Carney climate plan at risk as Canadian oil companies stress need to boost production | Globalnews.ca


A key plank of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s climate plan will likely ​miss its target implementation date, industry sources said, raising new doubts about Canada meeting its environmental goals in the face of higher oil prices and uncertain U.S. trade policy.

Carney climate plan at risk as Canadian oil companies stress need to boost production  | Globalnews.ca

Carney, a former U.N. climate envoy, committed last fall to negotiating a stronger industrial carbon pricing policy with Alberta by April 1.

He is counting on a strengthened pollution pricing scheme to keep Canada’s emission reduction targets on track after rolling back many of his predecessor Justin Trudeau’s climate policies to restore friendlier relations with the oil-and-gas producing province and prioritize economic growth.


Click to play video: 'Carney rejects ‘hypocrisy’ claim on Alberta pipelines, defends low-carbon energy'


Carney rejects ‘hypocrisy’ claim on Alberta pipelines, defends low-carbon energy


Two industry sources familiar with the talks told Reuters these negotiations have been challenging, and that no deal will be struck by the April 1 deadline ‌because large oil sands companies are pushing back on parts of the federal proposal.

Story continues below advertisement

Natural Resources Minister Tim Hodgson has acknowledged there may be a slight delay. “As we all know in doing deals, sometimes deals come ⁠right up to the deadline.

Sometimes they go a little bit over the deadline,” he told reporters.

One ‌of the sources said even if a pricing agreement is reached later this spring, oil sands producers are now unlikely to commit to another key part of the agreement: building the entire high-profile C$16 billion ($11.47 billion) Pathways Plus carbon capture and storage project, though a smaller, scaled-down project is ⁠possible.

The Canadian government continues to work closely with Alberta and all relevant parties and will have more to share in due course, said Keean Nembhard, press secretary for Environment Minister Julie Dabrusin.

Get daily Canada news delivered to your inbox so you'll never miss the day's top stories.

Get daily National news

Get daily Canada news delivered to your inbox so you’ll never miss the day’s top stories.

A ‌spokesperson for Alberta Premier Danielle Smith declined to comment directly, pointing instead to a television interview earlier this month in which she said the discussions are “complicated,” but that all parties are committed to getting to an agreement soon.

POLITICAL, ECONOMIC CLIMATE SHIFTS

Oil companies hope ⁠to boost production and sell more oil and gas to Asia in the coming ‌years to diversify away from the U.S.

Carney also wants to reduce economic dependence on the United States, which buys 90 per cent of Canada’s oil.

Story continues below advertisement

Now, the Iran war has bolstered global demand for Canadian oil and gas, and Canada agreed last week to support the International Energy Agency’s oil release with 23.6 million barrels from domestic producers.


Click to play video: 'Breaking down the impact of oil prices'


Breaking down the impact of oil prices


A December report from the Canadian Climate Institute had already warned Canada is not on track to meet any of its climate targets, including its 2030 Paris Agreement commitment.

The benchmark Brent crude now trades near US$100 a barrel, about 65 per cent above its level at the start of the year.

While some Canadian oil sector leaders once spoke publicly in favour of industrial carbon ‌pricing as a way to incentivize emissions reduction, their tone has shifted.

Oil sands companies investing in carbon capture and storage should not have to pay an industrial carbon price on top of the costs of constructing and operating the project, Canadian Natural Resources CEO Scott ⁠Stauth said in a March interview.

Story continues below advertisement

While Stauth said he had no reason to think the April 1 deadline on carbon pricing would be missed, he noted the negotiations are complex.

“It takes time to work through all the details to ensure that the needs of all of those involved are met and that it supports the vision that I think the prime minister has for growth in Canada,” he said.

HIGHER CARBON PRICE

Stauth’s comments followed an open letter released in January by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers lobby ​group, which argued that higher costs for carbon directly reduce Canada’s competitiveness, at a time when the U.S. has demonstrated a “willingness to leverage all tools at their disposal ​to achieve geopolitical and energy goals.”

Both Alberta and the federal government pledged last fall to work together on a new industrial carbon pricing policy, aiming to increase the effective price the province’s heavy emitters must pay ‌on carbon from an existing C$95 a metric ton to C$130 a metric ton.

The date at which this will happen, and the price increases over time, were to be negotiated.

Alberta and the federal government also agreed to cooperate on building the Pathways Plus project, pitched by Canada’s five largest oil sands companies in 2021 to be the world’s biggest carbon ⁠capture project.

Story continues below advertisement

The Carney government has bundled that project together with Alberta’s vision of ‌a new pipeline to export its oil to the Pacific coast — a pipeline no company has yet committed to build — and placed them both on its priority list for ‌fast-tracking.

Just 28 per cent of countries globally require industrial emitters to pay a carbon price, ​which means Canada’s oil and gas sector has legitimate concerns about the ways in which a strengthened regime could impact ⁠its competitiveness, said Kevin Birn, ⁠head of carbon research for S&P Global.

“Canada needs to find a policy approach that ensures this industry is competitive, and ensures it can achieve its objectives around diversifying markets, but also maintains policies that are important ​to Canadians for environmental protection purposes,” he said.


Click to play video: 'Canada ‘reliable’ and ‘low-risk’ oil exporter, will up production amid energy crisis: Carney'


Canada ‘reliable’ and ‘low-risk’ oil exporter, will up production amid energy crisis: Carney



Making it rain: Why more and more countries are turning to cloud seeding


Commuters make their way past India Gate amid smoggy conditions in New Delhi, India, on October 29, 2025.

Anadolu | Anadolu | Getty Images

Countries across the globe are increasingly turning to a decades-old weather modification technique as part of a push to control when and where it rains.

Alongside the U.S. and China, which boasts the world’s largest weather modification program, France, Russia, India and Saudi Arabia are among a growing list of countries to have experimented with cloud seeding.

For many, the embrace of rain-making operations stems from the need to boost water supplies as global demand continues to rise amid the climate crisis.

Others have sought to use cloud seeding to disperse fog at airports, tackle air pollution, reduce hail damage or even to manipulate the weather for major events, such as the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing.

Cloud seeding aims to improve a cloud’s ability to produce rain or snow by introducing tiny particles, usually silver iodide. The process is limited both in area and duration and, over time, is estimated to increase local precipitation by 5% to 15%.

The concept is not without controversy, however. Since first taking place in the 1940s, cloud seeding experiments have raised concern over potential environmental and ecological risks and stoked regional security tensions, with countries accusing each other of stealing rain.

Augustus Doricko, CEO of Rainmaker, a California-based cloud seeding company, said there are two dynamics at play that seem to be rekindling people’s interest in the technology — both in the U.S. and across the world.

“One is truly just circumstance, a lot of these countries and regions are suffering from more volatility in climate and precipitation patterns and their water supply, and so it’s leading them through necessity to be more creative than they were in the past,” Doricko told CNBC by telephone.

“Two, and I think this is like the real meat and potatoes of why Rainmaker got started, it’s because in the last few years there have been some fundamental breakthroughs in how to do measurements and attribution of cloud seeding effects.”

Despite an 80-year legacy, Doricko said interest in cloud seeding “really fell off” in the 1970s and 1980s because it had been difficult to accurately measure how much precipitation derived from cloud seeding deployments.

Recent technological improvements now make it possible to verify the success of these deployments in real time, Doricko said.

The company, which says it intends to arrest the aridification of the American West, has grown rapidly in recent months, from just 19 employees at the beginning of 2025 to 120 today, a trend that appears to underscore the booming interest in cloud seeding.

Yet, despite its name, Doricko said the company’s cloud seeding projects are mostly designed to make it snow.

“I misnamed the company it turns out, and ‘Snowmaker’ probably would have been more apt. It doesn’t sound as good for what it’s worth,” Doricko said.

He added: “I think that the most important thing for Rainmaker to do this season is just to make unambiguous evidence of manmade snow — and do it so often that it is undeniably a viable and scalable technology.”

Other U.S.-based cloud seeding companies include Weather Modification Inc. in North Dakota and North American Weather Consultants in Utah, although some U.S. states, such as Florida and Tennessee, have banned weather modification activities.

‘A viable water source’

There are two key reasons for why more countries are embracing cloud seeding operations, according to Frank McDonough, a research scientist at the Nevada-based Desert Research Institute (DRI).

Firstly, the scientific research and validation efforts that have been conducted on cloud seeding projects around the world over the past several decades “have provided enough data and cost-benefit analysis for stakeholders to use this tool with confidence,” McDonough told CNBC by email.

“The other concept of why more countries may be embracing cloud seeding technologies is that it’s currently one of the only options to enhance increasingly stressed localized water resources or help mitigate regional air pollution by using Earth’s natural atmospheric systems as a viable water source,” McDonough said.

Making it rain: Why more and more countries are turning to cloud seeding

Mixed results

Authorities in Iran reportedly sprayed clouds with chemicals over the Urmia lake basin late last year, seeking to boost rainfall to combat the country’s worst drought in decades.

Such projects are not always successful, however. Together with the Delhi government, a team at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kanpur recently reported mixed results following a cloud seeding trial to tackle air pollution in India’s capital city.

The IIT said in a statement at the time that its attempt was “not completely successful” due to a lack of moisture in the air, before adding that there had been a measurable reduction in particulate matter following the experiment.

People watch as an airplane flies during an operation of cloud seeding at Adi Soemarmo air force base in Boyolali, Central Java, Indonesia, Feb. 24, 2023.

Xinhua News Agency | Xinhua News Agency | Getty Images

Diana Francis, head of the Environmental and Geophysical Sciences lab at Khalifa University in Abu Dhabi, said cloud seeding can “modestly enhance” precipitation in the right conditions.

“But it is incremental, not transformative, and works best as part of a broader water and air-quality strategy,” Francis told CNBC by email.

Cloud seeding operations might typically cost between $1 to $10 per hectare-meter of additional water, Francis said, noting that while this remains highly variable, it works out to be much cheaper than desalination.

There are also other key caveats to consider, such as a strong dependence on cloud microphysics (given cloud seeding only works on existing clouds), problems with attribution and potential geopolitical and legal issues regarding downwind impacts, Francis said.

Studies have shown no significant impact on either human health or the environment from previous silver iodide cloud seeding projects, according to the World Meteorological Organization, while further investigation is needed to assess downwind effects.

The U.N. weather agency has also acknowledged that significant challenges in public, social and local acceptance of rain-making operations remain widely evident.


US Supreme Court to hear bid by oil companies to toss climate suits | Globalnews.ca


The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a bid by ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy to scuttle a lawsuit brought by officials in Boulder, Colorado that seeks to hold the oil companies liable for helping fuel climate change in a case that could affect dozens of similar lawsuits ‌around the country.

Carney climate plan at risk as Canadian oil companies stress need to boost production  | Globalnews.ca

The justices on Monday took up an appeal by the companies of a lower court’s ruling that let the litigation ⁠move forward.

The suit alleging state law violations by the ‌companies seeks unspecified monetary damages for costs incurred by Boulder associated with mitigating the impact of climate change.

President Donald Trump’s administration backed the appeal by the oil companies.


Click to play video: 'Business Matters: Bank CEOs grilled in parliament over fossil fuel funding'


Business Matters: Bank CEOs grilled in parliament over fossil fuel funding


The Boulder litigation is the ⁠latest chapter in efforts by numerous U.S. jurisdictions seeking damages from companies that extract, produce, distribute or sell fossil fuels. ‌

Story continues below advertisement

These plaintiffs are seeking compensation for harms they attribute to the role these companies played in causing climate change.

Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.

Get daily National news

Get the day’s top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.

The burning of fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases such as ⁠carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, causing more of ‌the sun’s heat to be trapped, which leads to a rise in the average global temperature over time.

The Boulder government officials in their 2018 lawsuit accused the U.S.-based Exxon and Canada-based Suncor of misleading the public about the role that their products played in exacerbating climate change while profiting from unchecked fossil fuel sales.


The companies deny wrongdoing.

The plaintiffs have said the oil companies should cover past and future costs incurred by the city and ‌county governments for steps taken to mitigate the effects of climate change, citing infrastructure repairs, environmental damage, emergency management and harms to public health.

The companies urged lower courts ⁠to dismiss the case, arguing among other things that Boulder’s lawsuit would illegally interfere with the federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.

The Colorado Supreme Court in May 2025 denied their request, prompting the appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Oil companies for years have been trying to avoid the
burgeoning volume of ​climate-related litigation, but so far have achieved little success.

Story continues below advertisement

Nearly 60 state and local governments have brought lawsuits like ​these seeking billions of dollars in damages, with more continuing to be filed, the companies told the Supreme Court in a filing.


Click to play video: 'Trump revokes ‘endangerment finding’ that underpinned US fight against climate change'


Trump revokes ‘endangerment finding’ that underpinned US fight against climate change


The ‌Trump administration has acted in various ways to bolster the companies’ positions.

Last year, it launched two preemptive cases seeking to stop Hawaii and Michigan from filing climate-related lawsuits against oil majors that the administration said would imperil domestic energy ⁠production.

The Supreme Court previously turned away a ‌similar bid by Sunoco and other oil companies to throw out a climate-related lawsuit by Honolulu after Hawaii’s top court ‌allowed it to proceed.

That lawsuit seeks to hold ​the companies liable for their alleged role in contributing to extreme weather affecting ⁠the region, as well ⁠as a significant rise in the average sea level along the Honolulu Pacific coastline, a development linked to flooding, erosion and beach loss.

Story continues below advertisement


Click to play video: 'Trump calls climate change ‘the greatest con job’ in speech to UNGA'


Trump calls climate change ‘the greatest con job’ in speech to UNGA



Supreme Court agrees to hear from oil and gas companies trying to block climate change lawsuits



Supreme Court agrees to hear from oil and gas companies trying to block climate change lawsuits

By LINDSAY WHITEHURST

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Monday that it will hear from oil and gas companies trying to block lawsuits seeking to hold the industry liable for billions of dollars in damage linked to climate change.

The conservative-majority court agreed to take up a case from Boulder, Colorado, among a series of lawsuits alleging the companies deceived the public about how fossil fuels contribute to climate change.

Governments around the country have sought damages totaling billions of dollars, arguing it’s necessary to help pay for rebuilding after wildfires, rising sea levels and severe storms worsened by climate change. The lawsuits come amid a wave of legal actions in states including California, Hawaii and New Jersey and worldwide seeking to leverage action through the courts.

Suncor Energy and ExxonMobil appealed to the Supreme Court after Colorado’s highest court let the Boulder case proceed. The companies argue emissions are a national issue that should be heard in federal court, where similar suits have been tossed out.

“The use of state law to address global climate change represents a serious threat to one of our Nation’s most critical sectors,” attorneys wrote.

President Donald Trump’s administration weighed in to support the companies and urge the justices to reverse the Colorado Supreme Court decision, saying it would mean “every locality in the country could sue essentially anyone in the world for contributing to global climate change.”

Trump, a Republican, has criticized the lawsuits in an executive order, and the Justice Department has sought to head some off in court.

Attorneys for Boulder had agued that the litigation is still in early stages and should stay in state court. “There is no constitutional bar to states addressing in-state harms caused by out-of-state conduct, be it the negligent design of an automobile or sale of asbestos,” they wrote.

Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.