PM, energy sector fend off EU move to rate oilsands oil as more polluting
Natural resources minister declares ‘ sound win,’ but acknowledges success not guaranteed
There are very important opinion leaders in the EU. It’s not one of our largest markets, but it’s very important in terms of international dialogue.
ALISON REDFORD
ALBERTA PREMIER
OTTAWA — The Harper government and Canadian energy sector are girding for several more months of intense lobbying after European Union officials Thursday blocked a draft fuel law that would label the oilsands a dirtier form of crude.
The Canadian government is trumpeting the outcome, which saw more EU officials reject the fuel directive than support it, as a temporary victory in its ongoing efforts to persuade European Union countries not to slap a higher carbon- emissions rating on oilsands crude compared to conventional oil.
It also means Canada’s threats of launching a trade war with the European Union and taking the proposal to the World Trade Organization are on hold for now.
But the result has environmental groups digging in their heels in the “dirty oil” fight and even more determined to prevent bitumen- derived fuels from being used in Europe.
With many of Canada’s allies abstaining from the vote, European Union countries supporting the proposed Fuel Quality Directive failed to win enough support at a Thursday committee meeting of technical experts to have it pass.
However, there also wasn’t enough support to kill the measure, so a council of EU ministers will now vote on the fuel directive, likely in June — but not before the Conservative government and petroleum producers ratchet up their efforts to quash it outright.
“There was a sound win,” federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said in an interview. “We will continue to advocate our position. It has obviously resonated.”
Thursday’s closed- door vote saw officials from 12 countries ( with a total of 89 votes) support the fuel standard, while eight countries ( with 128 votes) opposed it, including Spain, Italy and Czech Republic, according to officials familiar with the numbers.
Notably, seven countries with 128 votes abstained — including EU members home to companies with major operations in the Alberta oilsands, such as the United Kingdom ( BP), France ( Total) and the Netherlands ( Royal Dutch Shell).
A “qualified majority” at the committee — 255 votes out of a total 345 — was needed to pass or defeat the draft fuel standard.
The Harper government and Canada’s ambassador to the EU have been threatening to launch an international trade war with the bloc and take the matter to the WTO if it passes the fuel policy.
“Clearly there’s no need to do that at this point,” said Oliver.
The federal government thought it had a blocking minority going into the vote and was pleasantly surprised that more EU voters rejected the initiative than supported it.
However, Oliver said there are no guarantees the next vote — which will see 27 EU environment ministers vote on the policy — will go in Canada’s favour.
“We certainly don’t take anything for granted,” he said.
Countries with companies operating in the oilsands would be “clearly disadvantaged” with the fuel directive, the minister said, which could explain why a number of them abstained.
Virtually no bitumen- derived fuels are shipped to Europe, but Canada maintains the FQD is a discriminatory and nonscientific approach that singles out oilsands as having higher carbon emissions without any sound studies examining the greenhouse gases from the conventional oil the EU imports.
The Conservative government and petroleum sector worry the policy would set a dangerous dirty oil precedent, severely damage the oilsands sector’s global reputation and potentially close future energy export markets.
“We’re concerned because it could stigmatize our oil,” Oliver added.
Alberta Premier Alison Redford took a similar view. “It would have had an adverse impact if we had seen a different result today,” Redford said.
“I’ve always said it mattered to all of us as Albertans what the international community thinks of us. And there are very important opinion leaders in the EU. It’s not one of our largest markets, but it’s very important in terms of international dialogue.”
Canadian officials insist they support measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and don’t oppose a fuel directive that’s based on scientific evidence.
Connie Hedegaard, the European commissioner for climate action, said she was pleased the massive lobbying efforts by the energy industry and countries like Canada didn’t succeed in killing the proposal outright.
The fuel directive proposed by the European Commission, the EU’S executive arm, is a “sciencebased and non- discriminatory proposal,” and the right approach for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, she said.
“With all the lobbying against the Commission proposal, I feared that member states’ experts [ at committee] would have rejected the proposal in today’s experts committee. I am glad that this was not the case,” Hedegaard said in a statement to Postmedia News.