Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Support Quality Journalism
The Globe and Mail
First Access to Latest
Investment News
Collection of curated
e-books and guides
Inform your decisions via
Globe Investor Tools
Just$1.99
per week
for first 24 weeks

Enjoy unlimited digital access
Enjoy Unlimited Digital Access
Get full access to globeandmail.com
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(select.open)}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](select.open),dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){window.requestAnimationFrame(function() {var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))});}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1); // via darwin-bg var slideIndex = 0; carousel(); function carousel() { var i; var x = document.getElementsByClassName("subs_valueprop"); for (i = 0; i < x.length; i++) { x[i].style.display = "none"; } slideIndex++; if (slideIndex> x.length) { slideIndex = 1; } x[slideIndex - 1].style.display = "block"; setTimeout(carousel, 2500); }

Kevin Lynch is vice-chairman of BMO Financial Group.

Despite having massive unconventional energy reserves, and repeated rhetorical assertions of being an energy superpower, Canada faces an energy security conundrum – one of demand, not supply.

Fatih Birol, chief economist of the International Energy Agency, likens today's global energy sector to a long-running Broadway play, where suddenly the roles of many of the main energy actors are being reversed. The biggest role reversal is that of the United States, which is being propelled toward net energy self-sufficiency, and energy security, on the tide of the shale-gas revolution. The other key actor switching roles is China, which will soon overtake the United States as the world's largest energy consumer and inherit its script of insecurity of energy supply.

Story continues below advertisement

Canada, whose energy role has been long tied to the U.S, its single export market, will have to edit its script or miss the new energy season.

The new Canadian energy narrative is easy to sketch out, but much harder to write. Canada needs to diversify its energy exports to new markets, particularly fast-growing energy consumers in Asia and possibly the increasingly energy-insecure countries of Western Europe. But achieving this involves many plot twists, since Canada lacks the transportation capacity to ship energy, oil or gas, to these potential markets. And getting the audience onside for the required new pipelines, new port facilities, new volumes of shipping and new environmental risks will necessitate clearer dialogue and better audience participation.

First, we have to shift the script from a parochial debate on "projects and private interest" to a national dialogue on "diversification of our energy markets and the national interest." Without creating a shared sense of our energy future, it will be difficult to align all the actors and interests. It is difficult to envisage building such a shared vision without either active federal and provincial government leadership or vibrant and informed public discussion.

Second, we need to move away from the current winners-and-losers plot line and introduce the national interest, with its shared benefits and mutual risks, into the script. A national-interest framework of how best to achieve energy diversification would recast the current squabbles about "licensing rights." The multiple licensing challenge should be to align commercial licence (a project must make economic sense) with social licence (a project that impacts indigenous lands or raises environmental or community issues must make public sense) with policy licence (a project must make policy and regulatory sense) and with innovation licence (a project can alter the risk-return balance through technology, which has the public trust as a problem-solver).

Third, we need some innovation in policy thinking. Continuing as we're going, repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, is coming dangerously close to that famous definition of insanity. Given the enormity of the change we're contemplating – pivoting from a single energy export market that has dominated Canadian energy strategy for more than 70 years, to multiple markets on several continents – will require enormous investments and complex planning. Can and should we expect individual firms and projects to efficiently and effectively align the multiple licensing requirements to accomplish this?

One possibility is a public energy transportation corridor, stretching from coast to coast, which could include pipelines, electrical grids and other forms of energy transport. It would be established by government in the national interest. In turn, government would set the rules for those operating within the corridor, to be determined after appropriate public consultation and reflect the multiple licensing objectives. Given this certainty, the private sector would compete to build, own and operate energy transportation facilities within the corridor.

How Canada shapes its energy future will significantly influence our long-term growth prospects and prosperity across the country. We should be clearer about our national interest in the crucial area of energy market diversification.

Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies