This article was previously published in the National Observer.

The B.C. government recently announced it will stop importing American liquid biofuels that it blends in its gasoline and diesel supply in order to encourage domestic biofuel production and increase B.C. energy independence and security. Instead, the province will require all biofuels used in B.C. to be Canadian-made.

But British Columbia faces a similar, and arguably even greater, challenge in its reliance on the U.S. for gaseous biofuels. 

Natural gas customers in British Columbia may be familiar with the lines on their bill that explain how much of their supply is renewable natural gas, or RNG. What they may not know is that very little of that RNG is actually produced and consumed in the province. And that creates accounting and accountability problems that undermine the extent to which RNG can help deliver on B.C.’s climate goals. 

Gas utility FortisBC talks a lot about RNG (also known as biomethane) as a lower-emission alternative to natural gas. RNG is made by capturing the gas released by decomposing organic waste that would otherwise be released to the atmosphere. Recently, B.C.’s energy utility regulator approved a policy to automatically designate a portion of every customer’s gas as RNG, with customers absorbing the extra cost. This portion started at one per cent and rose to two per cent as of January 1, 2025. Customers can also choose to make up to 100 per cent of their gas supply RNG for an extra charge. 

But in-province supplies of RNG are limited, even at the small fraction of the total RNG gas Fortis requires. In FortisBC’s 2022 contracts, local companies only filled 14 to 17 per cent of its total RNG demand, with the remainder coming from outside the province. Over two-thirds of the RNG purchased by FortisBC is actually in the form of U.S. contracts for RNG credits. 

The utility isn’t piping RNG from Iowa or Pennsylvania to B.C. homes — instead, it buys the “environmental attribute” of the gas. This allows FortisBC to label an equivalent amount of conventional B.C. gas as RNG, while the U.S. producer sells RNG to American consumers as if it were conventional gas. 

At least, that’s the intent. There is currently no credible mechanism to prevent the same environmental benefit being counted twice — once in the U.S. and again, in B.C. The BC Utilities Commission — which approved FortisBC’s approach in a 2022 decision — recommended creating a process to guard against double counting, but has yet to do so. 

To add to the problem, Canada cannot claim emissions reductions from out-of-country RNG and does not get credit for the environmental attributes that FortisBC is buying. Under international climate accounting rules, the United States owns the carbon reductions from the RNG that it produces and consumes. 

There are ways that Canada could theoretically get credit for emissions’ reductions that happen in the United States. Under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, countries can sign agreements that formally transfer their ownership of emissions reduction credits to another country. The transfer avoids any double counting and clarifies lines of accountability.

However, no such agreement yet exists for FortisBC’s RNG credits and an agreement could be difficult to secure. Americans might not agree to give up those emissions’ reduction credits. And after U.S. President Donald Trump announced his plan to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on his first day in office, he effectively shut the door to any potential Article 6 agreements.

All of this leaves British Columbia with RNG credits that someone else in the U.S. could also be claiming, and do nothing to help Canada reach its climate targets. 

The B.C. government should revisit its policies that allow utilities to count RNG credits from out-of-province. If B.C. customers are paying extra for these credits, the B.C. Utilities Commission needs to ensure safeguards are in place to clearly distinguish between locally produced biomethane and natural gas paired with purchased RNG credits. A credible, independent process needs to verify that there is no double counting — B.C. can’t take credit for cuts if they are also claimed elsewhere.