The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Summary

• The Canada Water Agency will cut about 13 jobs to absorb a $5-million budget cut, as Prime Minister Mark Carney seeks to reduce government spending.
• The agency leads ecosystem restoration and protection work in major freshwater ecosystems, such as the Great Lakes, Lake Winnipeg and the Mackenzie River.
• A spokesperson said the agency “remains fully committed to delivering on its mandate to improve freshwater management in Canada.”

Internal government emails show staff at the Canada Water Agency trying to make sense of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s budget cuts in response to questions from the media.

The Canada Water Agency launched in October 2024 to help protect Canada’s fresh water, including leading restoration work to clean up the Great Lakes, Lake Winnipeg and other important sources of drinking water. Canada is home to 20 per cent of the world’s fresh water, which is being threatened by climate-driven floods, droughts and algal blooms, as well as industrial contamination and other groundwater stressors.

Carney’s first federal budget proposed $3.8 million in lower spending by 2029-30 at the agency, and a further $1.2 million categorized as a separate “ongoing,” or permanent spending reduction, for a total of $5 million in cuts. They were part of Carney’s $60 billion in proposed cuts — split into $48 billion in spending reductions through 2029-30, and a further $12 billion in “ongoing” cuts with no given end date.

---

The Narwhal reported on the budget in November, summarizing the government’s proposal as cutting $5 million in total spending at the agency over a number of years. After that story was published, the agency emailed The Narwhal with a request for a “small correction,” asking that figure be changed to $3.8 million.

When The Narwhal asked the agency why it shouldn’t include the $1.2 million in ongoing spending cuts in the figure — which would make it $5 million — internal emails released under Access to Information law show staff reached out to Finance Canada, sharing a screenshot of the budget’s spending review page for the agency with the proposed “ongoing” cut circled in red. 

“Hello Finance Department colleagues, we are fact-checking an article in The Narwhal that mentions the [agency]’s budget cuts, and just want to make sure we are understanding the budget chart correctly,” the agency wrote. 

The water agency asked the Finance Department whether the $5-million figure, which it had already asked The Narwhal for a correction on, was in fact, correct.

After the Finance Department said it would look into the matter, the water agency asked for guidance on how to explain the permanent portion of the spending reductions to journalists.

“Do you have messaging you can share around communicating the ‘ongoing’ to the media?” the staff member asked.

The next day, an official at Finance Canada said the story did not need a correction after all.

Canada Water Agency to cut 13 jobs, but continue restoration and protection of fresh water

Last month, a Canada Water Agency planning document showed how it expected to absorb the first three fiscal years’ worth of cuts, amounting to $2.6 million by 2028-29. One result was the loss of roughly 13 jobs, or what’s known as full-time equivalent positions, from a workforce of 223.

It said it was also planning on “modernizing government operations” and “leveraging new technology” as well as making administrative and support functions more efficient.

At the same time, the agency plans to keep conducting water quality and ecosystem restoration, including in the Great Lakes, it said.

The federal budget says cuts are necessary to “rein in government spending” from pandemic highs. Carney has gone on to trumpet other multibillion-dollar investments in areas like the military, technology and infrastructure that could in turn pose new environmental challenges for water.

Last week, the Canada Water Agency took on a new task when the Carney government promised $3.8 billion to “protect nature” as part of a new environmental strategy. The agency will be working on the country’s first National Water Security Strategy meant to reflect Indigenous knowledge systems including water stewardship.

The Narwhal emailed the Canada Water Agency asking how its spending cuts will affect freshwater stewardship and restoration work.

A spokesperson said the government’s budget cuts would not impact the agency’s “planned activities, staffing and funding commitments for restoration and protection” of its eight freshwater ecosystem initiatives through Canada’s Freshwater Action Plan, a “signature” federal program.

The program includes the Great Lakes, lakes like Simcoe and Winnipeg and rivers like the St. Lawrence in Ontario and Quebec, and the Mackenzie in the Northwest Territories. Former prime minister Justin Trudeau’s 2023 federal budget allocated $650 million over 10 years to these freshwater initiatives.

---

“Like all federal organizations, the Canada Water Agency is contributing to the government’s plan to reduce spending, eliminate duplicative programs and focus resources on core priorities,” the spokesperson wrote.

“The agency remains fully committed to delivering on its mandate to improve freshwater management in Canada by providing leadership, effective collaboration federally and improved coordination and collaboration with provinces, territories and Indigenous Peoples to proactively address national and regional transboundary freshwater challenges and opportunities.”

The agency also told The Narwhal the reduction in jobs would be staggered, with four next fiscal year, followed by another four the year after and five more after that.

Asked how the agency was planning for the budget’s proposed $1.2 million in permanent cuts, the spokesperson reiterated the budget review was meant to ensure government spending was sustainable and funding cost-effective programs and activities.

Federal funds support water conservation in Ontario and the Great Lakes

The spending reductions come at a time when the Ontario government is amalgamating its watershed protection agencies, called conservation authorities, from 36 to nine, as well as moving to give itself the power to dictate more rules around drinking water. 

Federal funding has been important for conservation authorities because Ontario has not been investing as much in community science and ecosystem restoration, Catherine Febria, the Canada Research Chair in freshwater restoration ecology, said. 

An associate professor at the University of Windsor’s Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research, Febria said that the federal “scale of investment is something that the province was never able to do.”

“That was really exciting, it was like a leapfrog in progress with this single initiative, and a number of large-scale projects were invested in [over] the first two years,” she said, naming the freshwater ecosystem initiatives in places like the Great Lakes as one example.

The federal government and Ontario have been working together “for over 50 years” through a series of agreements on protecting and conserving the Great Lakes, the spokesperson for the Canada Water Agency said. 

As one example, the Canada-Ontario Agreement on Great Lakes Water Quality and Ecosystem Health lays out how the two will coordinate protection efforts.

“This partnership has led to remarkable improvements, including dramatic reductions in harmful pollutants, and the return of pollution-sensitive species such as bald eagles,” the spokesperson wrote.

Ontario’s Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks did not respond to questions from The Narwhal about how much provincial funding was going towards efforts to restore freshwater ecosystems, and to what extent the ministry was working with the federal water agency.

Febria said given the federal water agency is still relatively new, it’s still not clear what its full mandate will be, not to mention if or how the proposed cuts will impact its work or what exactly may be lost.

She said another Carney initiative, directing $1.7 billion toward a series of scientific initiatives, including research awards attracting high-level talent from abroad, holds promise. Some of the research awards will focus on water security, environment and climate resilience. 

Still, it’s a “tricky balance,” she added, between investing in research and also carrying out on-the-ground work to improve local areas.

“I think we need both,” she said. “When the pendulum swings towards a whole bunch of researchers, that’s great, but at the end of the day, we still need people and organizations and communities on the ground.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Summary

• A working group of First Nations and the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada released an interim report on the cumulative impacts of development in the Ring of Fire.
• Among the participants and collaborators in that report, the Government of Ontario was glaringly absent. The report says the province hasn’t shared valuable data on caribou, polar bears and other regional species that are needed to complete the assessment.
• Ontario NDP MPP Sol Mamakwa said, “By not providing any information or any data to the process, they are essentially muzzling the process itself.”

We’re trying out staff-written summaries. Did you find this useful? YesNo

Ontario has not been involved in the federal government’s regional assessment of the Ring of Fire, withholding scientific data and funding needed to understand the impact of mining development, even as the province ushers it through. 

The province is absent in the regional assessment working group’s interim report, released Feb. 23. In multiple instances, the group, made up of representatives from 15 First Nations and the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, makes clear Ontario has yet to sign on. 

There is still an “opportunity for collaboration with the province of Ontario in the regional assessment,” the group wrote in the report. The group said it’s preparing what “specific information” it will need to request from the province.

Ontario’s absence is notable as the Doug Ford government continues to push through development in the Ring of Fire, an environmentally sensitive area of boreal forest and peatlands in the James Bay Lowlands, known as Bakitanaamowin Aki, which means “the Breathing Lands,” and Mammamattawa, or “many rivers coming together,” by the First Nations that call it home.

“If they really, really cared about [the assessment], they would work with the federal government,” Ontario NDP MPP Sol Mamakwa, who represents the Ring of Fire region, told The Narwhal. “By not providing any information or any data to the process, they are essentially muzzling the process itself.”

A spokesperson for the federal Impact Assessment Agency confirmed to The Narwhal that the working group understands “several areas it must assess are within provincial expertise.” It will “request information from Ontario as needed” in addition to consulting publicly available data, the spokesperson added.

The Ontario government is hoping the region will be the centre of new mining activity. During a press conference with Prime Minister Mark Carney in December, Premier Ford said Ontario is on track to get “shovels in the ground this June” to build a road to the remote region.

But the regional assessment has also been in the works for at least seven years. Aroland First Nation and environmental groups asked for a federal regional assessment in 2019.

The Ontario government has signed deals with three First Nations along the proposed roads to the Ring of Fire, even as other local communities urge the government to pause and properly address environmental protections and long-standing issues on the ground, such as boil-water advisories, health care and housing.

The interim regional assessment report reiterates some of these concerns, recommending the existing conditions for First Nations in northern Ontario be “thoroughly examined” and for “immediate interventions” to be made, even as mining and development are greenlit. 

“There are a lot of things happening in these First Nations and their territories that both Canada and Ontario need to address,” Mamakwa said. 

“Before the conversation turns to mining, conditions need to be properly assessed and improved.” 

---

The working group’s plan, updated in November, shows it has already built an information sharing platform, held technical sessions, developed community-led studies and begun to evaluate cumulative impacts of development in the Ring of Fire.

It’s now seeing through evaluations and studies and continuing to engage with communities to eventually compile a final report, which the group expects to land around June 2027. 

Whether or not Ontario will come to the table for the next phase is not yet clear.

“I think [the Ford government] is not happy with the federal assessment,” Mamakwa said. “The process itself, I think, they don’t want to be part of. And they just want to do their own thing.”

Ontario’s participation was ‘TBD’ — now it’s non-existent

Last January, when the working group finalized its terms of reference, it described an “outer ring” of contributors, such as experts and industry representatives and listed Ontario as one of these — but with “TBD,” or to be determined, attached to its name. 

The latest report suggests Ontario is not participating despite having a trove of scientific information readily available about the region. 

While 22 federal departments and agencies show up on a list of respondents to the working group’s public call for information and data, no provincial ministries are listed.

Even Wyloo Metals, the company behind the Eagle’s Nest mine, currently in the exploration phase in the Ring of Fire, contributed to technical sessions of the regional assessment, according to the report.

All of this is raising questions about whether the Ford government is preventing Ontario public servants from participating in the regional assessment. 

Without Ontario at the table for the regional assessment, “staff obviously won’t be given the mandate to participate,” Kerrie Blaise, the founder of the non-profit Legal Advocates for Nature’s Defence, told The Narwhal. 

“One hundred per cent, there would be staffers who would have knowledge and things to contribute. Without the direction to do so, they’re barred from doing so.”

---

In an interview at Queen’s Park on March 23, The Narwhal asked Ontario Environment Minister Todd McCarthy about the province’s lack of involvement in the regional assessment. He said he’d look into the matter.

McCarthy also told The Narwhal the province is “co-operating” with the federal government, citing a Dec. 18 agreement between the two levels to streamline the environmental assessment process. 

In that agreement, Ontario promised to lead any assessments for projects that are subject to both federal and provincial jurisdiction. But this deal covers single projects, whereas the Ring of Fire regional assessment isn’t examining a project, instead looking at cumulative effects of development in the region.

McCarthy said Ontario’s absence from the interim regional assessment report was “an exception.” 

“I suspect that Ontario is part of that conversation, and will be part of the conversation and will continue to co-operate and lead in terms of sharing data … to get all of it done,” he said.

“If the sense is that we’re not there at the moment, as I speak to you, we’re going to be there as we are all the time in terms of co-operating and leading.” 

The Narwhal sent specific questions to Ontario’s Ministry of Natural Resources, as well as the premier’s office, the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks and the Ministry of Indigenous Affairs and First Nations Economic Reconciliation, about the government’s direction to public servants and financial willingness to support First Nation participation in the federal assessment. None responded to those emails by publication time.

Ontario is withholding scientific data on the Ring of Fire from the regional assessment

Within its interim report, the assessment group wrote that “several priorities for the regional assessment would benefit from provincial expertise.”

There are hints of what kind of expertise the group is hoping to get, in a submission by Environment and Climate Change Canada filed in January in response to one of the group’s requests for information.

In a question about Indigenous consent for non-Indigenous uses of land, the Environment Department pointed out that most traditional territories in Ontario are on non-federal lands, and the province is responsible for hunting and fishing regulations there.

The department also pointed out how the province has been monitoring boreal caribou and undertaking research to fill gaps in knowledge about the animal, and that the province holds valuable data such as aerial surveys on polar bears in the southern Hudson Bay subpopulation. 

Ontario also hosts the Natural Heritage Information Centre, which has historical data and continues to track biodiversity in the Ring of Fire region, the federal Environment Department noted, and directed questions about the centre to the provincial government.

“There are certain things the federal government cannot touch,” Blaise said. “So even if there’s a comment deadline, and people bring up concerns, if it’s not all within federal jurisdiction, you’re not going to have those players at the table to actually respond to those information gaps and requests.”

---

Without Ontario’s participation, the working group will be forced to go to the province to request information. That could result in more delays and extra costs, Blaise said.

When the Government of Alberta successfully challenged the constitutionality of the Impact Assessment Act at the Supreme Court of Canada, the judges emphasized in the 2023 ruling that “respect for the division of powers” between the federal and provincial governments helps put in place strong environmental protection laws and “facilitates co-operation between the two levels of government.”

Here, “we’re not getting that co-operation,” Blaise said. “So it means you’re inherently getting a narrower process, a process that doesn’t actually have all the requisite knowledge and expertise and government officials at the table.” 

Blaise also said Ontario’s lack of participation could translate to a lack of provincial support for whatever the working group ends up recommending.

First Nations need more funding to participate in the regional assessment from ‘other parties.’ Ontario did not respond to the call

The interim report highlights how many First Nations in the Ring of Fire area lack basic necessities, like clean water, health care, housing, education and electricity. First Nations can’t be “true partners in equitable decision-making processes” like the regional assessment, the group wrote, without these “necessities of life.” 

The report recommended that the existing conditions of First Nations in northern Ontario be “thoroughly examined” and that “immediate interventions” be made.

Community members also have to “constantly balance their roles,” the report stated, with responding to emergencies, dealing with other federal and provincial negotiations, staying involved in legal actions, responding to regulatory processes like permit applications and answering outside requests from industry.

All of this points to a need for more funding to help “address the participation gaps within the regional assessment process,” the group wrote.

While First Nations have worked with the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada on a funding strategy, and receive “base funding” to support their participation, the group said the amounts involved are “often largely insufficient.”

The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada’s departmental plan for 2026-27 shows it’s planning for $34,206,000 in cumulative spending cuts through 2029, but it’s unclear whether or how those cuts will impact its work on the Ring of Fire regional assessment.

The working group noted the effort involved in trying to apply to other federal funding programs, or nailing down private funds, is “prohibitive.” The group recommended that the federal government “and other parties” help the First Nations get enough funding so that they’re not burdened with trying to find the money themselves. 

“The provincial government cannot claim to move the Ring of Fire forward ethically or equitably while withholding information or funding for this process,” Mamakwa said.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Summary

• Canada is looking for buyers of its fossil fuels, from bitumen to LNG, amid a global energy glut.
• The European Union has an objective of becoming the “world’s first climate-neutral continent” by 2050 and gets 70 per cent of its electricity from renewable energy or nuclear power.
• The federal government has gone back and forth over the years on whether to build export terminals on Canada’s East Coast to carry fossil fuels to Europe.

We’re trying out staff-written summaries. Did you find this useful? YesNo

Europe will give priority to clean energy sources and expects to continue to rely heavily on renewables and nuclear power, says a high-level European Union diplomat.

Belén Martínez Carbonell, secretary-general of the European External Action Service, the European Union’s diplomatic corps, made the remarks at a Feb. 27 press conference in response to a question from The Narwhal about whether Europe wants Canada’s oil and gas. She was in Ottawa as part of a visit to discuss a number of urgent foreign policy and defence priorities with senior Canadian government officials.

Her comments come as the world faces a global energy glut in fossil fuels, leading to questions — and challenges — for Canadian suppliers, including in oil-rich Alberta. The province just last week unveiled a budget showing depressed oil prices had led to a $7.5-billion decrease in royalties from the oilsands. But U.S. strikes on Iran in recent days, and retaliatory strikes throughout the region, have already impacted the global oil market and could send prices soaring.

---

Globally, the signals are mixed when it comes to prospects for Canadian fossil fuels. Canada’s trade relationship with the U.S., its biggest trade partner, has been fraught with uncertainty since the election of President Donald Trump. That uncertainty has led to increased interest in Canadian energy from China. The Indian government has also signalled it is eager to import Canadian oil and gas products, according to remarks by the Indian high commissioner, made as Prime Minister Mark Carney embarks on a visit to that country.

Meanwhile, Europe began importing higher volumes of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the United States following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. At the time, Europe moved to shut down Russian gas imports and phase out Russian oil. But relying on fossil fuels like methane-heavy LNG complicates the European Union’s objective of becoming the “world’s first climate-neutral continent” by 2050. That means Europe isn’t exactly rushing to buy Canadian oil and gas.

“Generally speaking, our policy is to give priority to clean energy sources, because we are on target to comply with our 2050 targets,” Martínez Carbonell said.

“More than 70 per cent of our electricity comes from clean renewables or nuclear, particularly small nuclear reactors. That’s the way forward. Simple.”

Talks ongoing on whether Canada’s carbon pricing can help avoid European tariffs on steel and more

This January, Europe enacted its Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, which implements a tariff on imports of carbon-intensive goods like steel and cement.

The mechanism raises the question of whether Canada’s own carbon pricing regime — which Carney has tinkered with, by first killing the consumer-facing carbon tax and then signing a deal with Alberta to allow more flexibility with its own — will be strong enough to keep up robust trade with Europe. 

European diplomats say the two jurisdictions are holding many conversations on the topic, including between Carney and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, on how Europe can take Canada’s carbon pricing into account.

“This is, I would say, a question that comes up again and again, and there are some discussions to take that into consideration, to adjust the price,” said European Union Ambassador to Canada Geneviève Tuts, sitting beside Martínez Carbonell.

“We will not abandon the [tariffs] — but the price might be adjusted depending on what is done already in the country.”

Canada’s evolving energy relationship with Europe

The European Union and Canada are part of a “High-Level Energy Dialogue,” collaborating on things like developing a hydrogen supply chain, tackling methane emissions and developing nuclear power. 

But the question of where Canada’s fossil fuels fit into the relationship has at times been a tricky one to answer.

Will anyone want Canada’s oil and gas? Energy regulator delays forecast due to shifting policies

Thirteen years ago, for example, the government under former prime minister Steven Harper was ultimately successful in opposing a push from Europe to discourage sales of fuel made from oilsands bitumen.

Crude oil from the oilsands is heavy and thick with sulphur. It requires extra steps in the upgrading and refining process compared to some other crudes to turn it into petroleum products like gasoline, which led some environmental organizations at the time to label it “dirty oil.”

More recently, oil and gas lobbyists in Canada argued after the Russian invasion of Ukraine that providing more fossil fuels to Europe would help support allies and displace foreign and hostile energy sources.

Months later, then-prime minister Justin Trudeau poured cold water on the idea during a meeting with his German counterpart in Montreal, when he said “there has never been a strong business case” to build LNG export terminals on Canada’s East Coast to ship more gas to Europe.

Under Carney, the message has changed again. On a trip to Berlin last year, Natural Resources Minister Tim Hodgson said Germany does, in fact, want to buy Canada’s LNG. Canada announced in August it would “begin discussions regarding the supply of LNG to German buyers.”

Hodgson has also said Canada wants to diversify its gas sales away from the United States, and the European Union’s energy commissioner has been open to that idea.

Europe’s reliance on fossil fuels for electricity is already dropping and that’s the ‘way to go’: secretary-general

Martínez Carbonell noted Europe’s decoupling from Russia has meant a change in the energy mix from many countries, including the U.S. 

But she said the moving toward non-emitting electricity generation is “the way to go … continuing relying on renewables, diversifying energy imports when it comes to LNG, while bringing down to zero the energy exposure to Russia.”

At the same time, it’s unclear what kind of long-term demand Europe will have for oil and gas. Currently, the global explosion of LNG terminals is leading to a worldwide glut of natural gas.

Meanwhile, European Union statistics show electricity generated from fossil fuels decreased by 7.2 per cent in 2024 compared with the previous year and oil and petroleum products saw a 1.2 per cent drop in supply.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Summary

• Despite the Government of Canada’s requirement for provinces and territories to phase out coal-fired power generation by 2030, Saskatchewan is refurbishing its coal plants.
• Federal Environment Minister Julie Dabrusin has the power to intervene and stop Saskatchewan’s pursuit of coal, but her office would not confirm if she’ll do that.
• Many have argued there are cleaner and more economical options than emissions-heavy coal for generating electricity.

We’re trying out staff-written summaries. Did you find this useful? YesNo

Federal Environment Minister Julie Dabrusin will work with Saskatchewan to “ensure” it follows the law, her office reiterated, as the province pushes to keep its coal plants open past Canada’s deadline. But when asked if she would intervene to stop the province’s continued reliance on coal-fired electricity, Dabrusin’s office was mum.

Saskatchewan’s decision to extend the life of its coal plants has put it on a collision course with federal rules to phase them out nationwide by Dec. 31, 2029. The province said last year it will spend $900 million refurbishing its coal plants for “years to come.” As of Feb. 26, the provincial Crown corporation SaskPower reported it was relying on 76 per cent fossil fuels for its electricity supply — 28 per cent coal and 48 per cent natural gas.

Canada wants to phase out coal plants, which burn thermal coal to generate electricity, because they’re the highest-emitting sources of carbon pollution and air pollutants in the country. Not only do they emit carbon dioxide, which is driving climate change, they can also emit nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and mercury, which are all on Canada’s toxic substances list and have been linked with respiratory diseases, cardiovascular diseases and acid rain. Ontario’s decision to decommission coal plants followed findings that this pollution was costing the province’s health care system $1 billion per year.

Sick of smog, this Canadian province killed coal. A decade later, it weighs its next big energy move

But Saskatchewan Crown Investments Corporation Minister Jeremy Harrison has said the province will “not comply” with federal Clean Electricity Regulations, which were finalized in December 2024 and put limits on emissions from fossil fuel electricity generation starting in 2035. Harrison has said they would create a financial burden on the province and lead to job losses. 

Both the regulations to phase out coal power and to limit power plant emissions are part of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, which regulates toxic substances and was upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court of Canada. Dabrusin, as the minister responsible for the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, has the power to intervene when a party is about to violate the law or its regulations.

---

She can seek an injunction, for example, to prevent a violation, and if a government agency is ignoring an injunction, she can seek a court order to comply or a contempt of court ruling, among other options.

The Narwhal asked the minister’s office on Feb. 20 if she plans on using the powers of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act to intervene and ensure either or both of the two regulations are followed.

Dabrusin’s press secretary Keean Nembhard pointed to a statement from the minister posted on the social network X six months earlier, which said phasing out coal was essential for cutting emissions, protecting clean air, supporting public health and meeting climate commitments. 

The post reiterated that federal regulations “require the phaseout of all unabated coal-fired power plants by December 31, 2029.” Unabated means emissions that are released into the atmosphere without any technology like carbon capture.

“We will continue to work with provinces and territories to ensure that all legal requirements and climate commitments are met, while supporting a reliable and affordable transition to clean energy,” the minister stated.

Nembhard also sent a statement to The Narwhal featuring the same quotes.

---

The federal and Saskatchewan governments signed a deal in 2024 that lets the province temporarily avoid the coal phase-out rules, but it expires at the end of this year.

It says Saskatchewan agreed to have a generating capacity made up of at least 30 per cent non-emitting electricity sources by the end of 2024, 34 per cent by 2027 and 40 per cent by 2030. According to SaskPower figures from June 2025, it appears to have met the 2027 target for total capacity, but how much those different sources contribute to the grid fluctuates regularly.

Saskatchewan Environmental Society will be ‘encouraging’ Dabrusin to intervene

Canada and the United Kingdom co-launched the Powering Past Coal Alliance in 2017 with the goal of phasing out coal power worldwide. At the United Nations climate summit in November 2025, Dabrusin said the “coal-to-clean transition is inevitable.”

In January, a Saskatchewan court dismissed a citizen-led legal challenge against the coal-power extension plan, saying it was a matter of government policy.

The applicants — Citizens for Public Justice, the Saskatchewan Environmental Society and three individuals — have filed a notice of appeal. They say the province’s decision, which could see its coal plants still active into the 2040s, violates federal law and was made without sufficient public consultation. 

“We’re going to be encouraging the federal minister to consider getting involved in objecting to the Government of Saskatchewan’s decision to keep its coal-fired power plants running,” Peter Prebble, a member of the board of directors of the Saskatchewan Environmental Society, said in an interview.

“It would be helpful if the federal minister actually intervened and said to Saskatchewan, ‘You can’t do this,’ because she does have that authority.”

Saskatchewan law claims province has ‘autonomy’ over carbon pollution controls

The Saskatchewan legislature passed the Saskatchewan First Act in 2023, which claims the province has “autonomy” over several areas including electricity generation, and any conditions affecting it, such as environmental standards and the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. 

The province established a tribunal under that law to examine the federal clean electricity rules. That tribunal produced a report claiming the rules would be a massive financial burden. 

Saskatchewan’s Harrison then used the tribunal’s findings to claim the federal rules were “unconstitutional,” “unaffordable” and “unachievable” and to declare that the province “will not comply with them.”

---

In 2025, he wrote a letter to SaskPower saying the Government of Saskatchewan had made the decision to extend the life of its coal power plants as a “bridge” to building a new fleet of nuclear power plants. 

“The certainty and security of coal means that it will continue as a pillar of our electrical generation system as we bridge to a nuclear future powered by Saskatchewan uranium,” Harrison wrote in the letter.

That nuclear future will not come until the mid-2030s, and perhaps later. The Crown corporation is planning for a small modular reactor to be built around that time. It also announced in January it was just beginning another process to evaluate large nuclear plants, which take longer to build.

Small modular reactors, big dreams: Ontario’s nuclear pitch

The Narwhal reached out to Harrison’s office and SaskPower but did not receive a response by publication time.

The many alternatives to continuing to rely on coal

Prebble argued there are better and cheaper alternatives to extending the life of coal power. The province could upgrade its grid connections with Manitoba to import more hydropower, generated from dams on the province’s rivers, he said, or invest in electricity efficiency and conservation. He also advocates for boosting renewable capacity in Saskatchewan.

A dizzying bird’s-eye view of Manitoba’s hydro-electricity dams

“We’ve got the best solar resource in the country, and we’re barely using it. Less than one per cent of our electricity is coming from solar,” he said. 

“We’ve got an incredible wind resource. Energy storage technologies are improving. There’s lots of potential for co-generation of electricity,” he added. “There were lots of other options.”

The Canada Energy Regulator estimates southern Saskatchewan has some of the highest solar photovoltaic potential in Canada as well as some of the highest wind energy potential.

Prebble also noted the United Nations has asked developed countries to phase out coal power by 2030 and developing countries to follow suit in 2040.

“It’s pretty incredible that a wealthy jurisdiction like Saskatchewan would say that it’s going to keep running its plants, knowing all the dangerous consequences that are associated with climate change,” he said.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Mushkegowuk Council is hoping new recommendations to “immediately” enact environmental monitoring in the Ring of Fire will see the light of day — even though construction on access roads is planned to begin in four months.

Lawrence Martin, the council’s director of lands and resources and a former Grand Chief, spoke to The Narwhal about a federal document released in January, part of a regional assessment of the consequences of industrial activity in the Ring of Fire. Mushkegowuk Council supported the creation of the document, which was co-written by 15 First Nations and a federal agency, and also included recommendations to help communities “urgently” access health care.

The Ontario government is hoping the environmentally sensitive Ring of Fire region that overlaps Indigenous ancestral homeland can be the centre of a burst of new mining activity. Ontario Premier Doug Ford has already said the province is on track to get “shovels in the ground this June.”

“Hopefully these regional assessment recommendations will actually happen,” Martin said. “I think it’s one of those situations where the train has already left the platform. … The project’s already started and these regional assessments, whatever they may be at this point, may not carry much weight.”

The portion of the assessment released was an executive summary, recommending that community-driven environmental monitoring should begin “before any development occurs.” It also highlights serious funding and capacity gaps in health care in the Far North, particularly mental health, and said this should be addressed “urgently, before any additional development can be considered.”

Ford has claimed that developing the region would create jobs and boost the economy, which he’s portrayed as a necessary counterweight to United States tariffs. According to the province, construction is set to begin on what will eventually be three new access roads to the Ring of Fire. 

The roads were proposed by two Indigenous communities, Marten Falls First Nation and Webequie First Nation, which are also members of the group behind the report. The remote communities want to secure all-season access to Ontario’s highway network to drive down their cost of living. The roads will serve a dual purpose, as they will also provide a pathway for Ring of Fire mining development. 

---

Martin told The Narwhal that Mushkegowuk communities want to see the all-season roads too, and he understands their potential to be environmentally disruptive, but he said the First Nations involved have assured the council they’re also concerned about the environment and are taking the issue seriously.

“We have to trust that our own people are very concerned, and they’ll do their best to protect these waters that flow down to our James Bay communities, and will protect the animals that live in those areas that migrate through there,” he said. “So, it’s a game of trust.”

Ford has already signed agreements with both First Nations to speed up the road building and provide them money to build community infrastructure, Martin noted. 

The provincial government has also passed laws meant to speed up development, and signed a deal with Ottawa handing the province more control over the environmental assessment process. Prime Minister Mark Carney has said mining critical minerals is also a federal priority to grow Canada’s clean technology and defence industries.

It’s unclear what kind of efforts are being made to get environmental monitoring in place before June. Greg Rickford, the provincial minister responsible for Ring of Fire partnerships, did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

Federal Environment Minister Julie Dabrusin’s press secretary Keean Nembhard said Ottawa recognizes the need for meaningful participation with Indigenous Peoples throughout the full Impact Assessment Act process “to promote responsible and inclusive resource development.”

The report, he wrote in emailed comments, represents “strong progress toward developing final recommendations that will ultimately promote responsible resource development in the region, which has First Nations consent and active participation.”

‘Too little’ known about Ring of Fire’s environmental conditions: report

The regional assessment will examine what kind of big-picture, long-term impacts might occur if several mines, roads and other projects in the Ring of Fire are built. These cumulative effects could be related to the environment, health, culture, social or economic conditions or Indigenous Rights. 

Ford has claimed the Ring of Fire area contains a “vast” reserve of critical minerals such as chromite and nickel that are needed for solar panels, batteries and weapons among other things.

But January’s report said too little was known about past and present environmental conditions in the Ring of Fire. It said “previous and ongoing” programs were “sparse, short-term and underfunded” and based on Western science, not Indigenous Knowledge, and that scientific data must be paired with expertise from Elders and others.

Access to health care and social services are also “profoundly inadequate,” the working group found. It wrote that “travel to obtain health care is a major barrier to well-being,” and First Nations need Elder-guided ceremonies and cultural practices to heal.

“We’re all suffering from the same symptoms of colonization and the same symptoms of being an isolated community with all of those conditions within,” Martin said.

The group itself has faced difficulty being able to move forward on its study, it noted, due to emergency conditions faced by several First Nations in northern Ontario including evacuations due to wildfire and a lack of clean drinking water.

---

The document warned “the bulk of the work lies ahead.” It said while discussions over the last year involved all First Nations at “key times,” not all of them were able to contribute equally because some were facing serious conditions.

The regional assessment working group’s terms of reference were finalized last year following criticism that the previous approach had tokenized Indigenous participation. Their study is supposed to continue until mid-2027. 

An “important next step,” the group added, was coming together “in unity” to map out community values, like a “shared understanding of First Nations’ relationship with the land and what must be preserved and protected.” That will help target possible impacts on Treaty Rights, it said.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

In 2006, scientists descended upon a remote open-pit mine in Australia to study air that turns into rock.

Like many mines, after churning through rock to get at a mineral, the Mount Keith nickel mine was left with piles of waste rock, which it held in huge, exposed reservoirs called tailings. This waste rock, however, was reacting with carbon dioxide in the air to form new minerals. It was effectively pulling the carbon out of the air and embedding it within the rocks, a kind of natural version of carbon capture and storage.

The scientists wanted to investigate exactly how much, and how quickly, this natural phenomenon was leading to carbon being captured and mineralized at the mine. Pinpointing this, they figured, would provide insight into how mines with similar tailings could offset their greenhouse gas emissions.

They took more than 800 samples of the mine waste to test and study and discovered something intriguing: the majority of the carbon was being pulled out of the air at Mount Keith by one mineral. Brucite is a waxy, pearly crystal that’s often a dull yellow or blue. It is highly reactive with carbon dioxide, and leveraging that reactivity could boost carbon storage at the mine many times over, the researchers found.

“As we studied the site and became more aware of the presence of brucite, I think then we understood that, ‘Oh yeah, brucite was really doing a lot of the work,’ ” said Ian Power, one of the scientists who travelled to Australia to study the mine, and now the Canada Research Chair in Environmental Geoscience and an assistant professor at Trent University. 

Brucite is now a key part of the carbon storage aspirations of a proposed nickel and cobalt mine near Timmins, Ont. Critical minerals, including copper, nickel and lithium, are essential components in renewable energy systems such as solar panels, wind turbines and batteries. They’re also used in a wide variety of other products, from phones to laptops to weapons.

The proponent of the Timmins mine, Canada Nickel Company Inc., says its Crawford Nickel-Cobalt Sulphide Project will be “Canada’s largest nickel mine.” The project, expected to last 41 years, involves an open pit and stockpile areas, two ore processing plants, a new rail line and relocating a portion of a provincial highway and existing power line.

The project’s greenhouse gas emissions over its lifetime are detailed in a report for the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. Before enacting any net-zero plans, the mine was expected to emit roughly 15,200 kilotonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, or about as much as 3.5 million gas-powered cars driven over a year, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s calculator (Natural Resources Canada’s calculator was not functioning at the time of publication).

---

The company expects to lower those emissions considerably by, for example, electrifying parts of its operation. All told, its net-zero plans could reduce emissions to 154 kilotonnes per year by the year 2030, it said.

But Crawford Nickel will also be capable of storing more than a megatonne of carbon dioxide per year, amounting to 54 megatonnes over the life of the project, the company said — and it will be relying on brucite in its tailings to do the heavy lifting. 

The company expects to start construction on the mine this year after it secures its remaining federal and provincial permits. It says it has moved its carbon storage technology along to the point where it’s filing for patents. 

Beyond its own operations, it plans to source carbon from industrial emitters in the region, although the details of how this will work are still unclear. Questions also remain about whether the technology will work as advertised and the mine’s overall environmental impact.

The little mineral that could

Taking advantage of brucite — as well as other minerals that aren’t quite as efficient — to store carbon is a different technique for “carbon capture and storage” than the one that gets the lion’s share of attention.

The technique the fossil fuel industry has used for years involves taking a stream of carbon dioxide gas and injecting it deep underground into porous rock formations. Traditionally this has been used to loosen up remaining oil reserves and extract more oil, but more recently, and in smaller amounts, it has been used to store that carbon underground.

The problem with mineralization, as Canada Nickel plans to use, has been that the natural process of carbon turning into a solid can take thousands of years under normal conditions. 

Artificially speeding it up has been a scientific pursuit for years at places like the University of British Columbia, where Power worked with other trailblazers in the field. 
A study he authored in 2020, for example, showed how carbon storage could be accelerated at a nickel deposit northwest of Prince George, B.C., by bubbling carbon dioxide and other gases through a powdered mixture containing brucite.

Sourcing the rock from mine tailings is part of the appeal, Power said, because the rock has already been pulverized from ore processing. That exposes much more surface area to carbon dioxide for chemical reactions. Bubbling the gas through brucite also helps the process.

“We were kind of at the forefront of the field, and then [there was] a lot of research, field studies, experiments,” Power said. “And then people at this stage now are thinking, ‘Okay, how can we get to commercialization?’ ”

Canada’s environmental regulations and subsidies for green technology development from government and other private sources could be prodding companies to take carbon storage more seriously, he said.

One of the leaders of the field is Greg Dipple, who worked at the University of British Columbia on carbon mineralization for two decades before retiring and co-founding Vancouver-based company Arca, which calls itself an “industrial mineralization company.” 

Dipple told The Narwhal he was familiar with Canada Nickel but had not had a chance to work with it yet. Arca’s technology involves capturing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, he said, rather than from direct sources like Canada Nickel is planning.

“To meet the world’s climate targets, no one company or pathway can do it alone,” Dipple said. “We look forward to Canada Nickel’s success in their carbon removal plans.”

How Canada Nickel plans to store carbon at its Crawford mine

The sites studied by Power, Dipple and others involve magnesium-rich rock, often home to nickel and chromium, and where brucite is also often found. The Crawford mine has this type of rock, and is targeting nickel, chromium, cobalt and other mineral deposits for extraction. 

To make use of the carbon-hungry mineral, and expedite its reaction with carbon dioxide, the company plans to run its tailings through a series of tanks as a final step at its ore-processing plant, said Pierre-Philippe Dupont, vice-president of sustainability at Canada Nickel, in an emailed response to questions from The Narwhal.

Inside the tanks, the carbon dioxide will be “bubbled and stirred into the tailings for several hours,” Dupont said. By using “high strength” carbon dioxide streams and controlling for “certain conditions,” he said, the company expects to “fully utilize the brucite in the tailings” to store more carbon.

It will be the first time the technology is being realized at the scale of a full commercial mine.

---

In its Impact Assessment Agency submission, the company described its mineralization process as being “at the research stage.” 

Asked by The Narwhal to describe its readiness today, the company pointed to several announcements it has made since 2023 showing the technology advancing through testing and pilot projects, to filing for a patent. 

“While [the technology] has not yet been implemented at full commercial production scale, these disclosures show that the technology has progressed … and is being actively advanced toward commercialization as part of broader carbon management efforts,” Dupont said by email.

Capturing public funds for carbon capture

Both Prime Minister Mark Carney and Ontario Premier Doug Ford have a lot riding on the mine’s success.

It’s the first project in Canada to get named to both the federal Major Projects Office and the provincial “One Project, One Process” list. Both the federal office and the provincial process are meant to make project approvals happen faster and smoother.

In press releases, both governments touted the Crawford Nickel project as “low-carbon” and both linked its production to “batteries and green steel.” Both also cited research showing its projected emissions would be “90 per cent below the global average.” Both governments have also made millions of dollars available for the project to happen. For example, federal dollars have funded its mineralization technology as well as its electrification plans.

---

In a January 2026 investor presentation, the company acknowledged it’s drawing on between US$100 and US$300 million of government funding, including support from federal and provincial critical minerals funds. It also has US$500 million in long-term debt financing through the Crown corporation Export Development Canada.

It’s also banking on US$600 million it expects to receive from two Canadian federal tax credits, one for carbon capture and the other for clean technology manufacturing.

“While Crawford could move forward without government support, our project economics includes eligibility for existing federal and provincial programs, including investment tax credits, as well as other forms of government support available to strategically significant critical minerals projects,” Canada Nickel CEO Mark Selby told The Narwhal in an emailed response to questions.

Bringing additional carbon to Crawford Nickel mine could involve a pipeline, or rail

As part of its carbon capture plans, Canada Nickel wants the region around Timmins to become a “low-carbon or potentially zero-carbon industrial cluster.” 

The company has proposed a scheme where the emissions of potential future nickel processing and stainless steel facilities in the region would be transported to the Crawford mine for carbon mineralization. 

Its subsidiary, NetZero Metals, is “advancing plans” for those facilities, Selby told The Narwhal. But he acknowledged there are no detailed plans yet for how it would transport the emissions.

The company has had “discussions” with “potential suppliers” of emissions, which have considered both the idea of constructing a carbon dioxide pipeline in the Timmins region as well as using rail transport, Selby said. 

Whether a pipeline or rail, or another solution is pursued, there would need to be “further engineering work, regulatory frameworks and project approvals” first, Selby said.

Meanwhile, the company’s priority is to reduce its own expected emissions first by electrifying operations and sourcing green energy.

Building a mine creates emissions, through wetland and forest destruction

The mine’s footprint, too, could itself create carbon emissions. Northern Ontario is home to the boreal forest and a vast peatland, which is a net absorber of carbon dioxide and also acts like a filter for clean water, keeping flooding and drought in check and supporting wildlife and biodiversity.

Peatlands are under threat in Canada from industrial uses like forestry, mining and agriculture — all of which can disturb the sequestered carbon, releasing it into the atmosphere. The Wildlife Conservation Society Canada has warned some peatlands overlie major mineral deposits, including Crawford. 

The company’s Impact Assessment Agency of Canada submission calculated the total forgone carbon sequestration over the project’s life was estimated at roughly seven million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent.

---

At the same time, the proposed mine is situated in an area that’s already partially disturbed and near roads — unlike the proposed mining developments in the so-called Ring of Fire farther north, which would involve pushing deep into undisturbed peatland to build new mining sites, and building new roads to access them. 

“It’s not in the Hudson Bay Lowlands, for example, where there are billions of tons of carbon stored in peatlands,” Adam Kirkwood, a research associate for forests, peatlands and climate change at Wildlife Conservation Society Canada, said in an interview.

“My perspective is, it’s still in the boreal forest, where we do have quite a few peatlands as well.” 

Kirkwood said the area around Timmins is a “mosaic” of forests, lakes and wetlands that may turn into peatlands in the future. He said there was an opportunity for the company to try to minimize its impact so peatland, which takes thousands of years to form, is left undisturbed.

Canada Nickel says the mine’s footprint was assessed federally and, where there are areas that overlap with wetlands and peatland, “these features have been identified and assessed as part of the environmental effects evaluation.”

“Where impacts are unavoidable, we have proposed mitigation, monitoring and compensation measures consistent with regulatory requirements and the commitments made through the Impact Assessment process,” Dupont said.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Again and again last year, Canadian oil and gas executives and lobby groups made public overtures to Prime Minister Mark Carney to “unwind the past decade” of environmental and energy policy in order to “unlock” fossil fuel industry growth.

After eight months in office, the Carney government has signalled major policy changes through its Building Canada Act, its Major Projects Office, its federal budget and its pipeline-focused memorandum of understanding with Alberta. All of this brings federal policy at least partially in line with the list of proposals made by these industry representatives. 

One fossil fuel company spokesperson told The Narwhal they’re “pleased to see the progress that has been made.”

“These are all steps in the right direction of building a stronger Canadian economy and an acknowledgement of the critical importance of energy and energy infrastructure to our country’s competitiveness and future,” Gina Sutherland, senior advisor, corporate communications and media relations for Calgary-based Enbridge, wrote in an email response.

The pipeline and utility company’s president and CEO, Greg Ebel, is an original signatory to the industry’s vision, laid out in March in an open letter titled “Build Canada Now.” Updated versions were published in April and September as more executives and lobby groups signed on and the group sharpened its requests.

Eight of the executives who signed the September letter, largely representing companies in the oilsands, had also planned to attend a meeting with Carney on June 1, 2025, to discuss “partnerships,” according to an internal government list of confirmed participants released to The Narwhal through access to information law. Government officials suggested that during his opening remarks, Carney could relay his “intention to use the letter to guide the discussion and delve into the positions they put forward,” according to briefing notes for the prime minister for that day.

The government says its policy changes are part of a broader plan to fight climate change, support workers and boost economic growth, especially in the face of the United States throwing around tariffs and threatening worse. 

Canadians expect their government to “win” the trade war, Energy and Natural Resources Minister Tim Hodgson said Dec. 9 on Parliament Hill. “To do that, we need cards in our hands. We have some fantastic cards: our energy and natural resources.”

Which might be true. It’s also true that the fossil fuel industry appears to have been very successful at arguing its case, with its wish list ticked off one by one.

Emilia Belliveau, energy transition program manager at advocacy organization Environmental Defence, has researched the fossil fuel industry’s techniques for garnering public support.

“We’re seeing an incredible alignment of government interests and fossil fuel industry interests,” she said in an interview.

Where Canada and the oil and gas industry align

The September version of “Build Canada Now” boasts 95 signatories including major lobby groups like the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. In that version, the group called for a federal law that bans crude oil tankers from the north coast of British Columbia to be completely repealed.

That would set up a major confrontation with Coastal First Nations, whose president Marilyn Slett made it clear to Carney on Jan. 13 at a meeting in Prince Rupert, B.C., that the oil tanker moratorium must be kept in place. 

The Carney government has not repealed the tanker ban, but its memorandum of understanding with Alberta commits to changing the ban if necessary to get a new pipeline built.

Another law the industry executives wanted to see vanish is the federal carbon pricing regime. While it is still in place, the federal government released a “climate competitiveness strategy” in November that commits to negotiating new carbon pricing arrangements with the provinces. The deal it signed with Alberta also permits the province significant flexibility over how its carbon rules are applied to specific sectors like oil and gas and electricity.

The executives also asked for an overhaul of a federal law that governs environmental assessments, and the Building Canada Act strips out part of that assessment process for projects the government deems in the “national interest.” 

They wanted to kill off a proposed emissions cap on the oil and gas sector, and the Alberta deal says Canada is happy with other plans to reduce emissions and won’t implement it. 

A central goal of the government’s Major Projects Office is to shrink approval timelines for projects — another item on the wish list.

---

Finally, the industry representatives asked for more loan guarantees for Indigenous communities. A loan guarantee is when the government agrees to repay any debt taken on by Indigenous communities that buy ownership stakes in oil and gas projects, should they be unable to repay it themselves. 

Making it financially easier for Indigenous communities to own portions of oil and gas projects is seen as addressing historic financial barriers to Indigenous economic participation — but it can also be seen as useful for overcoming opposition to fossil fuel expansion.

The federal budget reiterates a commitment to doubling its Indigenous loan guarantee program, and directs the Major Projects Office to help with financing.

The executives wrote in the Build Canada Now letter that they have “consistently advocated for the changes required to unwind the past decade of increasing policy complexity and uncertainty that led to delayed investments, lost opportunities and a competitive disadvantage on the global energy stage.”

Federal disclosure records show industry lobbyists focused on at least two aspects of the letter, carbon pricing and the emissions cap, as well as other elements of the federal climate plan during the two months surrounding the executives’ June 1 meeting with Carney.

Sutherland, at Enbridge, said the government’s proposed policy changes will now need to be “fully implemented” for large energy projects to move forward.

The Narwhal reached out to several other signatories of the Build Canada Now letter, including the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers and the Pathways Alliance of oilsands companies, but none responded by publication time.

Joe Calnan, vice-president of energy and Calgary operations at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, noted many of the industry’s proposals had been floated at one time or another, in particular by Alberta Premier Danielle Smith — like killing the tanker ban, altering carbon pricing and overhauling the environmental assessment law. Alberta’s oil and gas industry accounts for 84 per cent of total Canadian oil production.

---

Smith’s pressure on these issues “did kind of make these kinds of demands from industry more tangible and more clear as to what they’re after,” Calnan said. 

Large, publicly traded corporations also have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to make money, Calnan added, and so their interests lie in ensuring increased production of oil and gas. A province like Alberta, which takes in royalties when resources are developed, also has an interest in increasing fossil fuel production.

The government of former prime minister Justin Trudeau had portrayed many of the policies changed by Carney as necessary to deliver crucial carbon pollution cuts, and to properly consider the impact of oil and gas projects on the environment, Indigenous Peoples’ constitutional rights and the long-term well-being of Canadians, whose lives are continually disrupted by wildfires, floods and other extreme weather made worse by climate change. The emissions cap, for example, was supposed to hold the industry at its word to take steps to decarbonize its production.

In November, former Trudeau-era environment minister Steven Guilbeault quit his Cabinet post following the Alberta deal’s unveiling, saying several elements of the climate plan he had worked on “have been, or are about to be, dismantled.” 

Belliveau, at Environmental Defence, said it was frustrating to watch Carney and Smith discuss a “grand bargain” over oil and gas development that purported to also plan for emissions reductions, given that similar rhetoric had been deployed seven years ago when Trudeau framed the expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline as a “trade-off” for getting Alberta to sign on to climate action. 

“The last so-called grand bargain failed to produce the results that it promised, and the result that we need to actually address climate change,” Belliveau said. “Prime Minister Carney should be learning from past Liberal government mistakes.”

Pitfalls of Canada’s past climate policies

The latest government progress report on Canada’s climate plan shows the country is “significantly off track” to meeting its emissions reduction target for 2030 and 2035, according to the Canadian Climate Institute.

Carney’s environmental policy changes were also unveiled during a year when Canada faced its second-worst wildfire season, second-worst year for ice loss and major heat waves, the severity and frequency of all of which are tied to climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions, of which the global oil and gas industry is the largest contributor.

Belliveau said the government should be doing more to help people cut emissions — and, over time, their bills — by providing subsidies and access for clean technologies like heat pumps, instead of doubling down on fossil fuels.

The Narwhal asked the office of Hodgson, the energy minister, about how closely the government’s policies align with the requests in the letter from oil and gas executives, and whether the changes were made to fulfill those requests. The Narwhal also asked whether the government agreed with the assertion in the Build Canada Now letter about the need to “unwind the past decade.” 

Hodgson’s office directed questions to Environment and Climate Change Canada Minister Julie Dabrusin. Her press secretary Keean Nembhard said the government is committed to working with Alberta and is relying on industrial carbon pricing to cut pollution going forward. He acknowledged the “economies of tomorrow” will be “clean, low-carbon and resilient” and that “Canada can — and must — lead the way” in addressing climate change. 

“We’re creating the conditions for world-leading clean technology to thrive — by investing in Canadian innovation, scaling homegrown solutions and positioning Canadian companies to lead in the global race to net-zero,” he said.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Canada’s national energy regulator has postponed its report outlining future demand for fossil fuels, citing an “evolving energy and policy landscape.”

The move comes as both Ottawa and Washington have recently scrapped numerous climate rules while Prime Minister Mark Carney has promoted oil and gas projects as “nation-building” endeavours.

The regulator had expected to issue updated projections for “early in 2025,” but it’s been more than a year since it released the results of its public consultations for that report. Now it has decided to hold off publishing for the time being, communications officer Amanda Fedorchuk told The Narwhal.

“With the recent significant shifts in North American energy markets and policy context, we decided to defer the release of the next [Canada’s Energy Future]. The report was delayed to allow for a comprehensive assessment of the evolving energy and policy landscape, ensuring our analysis is relevant, fact-based and timely,” she said.

The Canada Energy Regulator oversees pipelines and powerlines that cross national or provincial borders, as well as offshore drilling and some exploration in the North. When the regulator put out the most recent version of its “energy future” report in 2023, it caused a major stir. It found that, in a world aiming for net-zero carbon emissions and easing away from fossil fuel dependency, oil production in Canada would begin to decline as early as next year and drop off a cliff over the next three decades.

“Canada’s energy landscape would look dramatically different than it does today in a net-zero world,” the regulator said in June 2023. It noted the push for emissions reductions would mean Canadians and others around the world switch to electric vehicles and heat pumps, actions that would leave countries oversupplied with petroleum and lower demand for Canadian fossil fuels.

The shift to clean energy is meant to combat a rapidly heating planet caused by the emissions from burning fossil fuels, as well as the extraction, refining and transporting necessary to produce gasoline, diesel and natural gas.

The federal government noted the urgency of this shift in a report released last week examining Canada’s progress on climate goals.

“Canada is facing more frequent and severe weather events that affect the daily lives of Canadians —damaging homes, increasing cost of living, affecting health and raising insurance costs,” reads the report from Environment and Climate Change Canada.

---

“In recent years, Canadians have seen firsthand the devastating impact of wildfires, floods, drought and melting permafrost on communities across the country. These impacts are not abstract — entire communities have been displaced and livelihoods upended by disasters.”

In a statement responding to the report, Rick Smith, president of the Canadian Climate Institute, said it showed the country is “significantly off track” from meeting its emissions targets and the federal government needs to take greater action over the next six months to correct course.

Meanwhile the oil and gas industry in Canada has been setting records for production, driven by the oilsands expansion and the government-owned Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, and Canadian oil producers are posting billions of dollars in profits.

We’re suing the RCMP to fight for press freedom

In November 2021, photojournalist Amber Bracken was arrested by the RCMP while on assignment for The Narwhal. So we launched a lawsuit to take a stand for press freedom. Now, we’re in the middle of our trial.

Learn more

Last energy forecast was during the Trudeau and Biden era

At the time the last energy forecast was released, the federal government under former prime minister Justin Trudeau had put in place its Emissions Reduction Plan, which called for Canadians to switch to electric vehicles and green their homes, while the government also planned to clean up electricity grids and cap oil and gas emissions. In the United States, then-president Joe Biden was spearheading what was called the Inflation Reduction Act, effectively the country’s national climate plan.

The International Energy Agency, too, had by that time offered up a scenario where global oil consumption nosedived from 94 million barrels per day to 22 million barrels per day in 2050, as much of the world put strong climate policies in place. The Canadian regulator’s findings prompted questions about whether Canada’s bet on fossil fuels in a net-zero future was too risky, and whether the country should be investing more in renewables.

Then came the inauguration of Donald Trump as U.S. president in early 2025. His administration immediately launched a campaign to embrace fossil fuels, wipe away emissions rules and dismantle scientific research into climate change, among other changes.

The Trump administration also pressured the International Energy Agency to change its forecasts to show a brighter future for fossil fuel demand, according to Bloomberg News. The organization’s World Energy Outlook, published last month, shifted away from its previous expectations for a quicker clean energy transition, instead saying global oil and gas demand looks like it could keep growing for decades.

Fedorchuk said the Canada Energy Regulator had not faced any similar political pressure and that the scenarios it prepares are “based on what is relevant to the Canadian energy dialogue.”

Carney, elected this spring, has rolled back some of Canada’s climate policies and promoted new fossil fuel projects. He’s backing the idea of a new oil pipeline and new natural gas facilities, ditched both the consumer carbon tax and the proposed emissions cap on the oil and gas sector, froze a policy requiring electric vehicle sales targets, moved to weaken a federal law against greenwashing and proposed looser restrictions in Alberta for electricity generation and methane gas.

Some provincial governments have also cut back on their own climate commitments, while financial regulators halted work earlier this year on mandatory rules requiring corporations to disclose how climate change will disrupt their business.

At the same time, the Carney government says it’s committed to keeping industrial carbon pricing in place, is relying on tax incentives to promote clean technology use, has recently introduced new methane restrictions and released a “climate competitiveness strategy” as an “update” to the Emissions Reduction Plan.

“The world economy is undergoing a historic transformation towards low-carbon energy and clean technology,” the strategy stated. “Lowering our emissions is critical to protecting the competitiveness of Canada’s oil and gas and steel sectors.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Ramon Kataquapit says too often he’s experienced Indigenous youth being excluded from rooms full of powerful people who are deciding their futures.

That’s why this past year, Kataquapit founded the Okiniwak Indigenous youth movement and led rallies and workshops across Ontario challenging Bill 5, officially called the Protect Ontario By Unleashing Our Economy Act. The provincial law creates “special economic zones” where the government can exempt companies from having to follow certain rules.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford has touted the law as an economic salve for U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariff war and threats to Canada’s sovereignty. He has emphasized the Ring of Fire, a vast area of mineral deposits on Treaty 9 territory in northern Ontario, as ripe for exploitation under these new powers.

But Kataquapit, a member of Attawapiskat First Nation who also serves on the Nishnawbe Aski Nation’s Oshkaatisak Council and the Chiefs of Ontario’s Youth Council, says the law threatens his way of life, the spirit of the land and “our very futures” that rely on the James Bay Lowlands for physical, mental and spiritual health.

---

The Ring of Fire overlaps a large, ecologically sensitive area of peatlands, or muskeg. This wetland system is a giant carbon sink, storing an estimated 35 billion tonnes of carbon, as well as a filtration system cleaning the water flowing through it and a critical habitat for migratory birds and wildlife like caribou. For the Omushkego Cree, their lives depend on the life-giving properties of water, which supports their food, medicines and shelter.

Kataquapit is hoping a court will let him and Michel Koostachin, the founder of Friends of the Attawapiskat River, an Indigenous group dedicated to protecting the waters and people downstream of the Ring of Fire, bring their distinct perspectives to an ongoing case brought by nine First Nations challenging the law.

Yesterday, they submitted materials seeking leave to intervene in the court challenge filed in July in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, which asks for Bill 5 to be found unconstitutional.

The litigation also targets certain parts of the federal Building Canada Act, a law that allows Ottawa to declare projects in the “national interest” where they can be pre-approved for certain legal requirements. Prime Minister Mark Carney has also framed the national legislation as a response to a “crisis” provoked by Trump’s threats to the Canadian economy.

The nine First Nations behind the court challenge want an injunction to stop the two governments from using the powers of those laws, which they argued in a court filing “represent a clear and present danger” to their self-determination rights to ways of life on their territories, and violate the Crown’s obligation to act honourably.

Bill 5, Bill C-5 and the court case brought forward by a group of First Nations

While both Bill 5 and the Building Canada Act, which was part of Bill C-5, allow for First Nations consultation in designating a national interest project or a special economic zone, this is a “smoke and mirrors trick,” the First Nations said, “deflecting attention from all the other ways the laws necessarily diminish the ability of First Nations to engage on the regimes’ broader consequences.”

That’s because Indigenous communities would normally be consulted and accommodated on a much wider range of approvals or assessments required for projects that aren’t being given special designation under the laws, they said.

The offices of federal Justice Minister Sean Fraser and Ontario Attorney General Doug Downey did not return requests for comment about the litigation or the proposed intervenors.

If their application for intervenor status is accepted, Kataquapit and Koostachin would be considered “friends of the court,” meaning they would bring their land-based knowledge and lived experience as grassroots community leaders to the proceedings, their legal counsel, Kerrie Blaise, said.

Blaise, the founder of the nonprofit Legal Advocates for Nature’s Defence, or LAND, told The Narwhal she’s doing the work pro bono and had to find donors and partners to help fundraise.

---

“Even just from a logistical standpoint, it’s very difficult to get to court. To get a lawyer, to afford a lawyer to do this type of work is very difficult,” she said. “It is very unprecedented, this is very unique to have these individuals in a setting like this.”

Koostachin, who provides wellness services on mental health, addictions and grief in northern Ontario communities, said the court case raises key questions around whether the principles behind reconciliation and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples are being applied properly.

He said Indigenous communities have distrusted the government for decades since the creation of the “racist” Indian Act in 1876 and the 1905 signing of Treaty 9 with Anishinaabe and Omushkego Cree, which has been questioned over its legitimacy.

“They call it the Ring of Fire, but to us, it’s the Breathing Lands. For them, they see profit. For us, we see the air of Canada, the air of Ontario, the air of ourselves, because we come from that land, we’re the artwork of that land, and for us, that’s our lives,” Kataquapit said in an interview.

“For them, it’s just something that they can use to combat Donald Trump and his tariffs, and this war that he has with Canada. But Canada has to take something from somewhere to respond. What are they going to take? That’s why they’re going to take from us.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.