LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment

Thursday, June 11, 2026

‘We don’t need anything that Canada has’: Trump says he’s ‘not looking to renew’ North American trade deal

Updated: June 11, 2026

Asked Wednesday about the upcoming review of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement, the free trade deal between the three countries, U.S. President Donald Trump said, “I’m not looking to renew it.”

“We don’t need anything” that Canada or Mexico has, said the president.

By July 1, all three countries must say whether they would like to renew the agreement for 16 years, or commit to annual reviews, per the schedule baked into the deal.

On-and-off informal negotiations between the U.S. and Canada have been going on for months, and the latter has already indicated it’s interested in renewing the trade pact. The U.S. and Mexico, meanwhile, have said they’re making progress on their formal bilateral talks.

CUSMA, or USMCA as it’s known in the U.S., has shielded Canadian goods from a large portion of U.S. import tariffs.

Leaders on both sides of the border have called it the best trade deal with the U.S. in the world. Trump sang its praises on Wednesday, but for one reason specifically.

“It gave the right to terminate,” he said.

“NAFTA was the worst trade deal I’ve ever seen,” said Trump, referring to CUSMA’s 1994 predecessor, the North American Free Trade Agreement. “I made it better, but I had the right to terminate. And with NAFTA, we didn’t have the right to terminate.”

“USMCA did one thing that I love. After six years, it comes up for renewal,” he added. “I don’t know that I’m going to renew it. Because to be honest with you, the United States does much better, OK? We don’t need anything that Canada has. We don’t need anything that Mexico has, but they need everything that we have.”

Canada has exported US$127-billion worth of goods to the U.S. so far this year, according to the American census bureau. Canada imported US$114 billion-worth of American goods, meaning the U.S. has accrued a US$12 billion trade deficit so far in 2026.

The trade deficit, a measure of the difference between imports and exports, has irritated Trump, who has repeatedly cited it as a problem with Canada-U.S. trade.

“We should have surpluses with them,” he said, referring to both Canada and Mexico.

During a scrum on Parliament Hill Wednesday, Prime Minister Mark Carney didn’t answer when asked by reporters to respond to Trump’s statements. CTV News has reached out to Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc’s office for comment.

Canadians in Washington

Canada has been on the charm-offensive in recent days as the review date draws nearer.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford has wrapped his two-day tour to Washington to push his “Fortress North America” for tariff free trade with the U.S. He posted photos of a discussion with the industry group Autos Drive America. He also had a meeting with the American Farm Bureau Federation and sat down with the American Automotive Policy Council.

Last week, LeBlanc made Canada’s intentions to renew the deal clear with a letter to his counterparts in the U.S. and Mexico.

“This agreement is highly beneficial to each of our countries and to the integrated North American economy,” LeBlanc wrote in a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and Mexican Secretary of Economy Marcelo Ebrard.

‘Typical Donald Trump bluster’

CTV News political commentator Tom Mulcair chalked Trump’s latest rhetoric as a negotiating tactic ahead of the July 1 deadline. The American economy is deeply intertwined with those of Canada and Mexico, and Mulcair says “(Trump) knows it, we know it, and again, this is all typical Donald Trump bluster.”

“The trade deficit is largely due to the fact that we export, cheaply, lots of petroleum straight to the United States to be refined there,” he said, adding Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre made a similar point during a keynote speech in New York.

“So, if Donald Trump wants us to put an end tomorrow to the trade surplus, we can. And we’ll stop shipping them oil cheap. And they can pay much more on the global market,” he added.

An October 2025 analysis of crude oil exports by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) found energy exports accounted for $197 billion in 2024. That’s more than metals and minerals ($124 billion), food and produce ($102 billion), transportation ($98 billion) and forest product ($38 billion).

After meeting domestic refining needs, 95 per cent of Canada’s oil exports go to the United States, “due to proximity and Canada’s limited access to alternative trade partners,” the report notes.

With files from CTV News’ Spencer Van Dyk and Abigail Bimman

Luca Caruso-Moro

Breaking Digital Assignment Editor, CTVNews.ca

Alberta pitches cheap natural gas for data centre boom, at odds with Canada’s clean power aims

Reuters

Published: June 09, 2026

CALGARY -- Alberta is touting its abundant supply of cheap fossil fuels to entice tech companies to build data centres for the AI boom, a move that would undermine Canada’s plan to link new data centre development with clean energy expansion.

Canada is the world’s fifth-largest producer of natural gas, around 60 per cent of which comes from Alberta. As well as huge fossil fuel reserves, the province boasts a cooler climate that can offset the cooling costs of data centre infrastructure and plenty of available land. All that can make operating data centres more cost-efficient than in the United States, where they are facing pushback from communities and lawmakers.

Tech companies could also create a new market for long-suffering natural gas producers in Western Canada, where drillers face a multi-year supply glut and at times have had to pay customers to take their gas when prices have turned negative.

But a rapid expansion of data centres in Alberta would disrupt Canada’s plans to power the AI boom using clean hydro, renewables and nuclear. While natural gas is a cleaner power source than coal or oil, as a fossil fuel it still contributes to emissions.

Prime Minister Mark Carney has said Canadian data centres will run on “some of the cleanest power in the world.” His government’s June 4 AI strategy — which aims to speed up Canada’s adoption of artificial intelligence — highlighted how more than 83 per cent of the country’s electricity grid comes from renewables and low-emission power sources.

Prime Minister Mark Carney speaks alongside Alberta Premier Danielle Smith in Calgary, Friday, May 15, 2026. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jeff McIntosh

Canada currently has only five functioning data centres at the so-called hyperscale level, demanding at least 50 megawatts of electricity capacity, equivalent to the power needs of a small city.

But nearly 100 more are in the works and 90 per cent of those are planned for Alberta, where the emissions intensity of the province’s electricity grid is almost five times the national average, research from York University shows.

“We’re essentially looking at these data centres as digital pipelines and digital refineries for us to help get the value from our natural gas to global markets, but in a creative modern way,” Alberta’s Technology Minister Nate Glubish said in an interview.

The province aims to attract $100 billion in data centre investment. Glubish said he has made multiple trips to Silicon Valley since 2024 to court energy-hungry tech giants with Alberta’s natural gas pitch.

The 20 existing small- to mid-scale data centres in Alberta already pull from the province’s energy grid, which is 60 per cent powered by natural gas. The provincial government is giving new proponents the option to build their own power sources to avoid limits on power capacity.

Julia Sawatzky, a doctor and member of the advocacy group Canadian Physicians for the Environment, said there was a growing discrepancy between Canada’s stated environmental goals and the reality on the ground.

“There seems to be an idea or a vision that Canada could be a green economy or a place that’s meeting its climate goals,” Sawatzky said. “But the way this AI data strategy might actually roll out, I think, is cause for all of us to really pay attention.”

A spokeswoman for Canada’s federal department of innovation did not comment on how Alberta’s proposed buildout of natural gas-fired data centres fitted with the country’s clean-power AI strategy. She said Canada will align new data centre development with clean energy expansion, strong environmental standards, and benefits for local communities.

An Alberta government spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment.

Connect quickly

Many tech giants have climate and emissions targets, which in theory would put Alberta’s natural gas-based electricity grid at a disadvantage to other Canadian jurisdictions such as Quebec, with its low-carbon hydroelectric grid.

But Glubish said the companies he is in talks with are more concerned with power availability, and the ability to connect to the grid quickly. He declined to name the companies.

Latest technology news on BNNBloomberg.ca

Combining natural gas with carbon capture and storage — a technology which aims to trap emissions from industrial processes and store them underground — could in future help tech companies maintain their climate goals, Glubish said.

Tech companies Amazon, Alphabet and Microsoft already operate data centres in central Canada, but on a smaller scale than in the U.S., which offers hyperscalers better tax incentives and proximity to customers.

Major hyperscalers Meta and Microsoft declined to comment on whether they plan to expand in Alberta, while Alphabet did not respond to a request for comment. An Amazon spokesperson said the company has invested in two solar projects and one wind project in Alberta, which help power its existing data centres.

Alberta-based Pembina Pipeline and partner Kineticor are expected to make a final investment decision by the end of June on a proposed 900 MW natural gas-fired generating facility they are developing for a customer with plans to build a large-scale data centre in the province.

Pembina declined to name the customer, but on a recent conference call, CEO Scott Burrows said the data centre project will create incremental demand for natural gas.

“The whole industry is falling all over ourselves to find a way to draw investment here to increase demand for our energy and to avoid the commodity otherwise being wasted at rock-bottom prices,” said Mike Belenkie, CEO of natural gas producer Advantage Energy.

(Reporting by Amanda Stephenson in Calgary; Editing by Caroline Stauffer and Nia Williams)

Ksi Lisims LNG signs benefit agreements with 3 First Nations

The Canadian Press

Published: June 09, 2026

The lead developer of the Ksi Lisims liquefied natural gas project planned for the West Coast has announced benefit agreements with three First Nations in northern British Columbia.

Houston-based Western LNG says two of those communities — the Metlakatla First Nation and Lax Kw’alaams Band — have in turn withdrawn their legal challenge to the federal approval of the $10-billion project.

The third agreement is with the Gitxaala Nation.

The benefit agreements cover aspects like economic development opportunities and climate initiatives for the affected communities.

The other Ksi Lisims partners are Rockies LNG, a consortium of Canadian natural gas producers, and the Nisga’a Nation, on whose land the project would be built.

Ksi Lisims has recently announced preliminary supply deals with German utilities and the partners aim to make a final go-ahead decision this year.

“We have always envisioned the Ksi Lisims LNG project as economically important for the entirety of northwest B.C., and we are pleased to see this vision materializing,” said Eva Clayton, president of the Nisga’a Nation.

This report by Lauren Krugel of The Canadian Press was first published June 9, 2026.

Germany's Big LNG Deal With Canada May Never Deliver a Single Cargo

By Andrew Topf - Jun 10, 2026

Germany has signed long-term LNG offtake agreements with Canada's Ksi Lisims project, seeking energy security and supply diversification amid heightened geopolitical risks.
Despite the deals, Canadian LNG may never physically reach Germany due to geography, shipping economics, and the lack of Atlantic Coast export infrastructure.
Instead, Germany could use LNG cargo swaps, sending Canadian gas to Asian buyers while receiving equivalent volumes from suppliers closer to Europe.

The Iran war has made supplies of liquefied natural gas, or LNG, the most strategic since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Suddenly, countries are scrambling to get their hands on molecules that provide reliable baseload power to industries and homes.

That explains why Germany is buying LNG from Canada. It’s to ensure long-term energy security, reduce reliance on volatile global supplies, and diversify away from Middle Eastern and Russian energy markets.

At the end of May, the Canadian government brokered a deal between the Ksi Lisims LNG facility planned for north of Prince Rupert, on the British Columbia coast, and German company SEFE, which is agreeing to buy 1 million tonnes of LNG per year for up to 20 years

Ksi Lisims LNG is a joint venture owned by the Nisga’a Nation, Texas-based Western LNG, and Rockies LNG, a consortium of Canadian natural gas producers.

The agreement marked the first long-term LNG supply arrangement between a Canadian project and a European buyer.

On June 8, a second, preliminary deal was announced. Germany’s Uniper signed a letter of intent with Ksi Lisims LNG for a possible offtake agreement of 2 million tonnes of LNG per year.

Construction of the facility, which has an annual capacity of 12 million tonnes, could begin in 2027, although there some significant hurdles to overcome.

First and foremost is a Final Investment Decision. To get an FID across the line, Ksi Lisims must show there is enough demand to start construction. The JV already has binding offtake agreements with Shell (NYSE:SHEL) and TotalEnergies. With SEFE and Uniper, up to 7 million tonnes have been annually committed. Will that be enough, and will the facility be profitable in a future LNG market? Ksi Lisims must decide.

The $10 billion project is also facing political and legal challenges about the environmental impacts increased gas production and shipping will have on the area:

Two B.C. Supreme Court petitions were filed over the provincial government's decision last year to deem the Prince Rupert Gas Transmission pipeline "substantially started," meaning it wouldn't need a new environmental assessment.

The liquefied natural gas pipeline's construction, which was authorized in 2014, and a deadline to start it was extended to 2024, spurring the court challenges from Gitxsan Hereditary Chief Charlie Wright and environmentalist groups opposed to the project.

Construction started in 2024 but the pipeline is not yet finished.

These are all significant obstacles, but the bigger question is how Ksi Lisims would get the LNG from the Canadian West Coast to Germany.

Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre has said the better option would be to ship it from the east coast. But there are currently no operational LNG export plants on that side of Canada; only an import and peaking facility in New Brunswick owned by Repsol.

The only large-scale LNG facility in operation is LNG Canada in Kitimat, close to the proposed Ksi Lisims plant. The first phase of LNG Canada was finished in 2025; a year ago it loaded its first export cargo.

When asked why Ottawa wouldn’t pipe LNG across the country, then ship it directly across the Atlantic to Germany, the energy minister said it's cheaper to move the product by water — through the Panama Canal — than it is to pay tolls through a pipeline.

In practice, Germany may never receive LNG directly from Ksi Lisims, despite the project signing two separate offtake agreements.

Instead, the German companies could employ a concept that is becoming increasingly common in LNG markets: cargo swaps

Here’s how it works: Instead of purchasing the LNG and physically delivering it to Germany, the companies would purchase the cargo and redirect it to buyers in Japan, South Kora, Taiwan or other Asian markets. In exchange, the companies would receive LNG from suppliers closer to Europe, like the US, Qatar, Algeria or Norway.

The result, says EnergyNow via the Financial Post, is lower shipping costs, shorter transit times, reduced congestion risk, and greater flexibility while maintaining the same overall gas supply balance.

This is already how major LNG portfolio players such as Shell, TotalEnergies, BP, and SEFE manage global supply chains. LNG contracts increasingly represent access to molecules rather than a commitment to move specific molecules from one point to another.

In the end, “the molecule doesn’t matter as much as the contract.”

A Canadian LNG contract provides supply from a stable democracy, reduced exposure to political disruptions, diversification from a single supplier, and long-term contractual security, states EnergyNow.

Reuters previously reported that German buyers are increasingly interested in acquiring Canadian LNG cargoes specifically because they can be swapped within global markets. Canadian Energy Minister Tim Hodgson noted that European buyers see value in holding Canadian LNG positions even if the fuel is ultimately consumed elsewhere.

By Andrew Topf for Oilprice.com

Why Canada should think bigger on solar

Dr. Tim Sandle

DIGITAL JOURNAL
June 8, 2026

Bank of solar power panels. Image © Tim Sandle

On a windswept plain in southern Alberta, a field of mirrors now tracks the sun with quiet precision. Each panel tilts in unison, converting photons into electrons, sunlight into electricity. It is a scene more commonly associated with California or Spain than Canada—and yet it may offer a glimpse of the country’s energy future.

A growing number of researchers argue that Canada has been thinking too small about solar power. According to a recent analysis from Simon Fraser University’s Clean Energy Research Group, the country should pivot away from its current patchwork of rooftop installations and instead invest heavily in utility-scale solar mega-projects (vast ground-mounted arrays capable of feeding power directly into the grid).

The case is not that rooftop solar is unhelpful. It is that it may be insufficient (both technically and politically) if Canada is serious about decarbonizing its energy system.

A solar laggard in a sunny world?

Globally, solar power has transformed from a niche technology into one of the fastest-growing sources of electricity. Costs have plummeted, with panel installation prices falling by roughly 90 per cent over the past decade, driven by manufacturing scale and technological advances. Yet Canada has largely sat on the sidelines. Solar accounts for around 4 per cent of global electricity generation, but just 0.5 per cent in Canada, according to the SFU analysis.

That disparity is striking, particularly for a country with vast land area and significant solar potential in regions such as Alberta, Saskatchewan and the interior of British Columbia. Even today, solar contributes only about 1 per cent of Canada’s electricity mix, dwarfed by hydropower, which dominates the system.

In part, this reflects geography: Canada’s long winters and variable sunlight are often cited as barriers. But the deeper explanation lies in policy. Solar deployment in Canada has largely been shaped by incentives for small-scale, decentralized systems in the form of rooftop panels on homes, warehouses and office buildings.

These schemes offer a political advantage: they are visible, popular and relatively easy to implement. Homeowners receive subsidies or net-metering credits; governments can point to individual participation in the energy transition. But, according to the SFU team, this approach has limitations that are becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.

Utility-scale solar, the researchers contend, offers a fundamentally different proposition. Rather than distributing thousands of small systems across rooftops, it concentrates capacity into large installations—often hundreds of megawatts—linked directly to transmission infrastructure. The economics are compelling. On average, utility-scale solar is around 64 per cent cheaper than residential systems and roughly 50 per cent cheaper than commercial installations, largely because of economies of scale, lower labour costs and simplified permitting.

This is not a uniquely Canadian pattern. Globally, large solar farms now rank among the cheapest sources of new electricity, frequently undercutting fossil fuels on a levelised-cost basis.

There is also a systems-level argument. Distributed solar can fragment electricity networks, introducing variability at thousands of points and requiring complex balancing measures. Large-scale solar, by contrast, can be integrated in a more controlled manner, particularly when paired with battery storage. Plus there is equity. Rooftop solar tends to favour households and businesses that can afford the upfront investment or have access to favourable financing. Utility-scale projects spread costs across the grid, potentially lowering prices for all users rather than privileging early adopters.

Why hesitate?

If the case for large solar farms is so strong, why has Canada not embraced them more fully? Part of the answer lies in familiar obstacles: high upfront capital costs, regulatory complexity and political resistance to large infrastructure projects. Solar farms require space—sometimes thousands of acres—and can trigger local opposition over land use and visual impact.

Here the researchers suggest the concerns may be overstated. The total land footprint required for solar to make a substantial contribution to Canada’s electricity supply is far smaller than many assume, particularly when compared with the land used for agriculture, forestry or fossil fuel extraction. There are also emerging solutions. “Agrivoltaics”, which refers to combining solar panels with crops or grazing land, can allow dual use of land. Projects in British Columbia, for example, are exploring ways to integrate solar arrays into agricultural systems, capturing water and improving soil conditions at the same time.

Agrivoltaics is the dual use of land for solar energy production and agricultural activities, enabling simultaneous electricity generation and farming.

Some researchers suggest that using public land could further ease tensions, reducing the “not in my backyard” effect while enabling strategic siting in high-irradiance regions. Canada would not be starting from scratch. Around the world, utility-scale solar has already proven its viability.

In California, the Solar Star project spans roughly 13 kilometres and generates 579 megawatts of electricity, enough to power hundreds of thousands of homes. Yet in Arizona, the Mesquite Solar complex began as a $600 million, 150 MW installation backed by a federal loan guarantee; it has since expanded into a multi-phase project exceeding 500 MW, illustrating how public financing can catalyse large-scale deployment. Such examples highlight a crucial insight: utility-scale solar often requires strong government support in its early stages, but can become economically self-sustaining once supply chains, financing models and regulatory frameworks mature.

A decentralized policy for a centralized grid

Canada relies heavily on centralized infrastructure. Its electricity system, which is dominated by large hydroelectric stations and nuclear plants, was built around big, capital-intensive projects. Yet when it comes to solar, policy has tended in the opposite direction. The result is a fragmented landscape: more than 100,000 small installations across the country, alongside a relatively modest number of large solar farms.

This fragmentation is reinforced by governance. Electricity regulation in Canada is largely provincial, meaning there is no single national framework for grid interconnection or renewable deployment (Canada lacks a unified national electricity market). Each province controls its own grid, pricing mechanisms, and approval processes). Developers must navigate a patchwork of rules, timelines and incentives that vary widely between jurisdictions.

The report calls for a more coordinated approach, including reforms to grid interconnection, often cited as a bottleneck for new generation projects, and stronger federal leadership to align provincial strategies. This aligns with broader trends in Canadian energy policy. The federal government’s Clean Electricity Regulations, finalised in 2024, aim to drive a transition towards a net-zero electricity system by 2035, requiring substantial investment in new generation capacity. Meeting that demand will likely require a mix of technologies. But solar, the researchers argue, could play a much larger role than it currently does.

None of this suggests that rooftop solar is redundant. Distributed systems can enhance resilience, reduce transmission losses and empower consumers to generate their own energy. Different scales of deployment each have a role to play, yet from an efficiency-of-capital perspective, he argues, utility-scale projects should be prioritised to accelerate the transition.

This is becoming especially true as electricity demand rises. Electrification of transport, heating and industry is expected to push consumption significantly higher in the coming decades, placing pressure on existing generation capacity. Where incremental additions of rooftop panels may struggle to keep pace. Large-scale projects, by contrast, can deliver substantial capacity quickly—provided the policy environment allows it.

There is a deeper shift implied here. For decades, Canada has viewed solar as a marginal technology—useful at the edges, but not central to the system. Hydropower, with its vast dams and reservoirs, has dominated the narrative. However, climate change is already challenging that model. Droughts and shifting precipitation patterns have begun to affect hydroelectric output in some regions, highlighting the need for greater diversification. A handful of rooftops may signal progress. yet if Canada’s energy transition is to gather real momentum, the future may lie in landscapes filled, horizon to horizon, with light.