Opinion: Why are Canadian taxpayers being asked to fund an economically and environmentally risky pipeline project?

Prime Minister Mark Carney discusses Alberta's pipeline proposal while Premier Danielle Smith watches on at an announcement in Calgary on July 2. Gavin Young/Postmedia

Article content

The agreement between Canada and B.C. to fund infrastructure and skills training to support private sector investment is good news for British Columbians. It acknowledges B.C.’s role as the host of major private sector projects in critical minerals and energy development that will strengthen the economy over the next decade.

Article content

But the deal between Canada and Alberta to build a new pipeline through B.C. isn’t good news because it will result in taxpayers losing money on a project that private industry will not build because it’s too risky.

Article content

Article content

Article content

Why are Canadian taxpayers being asked to pay over $2,000 per household to finance a multibillion-dollar pipeline for the highly profitable oil industry?

Article content

Article content

Alberta’s answer is that public funds are required because regulatory uncertainty discourages private investment. But the fact that the Carney government has streamlined the approval process and other pipeline companies such as Enbridge have been building new pipelines without any taxpayer support shows this explanation has no merit.

Article content

The real reason that no private company is willing to build Alberta’s pipeline is because it’s a bad investment.

Article content

Oil companies know that world oil markets are weakening. Oil prices have begun to decline with the winding down of the U.S.-Iranian conflict, and the International Energy Agency forecasts a significant global oil surplus in 2027.

Article content

The agency also forecasts that oil demand growth will continue to slow and may decline over the next several decades. This view is shared by private oil companies such as BP that forecast oil demand will decline by at least 11 per cent by 2050 with the increased adoption of electric vehicles.

Article content

Article content

Private investors also know that there is increased competition from other lower cost pipelines. Currently, there are over one million barrels per day of low cost expansions available on the existing Enbridge and Trans Mountain pipelines, plus up to 1.1 million barrels per day on the proposed Keystone XL-Bridger pipeline. These expansions, which include tidewater access to world markets, are more than sufficient to accommodate the most optimistic Canadian oil production forecast without Alberta’s pipeline.

Article content

Article content

This combination of weaker demand for oil and competition from lower cost pipelines means that Alberta’s proposed pipeline will be unable to attract enough oil shipments to cover its costs.

Article content

In addition to losing money if the pipeline is built, Canadian taxpayers will be liable for environmental damages from the pipeline.

Article content

Risk assessments conducted by our research team estimate that the probability of a tanker spill from the Trans Mountain expansion is between 43 and 75 per cent over the operating life of the project even with improved safety measures. The new pipeline would increase the risk even more by tripling tanker traffic in the Salish Sea.