The CO2 extractors: British Columbians are among world's most aggressive

British Columbians might be surprised to learn they are among the world’s most aggressive extractors of climate-destabilizing fossil fuels, per capita — and major projects that are already being built aim to make the province’s contribution much worse. 

Seven charts help tell the story of how we got here.

My first chart shows the amount of fossil fuel extracted per capita going back to 1980. I’ve converted the various forms of fossil fuels – coal, oil, gas -- into the tonnes of CO2 emitted when they get burned (see endnotes for details). In climate legalese, these emissions are known as “scope 3 liability.”

Notice that back in 1980, British Columbians were extracting similar amounts per capita as the Americans and Canadians overall — around 18 tonnes of CO2 (tCO2) per capita. 

Since then, British Columbians have aggressively increased fossil fuel extraction – currently digging up 41 tCO2 per capita. And just look how fast they have been bending their extraction curve upwards in recent decades. As the climate crisis keeps getting worse, British Columbians keep increasing the amount of the problem they are pulling out of the ground. They are choosing, decade after decade, to keep accelerating away from climate stability that can only come with net-zero fossil fuel CO2. That’s the green line at the bottom of the chart. 

And that is before British Columbians start up their brand-new, massive, liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry. We will look at the eye-popping surge in CO2 extraction needed to feed this industry in a minute. But first let’s take a moment to consider the increasing costs that now shadow fossil CO2 extraction.

Rising climate damage and liability

Unlike most pollution, fossil fuel CO2 relentlessly piles up in our atmosphere creating an ever-thickening blanket. This persistent blanket of CO2 will overheat and destabilize the climate system for countless generations to come. 

As the World Meteorological Organization warns: “the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere is irreversible on human timescales and will affect climate for millennia.” Irreversible. Millennia. The more fossil carbon we dig up and burn, the more damage and misery we cook up for the generations that follow.

The people who own, extract and sell these destabilizing fossil fuels are facing increasing liability for the serious and irreversible harm their products cause. This was highlighted by a recent International Court of Justice ruling that British Columbians would be wise to pay attention to: 

“Failure of the state to take appropriate action to protect the climate system from GHG emissions including through fossil fuel production, fossil fuel consumption, the granting of fossil fuel exploration licenses, or the provision of fossil fuel subsidies may constitute an internationally wrongful act which is attributable to that state.” (Emphasis added).

British Columbians face a trifecta of liability. They own the fossil carbon beneath their province. They license the extraction of it. And they also provide subsidies.

In the past, fossil carbon extractors have mostly dodged liability for their product because it has been hard to assess the specific role that fossil CO2 played in extreme weather events. But that’s been changing rapidly as climate science is getting far more accurate at pinpointing the contribution of climate change in catastrophes. When each tonne of your product can be shown to cause specific monetary damages, you should expect liability claims to follow. And when the damage caused by your product continues to shoot upwards — often beyond what insurance companies are willing or able to cover — those liability claims will grow massive. 

Someone will have to pay for the growing harm fossil carbon products are causing. And while the future is uncertain, the people increasing production of the problem as the crisis intensifies will certainly stand out. 

With that in mind, let’s return to British Columbians’ new LNG industry.

Turbocharging CO2 extraction via LNG

British Columbians are aiming to turbocharge CO2 extraction through a series of massive new LNG export terminals and the pipelines needed to feed them.

 

So far, BC has approved five LNG terminals with a combined capacity of 50 million tonnes of LNG per year (see endnotes for details).

Burning that much fossil gas will release 134 million tonnes of CO2 per year.

By 2035, when all these terminals plan to be operating, that will equal 21 tCO2 per British Columbian. 

I’ve added a dotted orange line to the chart to show this amount.

To be clear, that’s just the CO2 from burning the LNG. There is a lot more CO2 emitted when extracting, transporting, liquefying, and shipping it that isn’t included in these numbers.

If most of the exported LNG comes from increased production, then British Columbians could shoot past 50 tCO2 extracted per capita as the terminals come online.

To offer some perspective, I added the Saudis to the chart. Whenever I think of fossil carbon excess, that’s who comes to mind first. Currently, the Saudis extract 47 tCO2 per capita. That’s been falling in recent decades. 

British Columbians are aiming to shoot past even the Saudis in CO2 extraction per person. How do British Columbians plan to climb safely down from such a dizzying height? As the gathering storm clouds of climate damage and liability sweep in, it certainly seems reckless to me to keep climbing higher.  

Making Americans look like climate moderates

 

You know things are heading off the rails when your actions make the “drill-baby-drill”, “make-coal-great-again” Yanks look like the climate good guys in the room.

But just compare the CO2 extraction curves for British Columbians and Americans.

The Americans are the blue line in the middle of the chart. I’ve highlighted both ends of their line.

As mentioned before, back in 1980 the Americans were extracting a similar amount of fossil carbon as British Columbians and Canadians overall – around 18 tCO2 per capita. 

Since then, British Columbians (and Canadians overall) have more than doubled CO2 extraction per person, while the Americans have kept theirs at about the same level. They currently extract around 16 tCO2 per capita.

Imagine that chart with no regional names on it — which one of those CO2 extraction lines would look the most climate damaging to you? The flat blue line or the surging orange line? 

Peers heading to the safety of net zero fossil CO2

If British Columbians want a more hopeful climate future, they should follow the lead of their Commonwealth peers, the British. The British are highlighted in green at the bottom of the chart.

 

The British had coal mining and burning at the heart of their economy and national identity for more than a century. So, it’s notable that the British have chosen to shut down both coal extraction and burning. 

In addition, the British are also intentionally reducing extraction of their sizable North Sea oil and gas deposits. This choice to leave carbon safely in the ground has drawn the ire of the world’s great fossil carbon huckster and bully, Donald Trump – who lambasted this decision in a recent rambling speech to the United Nations. “Oiligarchs” are getting worried they won’t be able to maintain their accustomed supersized profits and geopolitical power if people switch to safer, cheaper, clean electricity. 

In total, the British have now reduced their CO2 extraction to only 20 per cent of what it was in 1980. They are choosing to head for the safe climate harbour of net-zero fossil CO2.

Another peer heading towards climate stability that British Columbians (and Canadians overall) could follow is Germany. Back in 1990, Germany was the world's third largest coal producer. Despite the difficulties, they too have cut off subsidies and shut down most of their coal production. Germans now extract only around one tonne of fossil CO2 per capita. British Columbians extract 40 times more CO2 per person and they still won’t stop pig piling on more.

Getting to net zero CO2 is what the world’s nations – including Canada — have collectively said is critical to achieve. The British and Germans have shown us that advanced economies can intentionally ramp down the fossil CO2 they extract if they choose to. 

The BC breakdown

So far, we’ve looked at total fossil CO2 extraction. My next chart breaks down British Columbians’ extraction into coal, oil and gas. (Special thanks to geologist, and Canadian energy expert David Hughes for helping me find some of the missing pieces in this puzzle.)

 

British Columbians currently extract record volumes of fossil gas — 23 tCO2 worth per capita. This is shown by the darkest shading on the chart. 

For scale, that is more than the Americans extract from all forms of fossil fuel combined: coal, oil and gas. 

And you can also see how rapidly British Columbians have been increasing this. Now they want to push it higher. That’s where the massive new LNG terminals come in. 

British Columbians are also currently extracting record amounts of fossil oil (or more broadly “liquids”). That’s shown by the medium dark band in the middle of the chart. Per capita extraction is now around five tonnes of CO2 and rising quickly. 

And to top it all off, BC is digging up a near record amount of coal. However, unlike oil and gas, coal extraction hasn’t increased as quickly as BC’s population — so the per capita amount has slowly fallen to around 13 tCO2 today. That’s shown by the lightest color area on the chart.

When this chart emerged from the data, the first question that jumped out at me was: how much higher are British Columbians planning to go? 

To find out, I turned to Canada Energy Regulator’s Energy Futures report. 

Projections with LNG

The Canada Energy Regulator has future projections for BC’s fossil gas and oil (but not coal). I’ve added the projections from their current measures scenario to the chart in grey. 

 

Under current policies, BC’s fossil gas extraction is projected to jump 50 per cent by 2035. And BC’s oil/liquids extraction is projected to nearly double. 

When expected population growth is factored in, BC gas extraction would rise to 30 tCO2 per capita – and oil would rise to more than 6 tCO2.

Even that might significantly underestimate what’s coming. That’s because the regulator’s scenario was based on current measures in 2023. 

Since then, BC has approved 45 per cent more LNG export capacity (see endnotes for details). And BC has also axed some major climate policies. So, I would expect projections based on today’s “current measures” to be even higher. 

The remaining piece of the puzzle is future coal production.

Unfortunately, I couldn’t find any projections for this. So, the best I can offer is the observation that if BC coal extraction remains the same, it would result in 11 tCO2 per capita in 2035. That’s based on projected population growth. 

Adding that much coal onto the Canada Energy Regulator’s projected gas and oil amounts would push British Columbians’ total in 2035 to nearly 50 tCO2 extracted per person. That would pass where the Saudis are now and be triple the Americans current level.

Regardless of how the details play out, the stage is set for the sprint away from net zero to continue. 

BC’s direct emissions also out of control

So far, we have looked at indirect climate pollution (scope 3). This is what your fossil fuel products emit when used. I will wrap up with a quick look at the more familiar direct emissions (scope 1). This is what gets emitted in your region.

 

 

My final chart lets you see the direct emissions for the Group of Seven (G7) advanced economies. It shows the changes made since 1990 — the international baseline year for comparing climate progress.

Hey, look. This chart of direct emissions looks a lot like the earlier ones of indirect emissions. 

Once again, BC’s emissions are way up – and Canada’s are too.

And here, too, the Americans are making no real climate progress and yet still doing far better than we are. 

And once again, the British and Germans have slashed their climate pollution and are heading for net-zero. Both nations have cut their direct emissions in half.

In Canada we constantly hear a feel-good fairy tale that claims we can significantly increase fossil carbon extraction while meeting our climate targets. But it turns out that this isn’t really a thing. We certainly have never come close. And I’ve never found any nation that has cranked up extraction while also making big cuts to their direct emissions. 

British Columbians need be honest about what they are doing and pick a climate lane. More extraction and emissions — or less.

As noted at the start of this article, British Columbians are one of the world’s most aggressive extractors of climate pollution per capita. Is that really who we want to be? Must we be even more fossil greedy per person than the Saudis or the Americans? When will we bend our CO2 extraction curve the other way – towards climate stability and safety?

If nothing else, British Columbian should at least worry about the escalating amount of climate liability our current path is piling onto us. 

The dangerous reality is that climate damages are rising rapidly. Insurance companies are starting to pull back. The costs aren’t going away; they are spiralling upwards. Someone will have to pay those costs. If the world ever decides to cover some of the increasingly unmanageable costs by enforcing product liability on fossil fuels, then British Columbians face supersized claims. Carrying around 50 tonnes of climate liability per person by 2035 threatens to be a crushing burden on many levels.

Maybe it’s time we start climbing down off the climate cliff. 

To start heading down toward climate safety we could align our CO2 extraction with the Americans — currently 16 tonnes of CO2 per capita. 

 

-------------------------------

Endnotes

-------------------------------

OTHER PROVINCES? 

The first question many readers might have is: “what does per capita CO2 extraction look like in Alberta?” (or another province). I too would like to know. Unfortunately, I find it very difficult and time consuming to find detailed fossil carbon extraction data at the provincial level, especially complete time series to show trends. For example, Statistics Canada has tables listing coal production by province but much of the data is “suppressed to meet the confidentiality requirements” and represented only by “x”. If any readers are aware of good extraction data for coal, oil and gas for a particular province, please leave a note in the comments section. 

B.C. LNG 

Here’s a list of approved B.C. LNG terminals. Only the first one has started exporting and it is still in low volume start up mode. Annual capacity is listed in millions of tonnes of LNG per year. The climate pollution released when this LNG is burned (scope 3) I calculated using a standard multiplier (2.68) and listed in millions of tonnes of CO2 per year.   

• 14 MtLNG (38 MtCO2) -- LNG Canada (phase 1)
• 14 MtLNG (38 MtCO2) -- LNG Canada (phase 2)
• 12 MtLNG (32 MtCO2) -- Ksi Lisims LNG
• 4.4 MtLNG (12 MtCO2) -- Tilbury LNG
• 3.5 MtLNG (9 MtCO2) -- Cedar LNG
• 2.1 MtLNG (6 MtCO2) -- Woodfibre LNG

In addition to these emissions, there is roughly one quarter more climate pollution emitted “upstream” from extraction, pipeline transport, terminal liquification, etc. A full LNG lifecycle accounting should include these as well. I did not include them in my charts and discussion because these upstream emissions are not included in the datasets of CO2 extraction per capita for nations that I found. So, to compare like-to-like I only used scope 3 emissions for B.C. LNG as well. 

The CER “current measures” scenario discussed in the article didn’t include the 15.5 MtLNG capacity of Cedar LNG and Ksi Lisims LNG terminals. They had not been approved yet. 

B.C. CO2 EXTRACTION (SCOPE 3)

To piece together fossil CO2 extraction for B.C. I used the following data sources:

• British Columbia’s 2023 Oil and Gas Reserves and Production Report   
• Government database of BC Annual Coal Production from 1866 Onwards (but ends in 2020).
• Government website listing BC coal production 2022 & 2023  
• Canada Energy Regulator’s Energy Futures “current measures” scenario
• B.C. Government population data and projections

To convert fossil carbon volumes into resulting (scope 3) CO2 emissions I used these standard emissions factors:

• Fossil gas: 0.002 tCO2/m3
• Fossil oil: 6.28981077 bbl/m3 * 0.438 tCO2/bbl
• Fossil coal: 2.487 tCO2/tCoal

NATIONAL CO2 EXTRACTION (SCOPE 3)

For this, I used data compiled by the Global Carbon Project. This data is made very accessible by Robbie Andrews of the Center for International Climate Research on his excellent website. You can type in the name of the country you are interested in and look for a chart labelled “Annual extraction emissions per capita”. Links are provided to download the data.

DIRECT EMISSIONS (SCOPE 1)

The final chart in this article shows the change in direct emissions (scope 1) since 1990. I collected this data from each nation’s annual National Inventory Reports they file with the United Nations. For the United States, which didn’t file one this year, I used their 2024 report, along with an estimate for their 2023 emissions made by the Rhodium Group.