West Coast pipeline project has become complicated for all involved

On July 2, Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that the Government of Canada will refer the Government of Alberta’s proposal for a West Coast pipeline to the Major Projects Office (MPO). Carney shared that the new pipeline will build a more resilient Canadian economy. He claims it will make Canada a “leading supplier of clean and conventional energy to ourselves and the world.” But communication about the positives and negatives of the pipeline has complicated the conversation.

Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith have both been vocal in their support for the new pipeline. But, it has raised concerns that have built a complicated story. While reading the news, I see one article promoting the new pipeline project and another sharing how it will come at a steep cost. 

This pipeline will stretch to the Robert Bank Terminal in Delta, British Columbia (B.C.) from Bruderheim, Alberta with an estimated one million barrels of oil transported per day. In an article from CBC, Smith shared how the route is along areas with existing Indigenous community relations. The route will also use the existing Trans Mountain Pipeline route, meaning that oil would take less time to come to market. 82 per cent of the pipeline will be within 100 metres of existing infrastructure.

The West Coast pipeline could provide many jobs at different points of the build and ongoing sale of oil. As well, jobs will be found within the community outside of direct oil work. Where the pipeline begins in Bruderheim and the surrounding towns will see the most benefits.

The majority of the new pipeline will be in B.C., but their Premier David Eby, has raised some concerns. Global News shared his statement outlining how there are many unknowns about funding, and the project could become a distraction from “real projects that will employ people.”

Smith and Carney already shared public financial support for the project, but private investment has been low. The project will cost at least $35 billion. 90 per cent of the project will initially be controlled by the federal government’s Trans Mountain Corporation and the Alberta government’s Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission. This will make most of this cost a public burden.

CBC shared thoughts from University of Calgary economist Garret Kent Fellows. He pointed out that there are broad benefits attracting the government to the pipeline, but that individual pipelines generate little money. Eby also pointed out that there is already one struggling publicly-owned pipeline that is not at capacity. 

There are many pipedreams, pardon my pun, around this new pipeline. But there are few guarantees. 

The benefits of the West Coast pipeline project are not insignificant. But the permanent environmental consequences are overlooked, including high carbon emissions, because the benefits are promoted so heavily. Carney and Smith promised a carbon capture and storage plan with the new pipeline. A drafted agreement with the Oil Sands Alliance advertises that the pipeline will cut emissions by 16 million tonnes annually when fully operational. But environmental groups are skeptical.

Emission promises are a marketing tool for the provincial and federal government that have proven to be just words. Similarly, the promises to build strong relationships with surrounding Indigenous communities are just words with a long history of being broken.  

Carney speculated that Trudeau’s past government’s climate plans were too “expensive and divisive” to work. How will Carney’s plan be any different? He shares how, although his ongoing energy plans will result in higher carbon emissions, it will be worth the benefits in the fight against the affordability crisis. 

Carney has had a strong career in economics. He led the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England. I trust that he has the experience to speak on these issues. But, I question if he is also motivated to pander towards Smith’s government with the threat of separation.

To be frank, the situation is complicated. It is important to solve short-term affordability issues. But we must also remember that we would like a home that is livable for generations to come. All parties want to create jobs and economic growth, but cannot agree on the means to do so. 

If there is to be another pipeline, we must have open-minded conversations. Governments and corporations will need to be honest about how they can manage the environmental impacts. No one knows the true benefit or cost of this project. We will need to be adaptable and open to the economic-focused and environmental-focused solutions that come.