The inability to diversify our energy markets is jeopardizing Canada’s prosperity. Quebec’s application to have an injunction on the Energy East pipeline, First Ministers’ divided views on a national carbon tax and Leonardo DiCaprio’s Academy Award confusion of the Chinook with global warming would be the latest sundry developments impinging on this critical problem. Pipeline construction is stymied by politics and undergoing contested regulatory reviews, preventing transport of oil to eastern Canada in order to tidewater and tankers to foreign markets. Because of a relentless campaign waged by well-funded opponents, public opinion has moved from belief in exaggerated claims about environmental risk to toleration of the damaging consequences of inaction, to the cusp of capitulation to the truly mad – a power powerhouse abandoning energy exports. That would be a historic blunder.
To understand our predicament and what to do about it, let’s examine the reality and set out some good sense realities.
Canada has enormous gas and oil reserves, that will exceed domestic requirements for hundreds of years. The International Energy Agency forecasts almost 75 percent of worldwide energy demand will come from non-renewable fuels in 2040. However, our only export market is the U.S., which buys our gas and oil in a multi-billion dollar discount towards the international price. Moreover, it needs less because of its massive shale discoveries, in the end have to export more because of our increased production. But when we cannot deliver outside The united states, it is irrelevant that most of the world is energy-deficient. On the line are tens of thousands of jobs and many vast amounts of dollars in revenue to governments for health care, education and infrastructure.
The only rational reason for not doing everything easy to export our oil is significant environmental risk. Determining that risk may be the responsibility of independent regulators who conduct comprehensive scientific reviews and consult broadly. As to global GHG emissions, Canada represents an insignificant 1.6 per cent and the oilsands a minuscule 0.01 per cent. Offsetting that meagre amount can be helped by replacing transport by rail with safer pipelines and exporting our oil and gas to lessen coal burning worldwide.
The pm has the opportunity for a Nixon-in-China breakthrough.
Let’s ‘t be duped by foreign rhetoric that’s contradicted by facts on the ground. President barack obama bolstered his green cred by turning down the Keystone XL pipeline. Yet he’s pleased to see the construction of a lot of domestic U.S. pipelines under his watch that their length would encircle the world, and that he approved American oil exports following a 40-year hiatus. Heavy Mexican crude is eating into our diminishing U.S. market share. The U.K. is aggressively developing its shale industry. The Saudis ship crude in tankers in the St. Lawrence River, even while Alberta attempts to convince Quebec politicians to simply accept domestic oil. Iran is preparing production now that sanctions are lifted. Everywhere, energy exporters are busily capturing market share, such as the market of the country. Meanwhile, Canada cannot get its act together.
Related
- Joe Oliver: Canadians should beware the effects of climate change – policiesJoe Oliver: Canada’s foolish pipeline flubs
-
-
-
Canada would not be the nation it is today if consensus was really a precondition to advance. Dissenting views must be seriously considered, however, if opponents are NIMBYs or ideologues who ignore science, the nation’s interest should prevail.
Not every environmental group is adamantly in opposition to resource development. However, several clearly are, that we called attention to when I was minister of natural resources. Regardless of a hyperbolic feeding frenzy over my comments, the following 4 years repeatedly proved my point. Indeed, I cannot name a single major resource project that these radical groups do support, even those with regulatory approval. It’s a fool’s errand to try to change their brains. Appeasement merely feeds defiance.
What should the authorities do? Remove the moratorium on oil-tanker traffic off B.C.’s north coast. Consider support for the construction of a B.C. upgrader or refinery, perhaps having a government guarantee. Facilitate aboriginal economic participation. Restrain regulatory duplication, scope creep and dilatory tactics. Advocate for pipeline projects assuming a completely independent regulator recommends approval. Critically, communicate to Canadians the reality and urgency of the issue.
The prime minister has the chance for a Nixon-in-China breakthrough. Instead of abdicate leadership as a “responsible referee” (shades of honest broker?), Justin Trudeau should emulate the current U.S. president, who extolled green policies even as the U.S. became the world’s biggest oil producer. The Liberal government’s high-profile concern about climate change provides a comparable opening to support pipeline development.
Trudeau has a chance for nation building. Otherwise, he risks leaving behind a legacy of missed opportunities and economic decline. Science, economics, national security and common sense all support opening our energy markets to the world.
Joe Oliver may be the former minister of finance and former minister of natural resources.
