Skip to main content

TransCanada Corp.’s Energy East oil pipeline would be one of North America’s largest crude pipes, offering Alberta’s oil sands producers waiting for the Keystone XL line another way to reach customers by shipping across Canada to the Atlantic Coast.

TODD KOROL/REUTERS

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley is set to meet on Friday with her Ontario counterpart, Kathleen Wynne, as the Western province seeks to build support for the proposed Energy East pipeline after it drew heat from Montreal-area mayors on Thursday.

With her province reeling from the impact of depressed oil prices, Ms. Notley is pressing Ottawa to approve crude pipelines to the east and west coasts that would provide Alberta's industry with access to more lucrative export markets and support investment over the longer term.

Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre and several regional mayors announced Thursday that they oppose TransCanada Corp.'s proposed $15.7-billion project, saying it poses environmental risks with few benefits to Quebec. The proposed pipeline would move 1.1 million barrels of crude oil a day from Western Canada to Irving Oil Ltd.'s refinery and export terminal in Saint John. It would pass through heavily populated areas in the Montreal region.

Story continues below advertisement

"They didn't do their homework, obviously," Mr. Coderre said. "They were a bit arrogant, frankly. Let's call a spade a spade: It's a bad project."

He said that the economic benefits are slim – with negligible job creation – whereas the possible environmental fallout, including costly oil spills, water contamination and human health concerns, is high.

Not surprisingly, Mr. Coderre's criticism drew rebukes from three provinces with big stakes in the project: Alberta, Saskatchewan and New Brunswick.

Alberta Economic Development and Trade Minister Deron Bilous described Mr. Coderre's statements as "both ungenerous and shortsighted."

"Everyone loses if we destroy our resource economy," he said in a statement.

Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall said the mayors were being "parochial," adding that Quebeckers will "benefit to the tune of $10-billion in equalization payments this year."

New Brunswick Energy Minister Donald Arseneault said the project would create 3,000 construction jobs in his province and Quebec, but acknowledged the environmental concerns of the Quebec mayors would have to be addressed.

Story continues below advertisement

Alberta's Premier has spoken about the need to build at least one "drama-free" pipeline project and is eager to win Ms. Wynne's support for Energy East. "We're trying to have drama-free discussions, which is what you get when you collaborate with other provinces," Ms. Notley's spokeswoman, Cheryl Oates, said Thursday.

At a speech in Toronto on Thursday evening, which was attended by Ms. Wynne, the Alberta premier made a plea for pipelines to the coasts.

Ms. Notley said her government is determined to meet the environmental challenges posed by the oil industry. But she added the province – and to some extent, the country – still relies on the industry to generate jobs and government revenues.

"We must be able to present to the world an intelligent, progressive and well-managed energy product," she said. "And that cannot and will not happen without access to tidewater in our country."

The NDP government announced a major pivot in Alberta's environmental policy on Nov. 22, when it unveiled plans for an economy-wide carbon tax and a cap on emissions from the province's oil sands.

Aimed at tackling climate change, Ms. Notley has also said that the wide-reaching carbon rules should help Alberta secure approval from communities across Canada for the construction of pipeline projects.

Story continues below advertisement

The decision by Montreal-area mayors is the latest blow to Energy East. TransCanada dropped plans for an export terminal in Quebec last year over concerns about belugas in the St. Lawrence River.

TransCanada spokesman Tim Duboyce said the company is eager to hear all public concerns and address them. "We want to make Energy East a better project. We've demonstrated we are responsive to those concerns when they are raised," he said in a telephone interview from Calgary.

The staunch opposition in Quebec poses a tricky political problem for the federal government, which says it supports better market access for the industry even as it promises a more robust environmental review process, which the Liberals in Ottawa have criticized as lacking in credibility.

Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr was in Atlantic Canada this week and toured Irving Oil's Saint John refinery, which would process crude from the Energy East pipeline and partner with TransCanada in construction of an export terminal.

Environmentalists have called on the federal government to suspend TransCanada's application at the National Energy Board – as well as the review of Kinder Morgan Inc.'s proposed expansion of its Trans Mountain pipeline to Vancouver – until it can retool the process. Instead, Mr. Carr has said he will impose some "transitional measures" – due within weeks – to boost the credibility of the review before cabinet rules on the board's recommendations, first on Trans Mountain and then on Energy East.

With a report from Shawn McCarthy

Story continues below advertisement

Editor's note: A previous version of this story said TransCanada Corp.'s Energy East oil pipeline project would cost $12-billion; in fact, the cost is $15.7-billion.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Tickers mentioned in this story
Unchecking box will stop auto data updates
Comments

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:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • 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. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

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.
Cannabis pro newsletter