Northern pipeline the wrong nation-building plan

Winnipeg Free Press

6 hours ago

Opinion
The Western Canadian climate-induced wildfires show the time for action on climate is now. But the premier of Manitoba pitched a fossil fuel pipeline to be built from Alberta to Hudson's Bay in response to the prime minister's call for 'energy corridors' to diversify export markets away from the United States. Climate was not mentioned once in Premier Wab Kinew's letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney on Manitoba's five nation-building projects.
Instead, Canada and Manitoba must invest in renewable energy and infrastructure to help all Canadians and not greenwash fossil fuel expansion projects as responsible economic development.
The prime minister and premiers are under pressure to demonstrate that they are taking action in the face of U.S. tariff threats and diversify markets. But Canadian oil products are currently exempt from tariffs, as are all products which are compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Trade Agreement. The U.S. has backed away from threats of tariffs on Canadian oil. Most of the crude oil the U.S. imports is from Canada — 62 per cent. The U.S. relies on Canadian oil, and to replace this would require increasing its production by 30 per cent, which is not feasible in the short- or mid-term.
Furthermore, the global oil and gas demand is expected to peak in 2030, if not sooner, and then decline as countries transition away from fossil fuels to renewable energy.
However, many of the nation-building projects being considered by the prime minister are fossil fuel expansion projects. In response to pressure from the oil and gas industry, Conservatives and Alberta, the prime minister has promised that the federal government will expedite federal approvals on infrastructure projects within two years, rather than five. But comprehensive reviews take time, and even with co-operation from provinces and Indigenous governments, the federal government has final approval over all projects that cross provincial boundaries.
The Canadian oil industry itself does not want the Canadian government to pick projects for fast-tracking; instead, it wants to delay climate action by asking the federal government to remove the emissions cap on industrial projects and eliminate the industrial carbon tax, two measures that Prime Minister Carney has said he will not do.
Pipeline development has been a boondoggle in Canada. The industry wanted the Northern Gateway and Energy East pipelines built, but both projects ultimately failed. The Northern Gateway project failed due to strong and ongoing opposition from First Nations communities, concerns over environmental impact and the potential for oil spills on B.C.'s coast. Energy East's failure is attributed to the high expense and emissions of fossil fuels.
The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, which tripled the capacity to ship Alberta oil to tidewater, was constructed by the federal government to meet the demand for a pipeline from the oil and gas industry in Alberta. The Canadian Trans Mountain pipeline cost Canadian taxpayers $34 billion and does not have a private-sector buyer. It is not working at capacity due to reduced demand.
Enter Kinew's pitch for a northern pipeline from Alberta to the Port of Churchill. The premier stated that Manitoba is 'open for business' for private sector development to build a pipeline that would transport an 'energy product, hydrogen, or a potash slurry', despite committing to no new pipelines during the last provincial election.
It appears Kinew is presenting himself as a nation-builder to the prime minister and the rest of Canada. The northern Manitoba pipeline is being pitched as a means to attract private capital for economic development. However, what is being ignored is the fact that the private sector has no interest in financing such a project. Experts advise that the Arctic shipping season is too short, even if the federal government funds expensive icebreakers to break up the ice. Building a pipeline on fragile northern muskeg would be challenging, particularly as permafrost in the north melts due to climate change. The threat of a spill to the northern Canadian coastline is significant.
Most importantly, investing in fossil fuel infrastructure in 2025 is contrary to scientific findings, legislated federal commitments and international commitments; it will exacerbate global warming, making life on Earth hotter and worse for all.
There is an alternative. Manitoba must prioritize climate mitigation and resilience in its nation-building projects. Canada and Manitoba are well-positioned to invest public resources in expanding Manitoba's clean energy advantage in nation-building projects alongside critical infrastructure for clean water, roads, schools and housing, as called for by the Assembly of First Nations.
Manitoba is on the right track with initiatives to expand the publicly-owned hydroelectric grid to Nunavut, Saskatchewan and Alberta, initiatives that would also bring economic development to Manitoba's north. Much more needs to be done to grow wind, solar and geothermal energy. Federal and provincial investment is needed, alongside promising initiatives in partnership with First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities for ownership and economic reconciliation.
Molly McCracken is the Manitoba director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.