Lack of an west-east oil pipeline leaves Canada vulnerable to U.S.: energy minister
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/87777/877772defc101cc6b5a62422a4810d73a1189fb6" alt="Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Jonathan Wilkinson leaves a cabinet meeting on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, on Monday, Dec. 16, 2024. Photo by: The Canadian Press/Justin Tang"
Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Jonathan Wilkinson leaves a cabinet meeting on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, on Monday, Dec. 16, 2024. Photo by: The Canadian Press/Justin Tang
Federal Energy Minister Jonathan Wilkinson says Ottawa and the provinces should discuss the possibility of an oil pipeline to Eastern Canada to improve energy security and diversify trade.
Wilkinson said Thursday that United States President Donald Trump's tariff threats have exposed "vulnerabilities" in the Canadian economy, including in the energy sector.
“The world has changed quite a bit in the aftermath of what we have seen from what has been our friend, the United States," he told reporters in Montreal. “I think it does call for us to reflect on whether there are some conversations that we need to have in this country.”
Trump’s threats of imposing 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods — and 10 per cent tariffs on energy resources — have renewed interest from Canadian leaders in energy projects that would lessen the country's reliance on the U.S. as a trading partner. Even in Quebec, which has long opposed a new oil pipeline, the government cracked open the door this week to the possibility of fossil fuel exports travelling through the province.
Critics, however, say the era of oil pipeline development in Canada is likely over, and that it would take much more than political rhetoric to revive it.
Earlier in the day, Wilkinson told reporters on a call from Washington, D.C., that it's a risk for Canada to be "so dependent on the United States for the export of oil." Nearly all of Canada's crude oil exports — about four million barrels a day — go to the United States. The Trans Mountain pipeline, which was bought by the federal government in 2018 and runs from Alberta to Burnaby, B.C., is the only oil pipeline that can serve other markets.
"The Trans Mountain pipeline was not without controversy, but I think in the current context, it is hard to argue that that was not an important investment for this country to make," he said.
Wilkinson also spoke about domestic energy security, pointing out that Ontario and Quebec are supplied by the Enbridge Line 5 pipeline, which transports western Canadian crude oil through the Great Lakes states and into Canada. "We hope that that will continue going forward, but I think we are all aware now that perhaps there are some vulnerabilities that we did not actually believe existed," he said. "And I would expect that the prime minister and the premiers of the provinces and territories will be reflecting on all of this."
Wilkinson didn't specifically mention Energy East, the proposed oil pipeline from Alberta to New Brunswick that was cancelled in 2017. But other leaders have, including Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston, who last month called on the federal government to "immediately approve" the project.
Even Quebec Premier François Legault has suggested Trump's tariff threats could weaken Quebecers' staunch opposition to a pipeline he has previously said would carry "dirty energy" through the province. “There’s no social acceptability for this kind of project right now in Quebec,” he told reporters Monday. “But of course … what Mr. Trump is doing may change the situation in the future. So if there’s social acceptability, we will be open to these kinds of projects.”
On Thursday, he said if a pipeline were proposed, his government would consider it.
Still, some experts are viewing the new interest in pipelines with skepticism. "The signals from major pipeline companies suggest that there's not an appetite for another new oil pipeline," said Amy Janzwood, assistant professor of political science at McGill University, who specializes in pipeline politics.
TC Energy, the former proponent of Energy East, spun off its crude oil pipelines business in 2023 to Calgary-based South Bow Corp. In a brief statement, a South Bow spokesperson said only that Energy East "was terminated by TC Energy in 2017."
Janzwood said it's quite possible there will be no more major oil pipelines built in Canada. “There's a lot of risk and uncertainty around the future of the oilsands,” she said. “Proposing a massive new oil pipeline that would be dramatically expanding oil production doesn't make economic sense given the current context.”
In a statement, Melissa Lantsman, federal Conservative deputy leader, accused the Liberal government of killing Energy East. She said a Conservative government would repeal Bill C-69, which overhauled Canada's environmental assessment process, "to get projects approved so we can get our resources to market and bring home powerful paycheques.”
A new poll from the Angus Reid Institute this week found that four out of five Canadians, including 74 per cent of respondents in Quebec, believe Canada "needs to ensure it has oil and gas pipelines running from sea to sea across the country."
Carol Montreuil, a vice-president with the Canadian Fuels Association, said people would "probably have a different opinion today" on projects like Energy East. "I think the merit, unfortunately, of the situation we're going through now with the U.S. is again to bring to the forefront the issue of security of supply," he said. "And this has not been discussed enough when some of these projects were cancelled."
But Charles-Édouard Têtu, climate and energy policy analyst with Quebec environmental group Équiterre, said he doesn't think the current enthusiasm for pipelines will last. "They're banking on a temporary political or economic crisis. Then to answer it, they're proposing projects that would have permanent consequences," he said. "When faced with a crisis, they try to rely on opportunism. And it would be Quebecers who pay in the end."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 6, 2025.
— With files from Kelly Geraldine Malone in Washington, D.C., and Stéphane Blais in Montreal
Comments
Good grief! Have our leaders lost their collective minds…build another dilbit pipeline? Will another Canadian city burning to the ground give pause to reflect..? The physical science basis of climate change is clear and irrefutable..we have to stop burning fossil fuels. Betting against physics and chemistry is delusional…and dangerous,
The federal government of Alberta under Stephen Harper killed physics and chemistry and other religions deemed part of the Great Scientific Conspiracy against the purity and Truth of fossil fuels doctrine. They haven't really recovered since then.
It will take 5 years to build Energy East; then this pipeline will bring 1 100 000 barrels/day of climate destroying dilbit to the markets for another 40 years. But Trump will be in power for only 4 years. After a 4 year mandate, he will be 82(+) yrs old!. He will be gone before Energy East could have a positive impact on our economy in order to neutralize his despicable tariffs.
Trump is a temporary distraction; we must deal with that distraction. However, we must remember that our MOST IMPORTANT FIGHT is against climate change and the destruction of our environment by floods, drought, hurricanes, massive wildfires, and rising sea levels.
Well said.
I think it would be far easier and quicker to build a national clean energy corridor across the land. Quebec would be foolish to not jump at the chance to send its enormous hydroelectricty capacity down the corridor for continental use. In addition, Canada could build pockets of heavy industry energized by clean electricity, guaranteeing demand from productive domestic customers.
Wilkinson has always been an oil and gas stooge. According to the IEA, Chinese demand for oil is about to peak in the next two years and then go into decline. Why on earth are we considering subsidizing the oil and gas industry more?
Also remember that most of the disinformation in the US and Canada that destroying democracy came from the oil and gas industry. Nobody seems to mention Koch Industries these days.
"Why on earth are we considering subsidizing the oil and gas industry more?"
Great question. Physics, economics and plain old common sense and observation of the increasingly severe effects of climate change escape this minister. Do oil industry lobbyists slip something into his coffee that renders his brain incapable of critical thinking? Do their donations blind him to his responsibility to work for the common good of the nation, not for the profits of foreign owned corporations?
Bye bye Wilkinson.
"The Trans Mountain pipeline, which was bought by the federal government in 2018 and runs from Alberta to Burnaby, B.C., is the only oil pipeline that can serve other markets."
In fact, Canadian oil producers ship oil via Keystone to the Gulf Coast, from which point it can be exported overseas.
I believe China is now buying a few tankers of dilbit, but certainly not at a premium price. The previous data indicated that the tankers were heading down the coast to heavy oil refineries in California. In addition, heavy oil is what fuels most of the US domestic consumption. Canadian heavy dilbit comprises the largest share of that. Their light oil is the primary export. The US does not have a lot of refineries tooled for light oil. It takes many years to commission refineries.
In other words, Canada has the US domestic oil supply in a stranglehold. So far, Canada hasn't squeezed.
Hmmm, why not focus on being less reliant on a product that is used as economic extortion on a regular basis. In addition this product is often the cause of inflation when times are good. Maybe focusing on energy that is not market based pricing that is easily manipulated would be a good thing.