U.S. President Donald Trump famously bragged on the campaign trail that he would end inflation and the war in Ukraine “on day one.” Simplistic claims sometimes sell, as seen by the fact that Kamala Harris is not occupying the Oval Office. Yet after less than four months of the chaotic Trump presidency, many American voters may wish they could build a time machine to revisit their choice on November 5, 2024.
Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre has made his own Trump-like claims of easy future energy project accomplishments. He has also trotted out a very revisionist narrative of how the Liberals ruined everything, especially around oil and gas development.
To prove his point he recently posted a list on social media of 16 oil and gas proposals totalling over $175 billion that he implied were killed by bill C-69, Canada’s updated Impact Assessment Act.
Specifically, Poilievre posted “Mark Carney says, ‘we do not plan to repeal Bill C-69.’ This Liberal law blocked BILLIONS of dollars of investment in oil & gas projects, pipelines, LNG plants, mines, and so much more – all of which would create powerful paycheques for our people.”
Is this true? Hardly. Not one of the projects he listed was subject to the so-called “no pipelines bill” because all were submitted to regulators prior to C-69 becoming law on June 19, 2019. As a result, all these projects were instead assessed under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act 2012. And who was prime minister in 2012? Former Conservative leader Stephen Harper.
Let’s go through Poilievre’s posted list to pick apart what is actually true.
Grassy Point LNG – This $10 billion proposal was submitted to regulators in 2014 but was withdrawn by the company in 2018 before a decision was rendered by provincial or federal governments, and a year before C-69 became law.
West Coast LNG – According to Poilievre’s own graphic, “Exxon Mobil and Imperial Oil withdrew this proposed LNG facility in Prince Rupert B.C. from the provincial and federal environmental assessment processes in 2018” – a year before the much-maligned C-69 was passed.
Aurora LNG – This $28 billion project was abandoned by their investors in 2017 – not because of Ottawa inaction – but due to plunging world prices for liquified natural gas that had dropped to $6 per million British thermal units due to a glut in global supply. According to the proponent Nexen, “Our decision was market-based and driven by capital discipline. We require every business investment to meet minimum criteria including sustainable, long-term profitability.”
Prince Rupert LNG – Shell pulled the plug on this project around the same time that the Aurora project was abandoned by investors, and for the same reason. According to a CBC report on the cancellation, “LNG expectations have taken a hit in recent years as the global markets have been flooded by supply.” This news came a day after Shell also dumped their $8.5 billion stake in the oil sands, citing the need to reduce their company’s carbon emissions.
Pacific Northwest LNG – Three years before C-69 was even passed, this proposal from Malaysian giant Petronas was approved by the Trudeau government in 2016 over strong objections of environmental groups. Rather than heaping climate considerations on the project as Poilievre alleges, it came to light in court documents that Ottawa did not even consider cumulative impacts. Ottawa apparently opted instead to approve the contentious proposal in a “horse trade” exchange for B.C.’s consent for the Trans Mountain pipeline. In the end Petronas pulled the plug, citing “prolonged depressed prices and shifts in the energy industry.”
KwispaaLNG – This $18 billion proposal for the west coast of Vancouver Island was abandoned by the company in February 2019, before C-69 became law. The federal government page states, “The proponent has not provided the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada with the required information or studies within the legislated time limit.”
Frontier Oil Sands Mine – Tech Resources abruptly abandoned their pre-C-69 federal environmental assessment in February 2020 for this massive bitumen mine proposal. Why? Unrealistic oil price projections. In 2016, Tech submitted documents optimistically stating, “Prices are forecast to be US$80 to US$90 per barrel by 2020, and increasing thereafter.” The COVID pandemic tanked oil prices to below $20 per barrel shortly after Tech cancelled the project and they have remained below $90 ever since except for six months in 2022. Still, it must somehow all be Ottawa’s fault.
Aspen Oil Sands – Exxon dumped this in-situ bitumen extraction project in 2019, less than a year after it was first proposed. The company said the project could not go forward until the Alberta government phased out their self-imposed production curtailment brought in to prop up sagging prices.
Muskwa SAGD – Koch Oil Sands walked away from this project in 2016 citing “regulatory uncertainty” – not from the yet-to-be passed C-69 – but from the Alberta government’s Climate Leadership Program. Andrew Read, a senior analyst at the Pembina Institute described the Muskwa cancellation as “a political maneuver to undermine the climate policies being implemented in Alberta.” Interestingly, Koch applied for a new oil sands lease two days after cancelling Muskwa, presumably under the same regime of “regulatory uncertainty.” While Koch was obviously no fan of the NDP government at the time, the real reason for the $600 million cancellation was likely crude prices hovering around $50 per barrel.
Fredrick Brook Shale – Corridor Resources cancelled this $70 million fracking proposal in New Brunswick in 2019. Why? Because the provincial government had a moratorium on new fracking projects since 2014. A newly elected Progressive Conservative government quietly granted Corridor an exemption from fracking ban but the deal fell apart due to lack of Indigenous consultation and public opposition – not from C-69.
Northern Gateway Pipeline – This contentious $7.9 billion proposed pipeline to the north B.C. coast was cancelled two years before C-69 was passed. While resource revisionists enjoy blaming this on oil-hostile policies from Ottawa, the primary nail in the coffin was lack of credible consultation with First Nations. Stephen Harper was the prime minister for the vast majority of the approval process, and he learned the hard way that neglecting Indigenous rights will lead to a drawn-out legal defeat. In a stinging decision, The Federal Court of Appeal found “Canada offered only a brief, hurried and inadequate” consultation with First Nations.
Exactly zero of these energy project cancellations can credibly be blamed on C-69. If Poilievre is so brazenly loose with truth, what kind of elected leader would he be? American voters are learning that facts matter and simplistic claims from populist politicians are not to be trusted. Canadian voters should take note and vote accordingly.
The post No, Canada’s So-called ‘No Pipelines Bill’ Didn’t Block These 16 Energy Projects appeared first on DeSmog.
This post has been syndicated from DeSmog, where it was published under this address.