through the EU’s painfully named Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D), which was adopted in 2024. Its dizzying web of regulations requires large companies to shift their global supply chains to low-carbon operations. In a comment piece in the Financial Times this week, Andrew Puzder, the U.S. ambassador to the EU, called CS3D “economic suicide” for the EU.

The EU won’t fully comply, but lobbying efforts from French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and the bosses of several bigname industrial and energy companies are removing CS3D’s fangs. The directive’s net-zero goals are being eliminated, for instance – another victory for the Chinese auto industry, which would face lower compliance barriers to sell its EVs in Europe.

While the EU green-dilution campaign might save a few car factories from closing over the next few years, it may not do the automakers any favours over the medium to long term. Removing some of the pressure on them to find alternatives to gas and diesel engines only provides a market opening for the Chinese automakers, who have turned into the world’s leading makers of EVs. Their autos are generally much cheaper than those of European rivals, and the quality has improved fast, to the point where they are rated on par with Teslas, or close to them.

The automakers’ soaring market shares outside China say as much. Germany’s Schmidt Automotive Research said Chinese EVs will capture 11 per cent of the Western European EV market this year, up from 9.6 per cent last year and a mere 3.8 per cent in 2021. The gains will continue now that Hungary is about to build Chinese EVs and car batteries in huge volumes. Because Hungary is a member of the EU, those products can escape the bloc’s hefty import tariffs on EVs.

Sometimes industries and businesses need a swift kick to get them moving. Allowing the European automakers to keep their old technologies alive for another generation will do them no favours. It will just ensure they lose more ground to the fast-moving Chinese companies in the EV war.

Role reversal

Major Projects Office less about red tape than coaxing capital

Terrace Mayor Sean Bujtas, left, Prime Minister Mark Carney, Major Projects Office CEO Dawn Farrell and Housing Minister Gregor Robertson in Terrace, B.C.

This article was written by Ryan Tumilty and was published in the Toronto Star on November 30, 2025.

Natural Resources Minister Tim Hodgson is clear about one thing: in the midst of a trade war and an uncertain economic future, Canada can’t succeed without leverage.

He points to a moment he can’t forget. During an Oval Office meeting in March, U.S. President Donald Trump badgered Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, telling him he “had no cards” to play. Hodgson said that exchange reinforced his belief that Canada needs to better position itself for the world ahead.

“None of us enjoyed watching the lecture that the president gave President Zelenskyy about how he had no cards,” Hodgson said in an interview with the Star. “I have no interest in ever being in that kind of conversation.”

But wanting leverage and having it are two different things. That distinction is at the core of Canada’s push with the Major Projects Office (MPO) and the Liberals’ recent aggressive spending strategy: while regulatory approvals are largely in place for many projects, securing financing is still a key challenge.

Many of the projects Prime Minister Mark Carney referred to the MPO were already nearing the end of their regulatory reviews. Some proponents have even said they don’t want the “national interest” designation that would guarantee a decision within two years. What these projects really need, they argue, isn’t faster approvals — it’s capital to start building.

The budget gave the Canada Infrastructure Bank another $10 billion in borrowing authority and allowed it to invest in any project referred to the MPO. Other Crown corporations — including the Canada Growth Fund and the Indigenous Loan Guarantee Corporation — were also granted new room to invest. Ottawa created a $2billion Critical Minerals Sovereign Fund as well.

Carney has so far referred 11 projects to the MPO and highlighted another six for further study. When the legislation establishing the office was fasttracked earlier this year, Carney stressed its potential to accelerate regulatory decisions.

“It’s time to build big, build bold and build now,” he said when the bill passed in June.

MPO CEO Dawn Farrell told MPs this week that only “one or two” of the projects on Carney’s referral list are likely candidates for the nationalinterest designation. The rest need capital.

“What we’re doing is ensuring that projects can be streamlined and can get to the finish line and can get built and get their financing,” Farrell said.

In practice, the MPO has been less a regulatory accelerator and more a facilitator, ensuring approved projects can actually be financed and built.

Nowhere is that need more urgent than in critical minerals, where Hodgson says Canada’s hand is weakest. China currently dominates supply chains for many of the minerals needed for electric vehicle batteries, advanced manufacturing and defence technologies. According to Hodgson’s department, China controls 77 per cent of global graphite production.

While the minister didn’t cite China by name, he said “nonmarket actors” are making it difficult for Canadian projects to advance.

“There are critical supply chains for advanced manufacturing, some of the technologies that decarbonize our economies, defence industries, where nonmarket actors have fundamentally cornered those supply chains and they’re using their ability to corner those supply chains for political and geopolitical means,” he said.

In late October, the government announced 27 deals combining federal financing tools with investments from G7 countries and major companies to secure critical mineral supplies. Canada is one of only a few countries outside China with significant reserves — and the only one in the G7.

“We have the opportunity to be a great ally, and secure supply chains for our allies. In the new world we live in where multilateralism is being replaced by mercantilism, in a world where might makes right, one needs cards,” Hodgson said. “We need to develop our cards. We have an incredible set of cards if we develop them.”

One of the first projects Ottawa is backing is the Nouveau Monde Graphite mine north of Montreal. Carney referred the mine to the MPO last week, but the company says it has already completed permitting and is nearly ready to build.

“At Christmas, we will have 50 per cent of all the contracts ready to give to contractors and start construction,” said Eric Desaulniers, the mine’s CEO and president. “But we need the project financing to be closed and that kind of seems easy, but it’s a lot of coordination to close like an $800million Canadian project financing.”

Desaulniers said his project has had discussions with the Canada Growth Fund, Export Development Canada and the Canada Infrastructure Bank about financing and the MPO is now able to help coordinate all those conversations and get the deals signed and delivered.

The federal government has also signed an offtake agreement to purchase 15,000 tonnes per year from the mine, alongside similar agreements from allied countries. Ottawa can stockpile the graphite or sell it, splitting profits with Nouveau Monde.

“It’s a very good instrument to make the project attractive for capital markets to give certainty on the sales price, so we can finance it, but also at the same time a good instrument for the taxpayer,” Desaulniers said.

North America’s only current graphite mine, also in Quebec, is expected to close within a decade. Desaulniers said bringing his mine online soon will keep customers anchored in Canada for future supply needs.

Mark Selby, CEO of Canada Nickel, had his Crawford Nickel Project referred to the MPO last week. The proposed mine near Timmins,

Ont., is still in the regulatory process; Selby said he doesn’t expect the MPO to significantly speed that up. But he said simply being referred provides credibility with investors.

“Most of the investors here are pretty focused on gold, silver and copper,” he said. “And so the rest of the periodic table doesn’t get attention — and that’s where most of these critical minerals are.”

Canada Nickel has received a small amount of government funding to help get electricity to the site, but the government is so far not a major investor in the mine itself. Selby said being referred to the MPO is an endorsement from that gives them credibility with private sector investors, as they look for the funding to get the project underway and he also hopes it will open up some government funding for the mine.

“Having this designation should put us in the express lane in terms of being able to be able to get this funding from what’s available,” he said.

Selby said to develop critical minerals and counter China’s current dominance, governments may have to offer support.

“I think over the next 12 months, you’re going to see Canada and other G7 countries and the United States provide more deals like that.”

Hodgson said the goal is to use public money to lure in private funds and to show “nonmarket actors” that they can’t corner the supply.

“If we make clear other competitors are coming — whether they lose money to do that or not — then maybe the nonmarket actors stop behaving in noneconomic ways.”

He said the government has to be in it for the longterm, because countering China is a longterm game.

“China has moved from being a pretty undeveloped, country with limited ambitions outside of China to a world power that wants to challenge U.S dominance of the world,” he said.

“If you tell me what that stops in and I’ll tell you when maybe we don’t have to focus on that anymore.”

Natural Resources Minister Tim Hodgson says the MPO's moves can strengthen Canada's hand and change the unhelpful behaviour of foreign “nonmarket actors.”

Nouveau Monde Graphite CEO Eric Desaulniers says the MPO can now help coordinate conversations about support from other arms of the government.

Agreement on pipeline weeks away: Smith

This article was written by Emma Graney and was published in the Globe & Mail on November 22, 2025.

Concrete plan doesn’t yet exist, but idea has drawn opposition from B.C.’s Premier

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is pushing back against British Columbia’s opposition to the prospect of an oil pipeline to the coast, saying that being part of “Team Canada” means co-operating on getting her province’s oil to market.

The Alberta and federal governments have been working to strike an energy accord, long sought by Ms. Smith to boost her province’s oil and natural-gas sector.

Part of that agreement may involve a new pipeline from Alberta to the north coast of B.C., The Globe and Mail first reported on Wednesday, which would also require an exemption to the federal government’s ban on oil-tanker traffic.

“If we’re going to get a deal, it will be in a matter of weeks,” Ms. Smith told reporters in Calgary Friday.

A concrete plan for such a pipeline does not yet exist; there is no route and no proponent. Yet the idea has drawn unequivocal opposition from B.C. Premier David Eby.

After Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said he was also involved in the AlbertacOttawa discussions, Mr. Eby said Thursday that Mr. Moe and Ms. Smith were jeopardizing major economic development by engaging in what he called “secret” talks on oil pipelines through his province.

While Ottawa has not publicly weighed in on the bubbling tensions between the provinces, Ms. Smith shot back Friday that there should be a Team Canada approach on pipelines.

“This is what Team Canada looks like: That when you’ve got provinces that don’t have access to a shoreline, we co-operate to make sure that we can get our product to market,” she said.

“A lot of people wrap themselves in the flag, talking about how much they support Canada and want to work together. And then, when it comes right down to it, not everybody lives up to that commitment.”

As for discontent from B.C. on the pipeline issue, Ms. Smith said “the ball is in Prime Minister Mark Carney’s court” to calm tensions.

“We all saw that there was also a lot of sabre-rattling in previous iterations of the British Columbia government. And in the end, the decision is the federal government’s to make based on their assessment of what’s in the national interest,” she said.

The Prime Minister’s Office said it had no comment on Ms. Smith’s remarks, nor the concerns being raised by B.C. that it is being left out of talks about a pipeline or partial lift of the tanker ban.

A source familiar with those discussions, however, said Mr. Moe is not involved in the Alberta-Ottawa negotiations. The Globe is not naming the source, who was not authorized to publicly discuss the status of the talks.

Earlier in the week, Mr. Moe said he was “at least part of that discussion over the last while” with the federal government and Alberta.

Both Alberta and Saskatchewan want to significantly boost oil production, and the pipeline sector sees that potential growth as a huge opportunity.

Enbridge Inc. recently announced that it will spend US$1.4-billion on pipeline networks to boost oil flows to U.S. refiners. And at South Bow Corp.’s first investor day on Wednesday, chief executive Bevin Wirzba said the company expects Western Canadian production to grow by one million barrels a day over the next 10 years.

Asked under what conditions South Bow would consider investing in a new oil pipeline to the West Coast, Mr. Wirzba said, “it really starts first with customers feeling confident that they actually have the barrels to commit to a project of that scope and scale.”

Such a project would also need strong alignment between governments, regulators and Indigenous communities, he said. “It’s not for the faint of heart.”

The B.C. government said this week that it is backing a proposal to increase the capacity of the Trans Mountain pipeline system by roughly 40 per cent, with results as early as 2026.

That’s a sharp reversal from a government that once fiercely opposed the initial Trans Mountain expansion, arguing when it was proposed that increased shipping traffic would put B.C.’s marine environment at risk.

The turnaround is part of B.C.’s effort to counter pressure from Alberta for an entirely new pipeline, but Ms. Smith said Friday that boosting capacity on the Trans Mountain system “is the beginning – not the end of it.”

“I want to see pipelines in all directions: north, east, south, west,” she said.

Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne declined to answer questions about why British Columbia has not been a party to federal-provincial talks about oil pipelines.

Asked repeatedly about the matter Friday, he said Ottawa has a “good relationship” with those provinces and intends to ensure that all the voices are listened to.

“I can’t speak really to the discussion that Premier Eby may have had or not. But what I can say is that people see Canada as an energy superpower, both in conventional and renewable energy,” Mr. Champagne told The Globe at an unrelated event in Winnipeg.

“You want the voice of the leaders in the nation, particularly the premiers, to be part of the discussion.”

Ontario lands $3.2B graphite factory

Plant will hire up to 1,000 to produce battery component

This article was written by Rob Ferguson and was published in the Toronto Star on November 21, 2025.

Ontario’s electric vehicle industry is getting a boost with a $3.2 billion feeder factory, but the new jobs won’t make up for thousands lost recently at auto assembly plants in Brampton and the London area.

Norwegian company Vianode said Thursday it will make synthetic graphite — a key component of lithium ion batteries — in St. Thomas, near the site of a massive EV battery plant under construction by Volkswagen subsidiary PowerCo.

Vianode will get a $670 million loan from Ontario taxpayers for the project, expected to create 300 jobs when production begins and 1,000 when full capacity is reached, supplying customers in North America and Europe while challenging China’s 80 per cent dominance of the industry.

“We’re going to keep doing everything in our power to support our workers, attract new investment,” Premier Doug Ford said at the announcement in an empty field, calling it “the best birthday present” as he turned 61.

His government also proposed legislation Thursday that would require provincial and municipal governments and public sector organizations such as transit agencies to “Buy Ontario,” prioritizing the purchase of materials and supplies made here over goods made elsewhere in Canada or abroad to counter the damage from U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade war.

The new plant — which will also supply the nuclear, steel, semiconductor and defence industries — comes weeks after autoworkers got bad news when General Motors scrapped production of its poorselling BrightDrop electric delivery vehicle in nearby Ingersoll and Stellantis moved pending production of the Jeep Compass to Illinois from Brampton.

Neither plant has a product to build and more than 4,100 workers are worried about their futures.

“We’re looking at different options, we’re working with the company itself to see if we can get another line in there, and we’re working with the federal government,” Ford said of the Ingersoll factory.

At Queen’s Park, opposition parties said the Progressive Conservative government needs to do more to buoy the auto industry, which has seen Canadian production drop by half since the turn of the century.

“We are falling farther and farther behind,” Liberal MPP John Fraser (Ottawa South) told reporters.

“It’s great when we get something, but we’re going to lose more jobs.”

Across the economy, more than 400 companies invested $40 billion in Ontario last year to create 24,000 jobs in part because they see the province as a safe haven in a “tumultuous world,” Economic Development Minister Vic Fedeli said in St. Thomas.

“Canada itself has a stable, predictable political system and situation, so that’s very important for companies investing a lot of money,” Vianode chief executive Burkhard Straube added at the factory announcement.

The plant will provide enough synthetic graphite to supply three million electric vehicles a year, he said.

With sales growth of EVs in Canada lower than forecast a few years ago, Green Leader Mike Schreiner urged the premier to do more to stimulate the industry, such as bringing back rebates for purchases of electric vehicles which are often more expensive than automobiles that run on gasoline.

Ford has said his government prefers to use public money to provide direct supports to the EV industry.

Japan eager for more energy, critical minerals from Canada, minister says

This article was written by Steven Chase and was published in the Globe & Mail on November 13, 2025.

Asian country says it is eager to tap back its reliance on Russian LNG, is looking to buy resources from what Carney calls an ‘energy superpower’

Japan is eager to buy more Canadian liquefied natural gas as it works to reduce its dependence on Russian imports, a senior official with its Foreign Ministry says.

Toshihiro Kitamura, director-general for press and public diplomacy at Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said energy security is one of the top priorities in relations with Canada.

He noted that Prime Minister Mark Carney is now marketing the country as an “energy superpower.”

He said Japan is also interested in buying more critical minerals from Canada including lithium and graphite, both key ingredients for electric-vehicle battery production.

Mr. Kitamura said Japan is trying to reduce its reliance on Russia for liquefied natural gas because of sanctions on petroleum sold by Moscow. The spokesman himself was slapped with an entry ban by Russia this month as the Kremlin expanded retaliation against Japan for its enforcement of sanctions on Russian products.

He said Japan has cut its oil imports from Russia to zero and reduced its coal purchases by 90 per cent. Japan still imports energy from Russia’s Sakhalin Island, however.

Japan’s Mitsubishi Corp is a 15-per-cent joint-venture partner in the LNG Canada project that began shipping liquefied natural gas to Asia in June. Mr. Kitamura said the Japanese company is ready to engage in discussions as plans for the Phase 2 expansion develop.

Canada is also one of the biggest foreign sources of propane for Japan, a fuel used for cooking, heating and industry. Since 2020, Canada has become the second-largest supplier of propane to Japan and South Korea, after the United States, according to the Canada Energy Regulator, an agency of the federal Department of Natural Resources.

Mr. Kitamura, speaking to journalists at the Group of Seven foreign ministers’ meeting in Niagara-on-the-Lake Wednesday, said the country is also interested in Canada’s efforts to build a commercial, or revenue-generating, small modular nuclear reactor. Japan’s Hitachi is playing a major role in this project.

During a trip to Asia last month, Mr. Carney pitched Canada as a reliable trading partner with ample natural gas and critical minerals at a meeting of Asian leaders, as part of his bid to shift trade away from the increasingly protectionist and unpredictable United States.

He told Asian leaders at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit in Malaysia that Canada is working to expedite the export of its natural resources, putting an emphasis particularly on the energy sector.

“We’re an energy superpower – an unabashed energy superpower,” Mr. Carney said in October.

“We have the third-largest reserves of oil. We have the fourth-largest reserves of LNG,” he said, referring to liquefied natural gas. “We’ve just started our first LNG shipments.”

U.S. plan­ning to take over Venezuela’s reserves

Major Projects Office less about red tape than coax­ing cap­ital

Plant will hire up to 1,000 to pro­duce bat­tery com­pon­ent

U.S. planning to take over Venezuela’s reserves

Major Projects Office less about red tape than coaxing capital

Plant will hire up to 1,000 to produce battery component