The Energy Mix
Subscribe
Donate
  • Topics
    • Buildings & Infrastructure
    • Climate Equity & Justice
      • Energy Poverty
      • Indigenous Rights & Reconciliation
    • Climate Finance
      • Community Climate Finance
      • Finance & Investment
      • Insurance & Liability
      • Subsidies
    • Climate Impacts & Adaptation
      • Biodiversity & Habitat
      • Drought & Wildfires
      • Forests & Deforestation
      • Health & Safety
      • Heat & Temperature
      • Ice Loss & Sea Level Rise
      • Severe Storms & Flooding
    • Emissions
      • Carbon Levels & Measurement
      • CCS & Negative Emissions
      • Methane
    • Energy
      • Renewables
      • Fossil Fuels
      • Hydrogen
      • Nuclear
      • Batteries & Storage
      • Energy Efficiency
      • Power Grids
    • Food & Agriculture
    • Industry
      • Data Centres & Tech
      • Critical Minerals & Mining
      • Petrochemicals & Plastics
    • Policy & Politics
      • Carbon Pricing
      • COP Conferences
      • Elections
      • Energy Politics
      • International Security & War
      • Legal & Regulatory
    • Research & Innovation
      • International Agencies & Studies
      • Research & Development
    • Society & Culture
      • Climate Action
      • Mis/Disinformation & Greenwashing
      • Jobs & Training
      • Leisure & Recreation
      • Media, Messaging, & Public Opinion
    • Transportation & Mobility
      • Electric Vehicles
      • Shipping & Aviation
      • Transit
      • Walking, Biking & Micromobility
  • Regions
    • Africa
    • Arctic & Antarctica
    • Asia
    • Australia
    • Canada
    • International
    • Mexico & the Caribbean
    • Middle East
    • Oceans
    • Small Island States
    • South & Central America
    • Subnational
    • United States
    • UK & Europe
  • Special Coverage
    • The Weekender
    • IEA2026
    • Canada’s Major Projects Office
    • Hidden Wonder Valley
    • COP30
    • Cities & Communities
    • Heat & Power
    • Community Climate Finance
  • More Resources
    • Climate Glossary
    • What If We Changed the Conversation on Climate Change?
    • Eco-Anxiety
  • About
  • Contact
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Topics
    • Buildings & Infrastructure
    • Climate Equity & Justice
      • Energy Poverty
      • Indigenous Rights & Reconciliation
    • Climate Finance
      • Community Climate Finance
      • Finance & Investment
      • Insurance & Liability
      • Subsidies
    • Climate Impacts & Adaptation
      • Biodiversity & Habitat
      • Drought & Wildfires
      • Forests & Deforestation
      • Health & Safety
      • Heat & Temperature
      • Ice Loss & Sea Level Rise
      • Severe Storms & Flooding
    • Emissions
      • Carbon Levels & Measurement
      • CCS & Negative Emissions
      • Methane
    • Energy
      • Renewables
      • Fossil Fuels
      • Hydrogen
      • Nuclear
      • Batteries & Storage
      • Energy Efficiency
      • Power Grids
    • Food & Agriculture
    • Industry
      • Data Centres & Tech
      • Critical Minerals & Mining
      • Petrochemicals & Plastics
    • Policy & Politics
      • Carbon Pricing
      • COP Conferences
      • Elections
      • Energy Politics
      • International Security & War
      • Legal & Regulatory
    • Research & Innovation
      • International Agencies & Studies
      • Research & Development
    • Society & Culture
      • Climate Action
      • Mis/Disinformation & Greenwashing
      • Jobs & Training
      • Leisure & Recreation
      • Media, Messaging, & Public Opinion
    • Transportation & Mobility
      • Electric Vehicles
      • Shipping & Aviation
      • Transit
      • Walking, Biking & Micromobility
  • Regions
    • Africa
    • Arctic & Antarctica
    • Asia
    • Australia
    • Canada
    • International
    • Mexico & the Caribbean
    • Middle East
    • Oceans
    • Small Island States
    • South & Central America
    • Subnational
    • United States
    • UK & Europe
  • Special Coverage
    • The Weekender
    • IEA2026
    • Canada’s Major Projects Office
    • Hidden Wonder Valley
    • COP30
    • Cities & Communities
    • Heat & Power
    • Community Climate Finance
  • More Resources
    • Climate Glossary
    • What If We Changed the Conversation on Climate Change?
    • Eco-Anxiety
  • About
  • Contact
Subscribe
Donate
The Energy Mix
Subscribe

Analysis: Teck Mine Would Have Produced 45 Million Tonnes of Emissions Per Year

February 24, 2020
Reading time: 3 minutes
Author: Brian Kelly
Full Story: The Energy Mix @theenergymix

jasonwoodhead23/flickr

jasonwoodhead23/flickr

If Justin Trudeau’s cabinet had approved the controversial Teck Frontier tar sands/oil sands mine this week, it would have given its blessing to a project that would dump 45 million tonnes of carbon dioxide or equivalent (CO2e) into the atmosphere, 11 times more than the company acknowledged, according to analysis completed in the days before the company’s dramatic decision to withdraw its project application.

The order-of-magnitude difference in the numbers turns on the standard practice of calculating the climate impact of oil and gas megaprojects based solely on the emissions produced to extract the product, but leaving out the much larger atmospheric assault when that product is sent to a customer and used as directed.

The full, all-in total was about equal to the CO2e the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) would save if the whole region could bring its emissions to net-zero.

Canadians and indeed the world were watching to see how the cabinet weighed in on Teck’s $20.6-billion megaproject, which was expected to produce 260,000 barrels of bitumen per day if it had ever been built. This at a time when the world in general needs to honour its commitments to drastically reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, while Ottawa has promised a tougher emission reductions target for 2030 leading to net-zero by 2050. 

Get the latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox.

Subscribe Today

View our latest digests

Just how significant were the emissions from this proposed project? Teck put emissions from the operation of the Frontier mine at about 4.1 million tonnes of CO2e per year. An estimate from climate organizations that included all the ancillary activities around this open pit mining project placed the annual emissions at 6.0 million tonnes.

But either way, that was just the start.

Diluted bitumen is not a benign product. This project was not intended to produce something innocuous like milk. The product of the Teck mine was diluted bitumen destined to be transported and refined into gasoline, oil, and other fuels. Burning those products would have generated about 41 million tonnes of CO2e per year—about 10 times the emissions from the project’s operation.

Together, the mine’s operations and its final products would have contributed at least 45 million tonnes of CO2e per year of new greenhouse gas emissions.

Humanity has already used up three-quarters of its global carbon budget, the amount of CO2 the atmosphere can absorb before human activity triggers irreversible climate catastrophe. The IPCC warned in 2018 that we must cut our carbon emissions about 50% by 2030 to get the climate crisis under control. And we must halve our carbon emissions in each of the following two decades to arrive at net-zero by 2050—which is the new Canadian target.

So how significant is 45 million tonnes of CO2e per year? For comparison, the entire Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) emits about 48 million tonnes per year, including the steel plants in Hamilton, emissions from solid waste, and all forms of energy across all sectors of the country’s biggest regional economy. The production and use from the Teck mine would have nearly equaled the emissions from the entire GTHA. 

Put another way, if the GTHA could somehow achieve net-zero carbon emissions, the Teck project alone would have negated that contribution to meeting Canada’s and the world’s climate change goals. Is that climate justice?

The new numbers show how closely our climate future was tied to the cabinet decision on the Teck project. Even though a Vancouver-based mining company ultimately took the decision out of our elected representatives’ hands, make no mistake: this was a bellwether moment for our future and the sort of world we are leaving for our children and grandchildren.

Brian Kelly was one of the founders of Pollution Probe in 1969 and was the second employee of the federal Office of Energy Conservation in 1974. After a career in environment and energy, he was most recently the climate lead for the Region of Durham in Ontario.







in Canada, Carbon Levels & Measurement, Cities & Communities, Energy Politics, Oil Sands, Subnational

Trending Stories

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Minister of Technology and Innovation Nate Glubish introduced, at a news conference in Edmonton on December 4, 2024, the province’s new data strategy. (photography by Chris Schwarz/Government of Alberta)
Data Centres & Tech

Smith Tells Albertans to ‘Lock In’ Power Prices Before Meta Data Centre Joins Grid

September 1, 2026
39.5k
Jay Phagan/flickr
Pipelines / Rail Transport

West Coast Pipeline Won’t Recoup Its $43.7B Cost as Global Oil Demand Weakens

September 2, 2026
2k
@5thAdmiralFrank
/Twitter
Carbon Levels & Measurement

‘Call to Apathy, Not to Arms’ as UN Warns Climate Overshoot Is Inevitable, Downplays Fossil Phaseout

September 3, 2026
408

Comments 1

  1. Geoff Stiles says:
    7 years ago

    Hi Brian. Good point, but the problem is a political one as I’m sure you know. UNFCCC accounting methods for national GHG emissions don’t require countries to include emissions produced by consumption of the fossil fuels they produce when consumed in other countries. So, arguably, Teck (and Canada) can reasonably exclude from their reporting the emissions from any tar sands bitumen (or refined product) that is sent to other countries, e.g. China and the US.

    That doesn’t free them from responsibility, and in any case their production does entail additional downstream emissions, e.g. for transport and refining, which are correctly included in Canada’s (but not Teck’s) total. But that argument–that fossil fuel producers should account for all downstream and end-use emissions–has yet to be accepted internationally. Although I think the idea of including such emissions has some merit, it would also mean adjusting national emissions totals in countries that are consumers of the (imported) product.

    Perhaps there is really a need for a new approach to GHG accounting….

    Lots to discuss!

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Get the latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox.

Subscribe Today

The Better Ideas Show: How the Clean Climate Economy Protects Canada’s Sovereignty

by Mitchell Beer
August 30, 2026

…

Follow Us

Analysis: Teck Mine Would Have Produced 45 Million Tonnes of Emissions Per Year

February 24, 2020
Reading time: 3 minutes
Author: Brian Kelly
Full Story: The Energy Mix @theenergymix

jasonwoodhead23/flickr

jasonwoodhead23/flickr

If Justin Trudeau’s cabinet had approved the controversial Teck Frontier tar sands/oil sands mine this week, it would have given its blessing to a project that would dump 45 million tonnes of carbon dioxide or equivalent (CO2e) into the atmosphere, 11 times more than the company acknowledged, according to analysis completed in the days before the company’s dramatic decision to withdraw its project application.

The order-of-magnitude difference in the numbers turns on the standard practice of calculating the climate impact of oil and gas megaprojects based solely on the emissions produced to extract the product, but leaving out the much larger atmospheric assault when that product is sent to a customer and used as directed.

The full, all-in total was about equal to the CO2e the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) would save if the whole region could bring its emissions to net-zero.

Canadians and indeed the world were watching to see how the cabinet weighed in on Teck’s $20.6-billion megaproject, which was expected to produce 260,000 barrels of bitumen per day if it had ever been built. This at a time when the world in general needs to honour its commitments to drastically reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, while Ottawa has promised a tougher emission reductions target for 2030 leading to net-zero by 2050. 

Get the latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox.

Subscribe Today

View our latest digests

Just how significant were the emissions from this proposed project? Teck put emissions from the operation of the Frontier mine at about 4.1 million tonnes of CO2e per year. An estimate from climate organizations that included all the ancillary activities around this open pit mining project placed the annual emissions at 6.0 million tonnes.

But either way, that was just the start.

Diluted bitumen is not a benign product. This project was not intended to produce something innocuous like milk. The product of the Teck mine was diluted bitumen destined to be transported and refined into gasoline, oil, and other fuels. Burning those products would have generated about 41 million tonnes of CO2e per year—about 10 times the emissions from the project’s operation.

Together, the mine’s operations and its final products would have contributed at least 45 million tonnes of CO2e per year of new greenhouse gas emissions.

Humanity has already used up three-quarters of its global carbon budget, the amount of CO2 the atmosphere can absorb before human activity triggers irreversible climate catastrophe. The IPCC warned in 2018 that we must cut our carbon emissions about 50% by 2030 to get the climate crisis under control. And we must halve our carbon emissions in each of the following two decades to arrive at net-zero by 2050—which is the new Canadian target.

So how significant is 45 million tonnes of CO2e per year? For comparison, the entire Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) emits about 48 million tonnes per year, including the steel plants in Hamilton, emissions from solid waste, and all forms of energy across all sectors of the country’s biggest regional economy. The production and use from the Teck mine would have nearly equaled the emissions from the entire GTHA. 

Put another way, if the GTHA could somehow achieve net-zero carbon emissions, the Teck project alone would have negated that contribution to meeting Canada’s and the world’s climate change goals. Is that climate justice?

The new numbers show how closely our climate future was tied to the cabinet decision on the Teck project. Even though a Vancouver-based mining company ultimately took the decision out of our elected representatives’ hands, make no mistake: this was a bellwether moment for our future and the sort of world we are leaving for our children and grandchildren.

Brian Kelly was one of the founders of Pollution Probe in 1969 and was the second employee of the federal Office of Energy Conservation in 1974. After a career in environment and energy, he was most recently the climate lead for the Region of Durham in Ontario.







in Canada, Carbon Levels & Measurement, Cities & Communities, Energy Politics, Oil Sands, Subnational

Comments 1

  1. Geoff Stiles says:
    7 years ago

    Hi Brian. Good point, but the problem is a political one as I’m sure you know. UNFCCC accounting methods for national GHG emissions don’t require countries to include emissions produced by consumption of the fossil fuels they produce when consumed in other countries. So, arguably, Teck (and Canada) can reasonably exclude from their reporting the emissions from any tar sands bitumen (or refined product) that is sent to other countries, e.g. China and the US.

    That doesn’t free them from responsibility, and in any case their production does entail additional downstream emissions, e.g. for transport and refining, which are correctly included in Canada’s (but not Teck’s) total. But that argument–that fossil fuel producers should account for all downstream and end-use emissions–has yet to be accepted internationally. Although I think the idea of including such emissions has some merit, it would also mean adjusting national emissions totals in countries that are consumers of the (imported) product.

    Perhaps there is really a need for a new approach to GHG accounting….

    Lots to discuss!

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Minister of Technology and Innovation Nate Glubish introduced, at a news conference in Edmonton on December 4, 2024, the province’s new data strategy. (photography by Chris Schwarz/Government of Alberta)

Smith Tells Albertans to ‘Lock In’ Power Prices Before Meta Data Centre Joins Grid

September 1, 2026
39.5k
Jay Phagan/flickr

West Coast Pipeline Won’t Recoup Its $43.7B Cost as Global Oil Demand Weakens

September 2, 2026
2k
@5thAdmiralFrank
/Twitter

‘Call to Apathy, Not to Arms’ as UN Warns Climate Overshoot Is Inevitable, Downplays Fossil Phaseout

September 3, 2026
408

The Better Ideas Show: How the Clean Climate Economy Protects Canada’s Sovereignty

by Mitchell Beer
August 30, 2026

…

Follow Us

Copyright 2026 © Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy
No Result
View All Result
  • Topics
    • Buildings & Infrastructure
    • Climate Equity & Justice
      • Energy Poverty
      • Indigenous Rights & Reconciliation
    • Climate Finance
      • Community Climate Finance
      • Finance & Investment
      • Insurance & Liability
      • Subsidies
    • Climate Impacts & Adaptation
      • Biodiversity & Habitat
      • Drought & Wildfires
      • Forests & Deforestation
      • Health & Safety
      • Heat & Temperature
      • Ice Loss & Sea Level Rise
      • Severe Storms & Flooding
    • Emissions
      • Carbon Levels & Measurement
      • CCS & Negative Emissions
      • Methane
    • Energy
      • Renewables
      • Fossil Fuels
      • Hydrogen
      • Nuclear
      • Batteries & Storage
      • Energy Efficiency
      • Power Grids
    • Food & Agriculture
    • Industry
      • Data Centres & Tech
      • Critical Minerals & Mining
      • Petrochemicals & Plastics
    • Policy & Politics
      • Carbon Pricing
      • COP Conferences
      • Elections
      • Energy Politics
      • International Security & War
      • Legal & Regulatory
    • Research & Innovation
      • International Agencies & Studies
      • Research & Development
    • Society & Culture
      • Climate Action
      • Mis/Disinformation & Greenwashing
      • Jobs & Training
      • Leisure & Recreation
      • Media, Messaging, & Public Opinion
    • Transportation & Mobility
      • Electric Vehicles
      • Shipping & Aviation
      • Transit
      • Walking, Biking & Micromobility
  • Regions
    • Africa
    • Arctic & Antarctica
    • Asia
    • Australia
    • Canada
    • International
    • Mexico & the Caribbean
    • Middle East
    • Oceans
    • Small Island States
    • South & Central America
    • Subnational
    • United States
    • UK & Europe
  • Special Coverage
    • The Weekender
    • IEA2026
    • Canada’s Major Projects Office
    • Hidden Wonder Valley
    • COP30
    • Cities & Communities
    • Heat & Power
    • Community Climate Finance
  • More Resources
    • Climate Glossary
    • What If We Changed the Conversation on Climate Change?
    • Eco-Anxiety
  • About
  • Contact

Copyright 2025 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}
No Result
View All Result
  • Topics
    • Buildings & Infrastructure
    • Climate Equity & Justice
      • Energy Poverty
      • Indigenous Rights & Reconciliation
    • Climate Finance
      • Community Climate Finance
      • Finance & Investment
      • Insurance & Liability
      • Subsidies
    • Climate Impacts & Adaptation
      • Biodiversity & Habitat
      • Drought & Wildfires
      • Forests & Deforestation
      • Health & Safety
      • Heat & Temperature
      • Ice Loss & Sea Level Rise
      • Severe Storms & Flooding
    • Emissions
      • Carbon Levels & Measurement
      • CCS & Negative Emissions
      • Methane
    • Energy
      • Renewables
      • Fossil Fuels
      • Hydrogen
      • Nuclear
      • Batteries & Storage
      • Energy Efficiency
      • Power Grids
    • Food & Agriculture
    • Industry
      • Data Centres & Tech
      • Critical Minerals & Mining
      • Petrochemicals & Plastics
    • Policy & Politics
      • Carbon Pricing
      • COP Conferences
      • Elections
      • Energy Politics
      • International Security & War
      • Legal & Regulatory
    • Research & Innovation
      • International Agencies & Studies
      • Research & Development
    • Society & Culture
      • Climate Action
      • Mis/Disinformation & Greenwashing
      • Jobs & Training
      • Leisure & Recreation
      • Media, Messaging, & Public Opinion
    • Transportation & Mobility
      • Electric Vehicles
      • Shipping & Aviation
      • Transit
      • Walking, Biking & Micromobility
  • Regions
    • Africa
    • Arctic & Antarctica
    • Asia
    • Australia
    • Canada
    • International
    • Mexico & the Caribbean
    • Middle East
    • Oceans
    • Small Island States
    • South & Central America
    • Subnational
    • United States
    • UK & Europe
  • Special Coverage
    • The Weekender
    • IEA2026
    • Canada’s Major Projects Office
    • Hidden Wonder Valley
    • COP30
    • Cities & Communities
    • Heat & Power
    • Community Climate Finance
  • More Resources
    • Climate Glossary
    • What If We Changed the Conversation on Climate Change?
    • Eco-Anxiety
  • About
  • Contact

Copyright 2025 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.