GOLDSTEIN: Expect retaliation if we weaponize our energy exports to the U.S.

Americans could shut down Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline in retaliation

Published Aug 26, 2026  •  Last updated 1 hour ago  •  3 minute read

An Enbridge facility in Sarnia, Ont. Photo by Postmedia file photo

Those calling for Prime Minister Mark Carney to tax or restrict energy exports to the U.S. as a weapon in the ongoing tariff war should explain the consequences if we do.

Article content

If, for example, we put an energy tax on our oil exports to the U.S., what will we do if the Americans shut down Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline in retaliation?

Article content

Recommended Videos

Article content

The 1,038-km pipeline transports 540,000 barrels of light crude oil and natural gas liquids daily from Alberta to refineries in Ontario and Quebec, by way of Wisconsin and Michigan.

Shutting it down would create an immediate oil crisis in Ontario and Quebec, since Line 5 supplies roughly half of the oil used in both provinces.

Enbridge warns closing Line 5, which connects Alberta and Saskatchewan energy producers to vital markets in central Canada, would cost thousands of Canadian jobs, hike the price of gasoline, increase the cost of living and over time result in the elimination of thousands of products Canadians rely on every day.

Risking U.S. retaliatory ramifications

The Carney government warns that:

“The economic and energy disruption and damage to Canada and the U.S. from a Line 5 shutdown would be widespread and significant. This would impact energy prices, such as propane for heating homes and the price of gas at the pump. At a time when global inflation is making it hard on families to make ends meet, these are unacceptable outcomes.

Article content

Article content

“The Government of Canada is also worried about the domino effects the shutdown would have on the jobs of thousands of Canadians working not only in the oil industry but in interconnected areas of our economy. The shutdown could have a major impact on a number of communities on both sides of the border that depend on the wellbeing of businesses along the supply chain.”

Because the need for oil and natural gas liquids would continue, up to 800 railway tank cars or 2,000 trucks per day would be required to transport them if Line 5 is shut down.

Democrats aren’t in favour of Line 5

If U.S. President Donald Trump was to order the closure of Canadian oil flowing through American pipes in retaliation for Canada putting an energy tax on Canadian oil destined for the U.S., don’t expect the Democrats to help us.

Michigan’s Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has been trying to shut down Line 5 for eight years through multiple legal actions and court cases, arguing a 7.2-km stretch of the pipeline anchored underwater at the bottom of the Straits of Mackinac, connecting Lake Michigan and Lake Huron, is an environmental hazard.

Article content

Whitmer has rejected Enbridge’s proposed solution — constructing a concrete-lined tunnel costing $500 million in 2018 and about $750-million today — burying a replacement pipe deep beneath the bed of the Straits of Mackinac.

Lack of pipelines holding us back

The continuing legal battle over Line 5 is one reason Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Ontario Premier Doug Ford last month proposed a 3,000-km Northern Shield Energy Corridor from Hardisty, Alta. to Sarnia, but that would take years to complete and would be no help in an immediate crisis caused by the closure of Line 5.

While he says all options are on the table, Carney has so far resisted calls to tax or curtail Canadian energy exports to the U.S., arguing it’s important for Canada to show the world we are a reliable, rules-based energy supplier as we pursue more foreign markets.

But it’s also a practical response to the reality that more than 90% of Canada’s oil exports (and almost 100% of our natural gas exports) currently go to the U.S.

Article content

Shipping oil and natural gas to global markets — which would have given us more energy options today and which we should have started decades ago — is in its infant stages in Canada, constricted by our lack of pipelines.

That means that curtailing the flow of Canadian oil and natural gas to the U.S. by slapping a tax on energy would result in massive revenue losses to the Canadian economy and bolster separatist forces in Alberta heading into the Oct. 19 referendum.

Taxing the Americans for our energy would certainly be noticed by the U.S. as we are their major foreign supplier of oil, natural gas and electricity through deeply integrated power networks.

But those Canadians calling for it should be careful what they wish for.

Article content