As construction gets underway on Cedar LNG, the world’s first Indigenous majority-owned LNG export terminal, a report from RBC highlights the project as a model of successful energy development in Canada.

“We broke a pattern that had existed for over a century,” said Karen Ogen, CEO of the First Nations Natural Gas Alliance.

“First Nations have been at the heart of the LNG opportunity, not on the sidelines or just on the job sites but in the boardrooms helping to make it happen.”

RBC said the Cedar LNG project in Kitimat, B.C. – a partnership between the Haisla Nation (50.1 per cent) and Pembina Pipeline Corporation (49.9 per cent) – is a model for Indigenous economic reconciliation in action.

“Canada’s future growth and prosperity depends heavily on getting Indigenous economic reconciliation right,” said report co-author Varun Srivatsan, RBC’s director of policy and strategic engagement.

“If not, the country’s ability to diversify our resource exports, enjoy independence and resiliency in strategic sectors, and improve productivity, which has lagged that of other countries for years, are all at risk.”

RBC outlined the enormous potential of Indigenous-led energy projects to drive economic growth.

Almost three-quarters of the 504 major resource and energy projects planned or underway in Canada run through or are within 20 kilometres of Indigenous territories.

The value of Indigenous equity opportunity from these projects is estimated at $98 billion over the next 10 years, with oil and gas projects dominating the list at $57.6 billion.

“It’s clear that First Nations are critical to LNG in Canada. It’s First Nations territory from where the gas is extracted in Treaty 8 territory, it’s First Nations territory across which gas is transported via pipeline, it’s First Nations territory where LNG terminals are located, and it’s First Nations waters through which carriers take LNG to market. This is why we say Canadian LNG is Indigenous LNG. And we are going to make history,” Ogen said.

Cedar LNG reached a final investment decision last June, following a permitting process that saw the Haisla Nation directly involved in planning the facilities and operations.

This includes a floating LNG terminal with emissions among the world’s lowest, at 0.08 per cent CO2 equivalent per tonne of LNG compared to the global average of 0.35 per cent. Operations are slated to start in late 2028.

“Our community felt it was important that our values of being Haisla, being Indigenous, were felt through every decision that was being made. That is what makes this project unique,” said Crystal Smith, the Haisla Nation’s elected chief councillor.

Central to the Haisla’s involvement in Cedar LNG are the jobs and ongoing revenues that benefit the nation and neighbouring communities.

This has included support for education and cultural programs and building a state-of-the-art health facility and a new housing development.

“Cedar LNG shows what is achievable when you have a shared vision,” Smith said.

“It is going to mean that my kids and grandkids have a different future from what I or anybody in my generation have experienced in our community. It is going to revive our culture, revive our language, and make us stronger going forward.”

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to the Canadian Energy Centre.

Canada’s natural gas production and exports are primed for growth as LNG projects come online, according to Houston, Texas-based consultancy RBN Energy.

Long-awaited LNG export terminals will open the door to Asian markets and break the decades-long grip of the United States as the sole customer for Canada’s natural gas.

RBN projects that Canada’s natural gas exports will rise to 12 billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d) by 2034, up from about 8 bcf/d today. But as more LNG terminals come online, less of that natural gas will head south.

“We think the real possibility exists that the amount of natural gas being exported to the United States by pipeline will actually decline,” said Martin King, RBN’s managing director of North America energy market analysis, on a recent webinar.

RBN’s analysis suggests that Canada’s natural gas exports to the United States could drop to 6 bcf/d by the early 2030s compared to around 8 bcf/d today.

With the first cargo from the LNG Canada terminal at Kitimat, B.C. expected to ship in late June, Canada will finally have access to new markets for natural gas. The first phase of the project will have capacity to ship about 1.8 bcf/d.

And more projects are on the way.

LNG Canada’s joint venture partners are considering a second phase that would double export capacity.

Also at Kitimat, the Cedar LNG project is under construction and is expected to be completed in 2028. The floating terminal led by the Haisla Nation will have capacity to export 0.4 bcf/d.

Woodfibre LNG, located near Squamish, B.C. began construction in late 2023 and is expected to be substantially completed by 2027, with export capacity of about 0.3 bcf/d.

Expansions of LNG Canada and Cedar LNG could put LNG exports into the range of 5 bcf/d in the early 2030s, King said.

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to the Canadian Energy Centre.

As the utilities and hydroprocessing technical lead for Imperial Oil’s Strathcona Refinery near Edmonton, 32-year-old Marjorie Mallare and her team help ensure operations run smoothly and safely at one of Canada’s largest industrial facilities.

The exciting part, she says, is that all four engineers she leads are female.

It’s part of the reason Mallare was named one of ten Young Women in Energy award winners for 2025.

“I hope they realize how important the work that they do is, inspiring and empowering women, connecting women and recognizing women in our industry,” she says.

“That can be very pivotal for young women, or really any young professional that is starting off their career.”

Born and raised in the Philippines, Mallare and her family moved to Edmonton near the end of junior high school.

Living in the industrial heartland of Alberta, it was hard not to see the opportunity present in the oil and gas industry.

When she started post-secondary studies at the University of Alberta in the early 2010s, the industry was booming.

“The amount of opportunities, at least when I started university, which was around 2011, was one of the high periods in our industry at the time. So, it was definitely very attractive,” Mallare says.

When choosing a discipline, engineering stood out.

“At the time, chemical engineering had the most number of females, so that was a contributing factor,” she says.

“Just looking at what’s available within the province, within the city, chemical engineering just seemed to offer a lot more opportunities, a lot more companies that I could potentially work for.”

Through work co-ops in oil and gas, her interest in a career in the industry continued to grow.

“It just kind of naturally happened. That drew my interest more and more, and it made it easier to find future opportunities,” Mallare says.

Following a work practicum with Imperial Oil and graduation, she started working with the company full time.

On the side, Mallare has also driven STEM outreach programs, encouraging young women to pursue careers in engineering.

In addition to supporting the Strathcona Refinery’s operations department, Mallare and her team work on sustainability-focused projects and reducing the refinery’s carbon footprint.

The 200,000 barrel per day facility represents about 30 per cent of Western Canada’s refining capacity.

“Eventually, our group will also be responsible for running the new renewable diesel unit that we’re planning to commission later this year,” says Mallare.

Once completed, the $720 million project will be the largest renewable diesel facility in Canada, producing more than one billion litres of biofuel annually.

Projects like these are why Mallare believes Canada will continue to be a global energy leader.

“We’re leading others already with regards to pursuing more sustainable alternatives and reducing our carbon footprints overall. That’s not something we should lose sight of.”

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to the Canadian Energy Centre.

Building a port on Hudson’s Bay to ship natural resources harvested across Western Canada to the world has been a long-held dream of Canadian politicians, starting with Sir Wilfred Laurier.

Since 1931, a small deepwater port has operated at Churchill, Manitoba, primarily shipping grain but more recently expanding handling of critical minerals and fertilizers.

A group of 11 First Nations in Manitoba plans to build an additional industrial terminal nearby at Port Nelson to ship liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe and potash to Brazil.

Courtesy NeeStaNan

Robyn Lore, a director with project backer NeeStaNan, which is Cree for “all of us,” said it makes more sense to ship Canadian LNG to Europe from an Arctic port than it does to send Canadian natural gas all the way to the U.S. Gulf Coast to be exported as LNG to the same place – which is happening today.

“There is absolutely a business case for sending our LNG directly to European markets rather than sending our natural gas down to the Gulf Coast and having them liquefy it and ship it over,” Lore said. “It’s in Canada’s interest to do this.”

Over 100 years ago, the Port Nelson location at the south end of Hudson’s Bay on the Nelson River was the first to be considered for a Canadian Arctic port.

In 1912, a Port Nelson project was selected to proceed rather than a port at Churchill, about 280 kilometres north.

Port Nelson, Manitoba in 1918. Photo courtesy NeeStaNan

The Port Nelson site was earmarked by federal government engineers as the most cost-effective location for a terminal to ship Canadian resources overseas.

Construction started but was marred by building challenges due to violent winter storms that beached supply ships and badly damaged the dredge used to deepen the waters around the port.

By 1918, the project was abandoned.

In the 1920s, Prime Minister William Lyon MacKenzie King chose Churchill as the new location for a port on Hudson’s Bay, where it was built and continues to operate today between late July and early November when it is not iced in.

Lore sees using modern technology at Port Nelson including dredging or extending a floating wharf to overcome the challenges that stopped the project from proceeding more than a century ago.

Port Nelson, Manitoba in 1918. Photo courtesy NeeStaNan

He said natural gas could travel to the terminal through a 1,000-kilometre spur line off TC Energy’s Canadian Mainline by using Manitoba Hydro’s existing right of way.

A second option proposes shipping natural gas through Pembina Pipeline’s Alliance system to Regina, where it could be liquefied and shipped by rail to Port Nelson.

The original rail bed to Port Nelson still exists, and about 150 kilometers of track would have to be laid to reach the proposed site, Lore said.

“Our vision is for a rail line that can handle 150-car trains with loads of 120 tonnes per car running at 80 kilometers per hour. That’s doable on the line from Amery to Port Nelson. It makes the economics work for shippers,” said Lore.

Port Nelson could be used around the year because saltwater ice is easier to break through using modern icebreakers than freshwater ice that impacts Churchill between November and May.

Lore, however, is quick to quell the notion NeeStaNan is competing against the existing port.

“We want our project to proceed on its merits and collaborate with other ports for greater efficiency,” he said.

“It makes sense for Manitoba, and it makes sense for Canada, even more than it did for Laurier more than 100 years ago.”

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to the Canadian Energy Centre.

]]>

Building a port on Hudson’s Bay to ship natural resources harvested across Western Canada to the world has been a long-held dream of Canadian politicians, starting with Sir Wilfred Laurier.

Since 1931, a small deepwater port has operated at Churchill, Manitoba, primarily shipping grain but more recently expanding handling of critical minerals and fertilizers.

A group of 11 First Nations in Manitoba plans to build an additional industrial terminal nearby at Port Nelson to ship liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe and potash to Brazil.

Courtesy NeeStaNan

Robyn Lore, a director with project backer NeeStaNan, which is Cree for “all of us,” said it makes more sense to ship Canadian LNG to Europe from an Arctic port than it does to send Canadian natural gas all the way to the U.S. Gulf Coast to be exported as LNG to the same place – which is happening today.

“There is absolutely a business case for sending our LNG directly to European markets rather than sending our natural gas down to the Gulf Coast and having them liquefy it and ship it over,” Lore said. “It’s in Canada’s interest to do this.”

Over 100 years ago, the Port Nelson location at the south end of Hudson’s Bay on the Nelson River was the first to be considered for a Canadian Arctic port.

In 1912, a Port Nelson project was selected to proceed rather than a port at Churchill, about 280 kilometres north.

Port Nelson, Manitoba in 1918. Photo courtesy NeeStaNan

The Port Nelson site was earmarked by federal government engineers as the most cost-effective location for a terminal to ship Canadian resources overseas.

Construction started but was marred by building challenges due to violent winter storms that beached supply ships and badly damaged the dredge used to deepen the waters around the port.

By 1918, the project was abandoned.

In the 1920s, Prime Minister William Lyon MacKenzie King chose Churchill as the new location for a port on Hudson’s Bay, where it was built and continues to operate today between late July and early November when it is not iced in.

Lore sees using modern technology at Port Nelson including dredging or extending a floating wharf to overcome the challenges that stopped the project from proceeding more than a century ago.

Port Nelson, Manitoba in 1918. Photo courtesy NeeStaNan

He said natural gas could travel to the terminal through a 1,000-kilometre spur line off TC Energy’s Canadian Mainline by using Manitoba Hydro’s existing right of way.

A second option proposes shipping natural gas through Pembina Pipeline’s Alliance system to Regina, where it could be liquefied and shipped by rail to Port Nelson.

The original rail bed to Port Nelson still exists, and about 150 kilometers of track would have to be laid to reach the proposed site, Lore said.

“Our vision is for a rail line that can handle 150-car trains with loads of 120 tonnes per car running at 80 kilometers per hour. That’s doable on the line from Amery to Port Nelson. It makes the economics work for shippers,” said Lore.

Port Nelson could be used around the year because saltwater ice is easier to break through using modern icebreakers than freshwater ice that impacts Churchill between November and May.

Lore, however, is quick to quell the notion NeeStaNan is competing against the existing port.

“We want our project to proceed on its merits and collaborate with other ports for greater efficiency,” he said.

“It makes sense for Manitoba, and it makes sense for Canada, even more than it did for Laurier more than 100 years ago.”

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to the Canadian Energy Centre.

]]> https://www.canadianenergycentre.ca/new-canadian-oil-and-gas-pipelines-a-38-billion-opportunity-says-montreal-economic-institute/ Mon, 14 Apr 2025 17:13:31 +0000 https://www.canadianenergycentre.ca/?p=15569

Building pipeline export capacity from west to east would benefit Canadians by diversifying trade, says the Montreal Economic Institute (MEI).

In a recent report, MEI found that if the proposed Energy East and Gazoduq/GNL Quebec projects had been built, Canada would have been able to export $38 billion worth of oil and gas to non-U.S. destinations last year.

“Based on the 2024 export numbers, this would have been equivalent to as much as 27.7 per cent of Canada’s oil and 15 per cent of natural gas,” said MEI senior policy analyst Gabriel Giguère.

Canada is already seeing the benefits of increased export capacity on a smaller scale.

The completion of the Trans Mountain expansion last year saw oil shipments off the West Coast to markets other than the United States dramatically increase by 59 per cent, according to Statistics Canada.

But those increased exports represent only about four per cent of Canada’s total oil production.

Building export capacity in Eastern Canada, especially for liquefied natural gas (LNG), could further increase the diversity of Canada’s energy trade, something that our allies are looking for, said Giguère.

“People want our natural resources. We saw during the pandemic South Korea, Germany, Poland [and] Japan asking for Canada’s LNG. The dynamic with the United States is shifting. It will be more appealing to look toward Canada who is still a reliable ally,” he said.

“We would be able to have more prosperity for Canada, more revenue for governments because they collect royalties that go to government programs. So, I believe everybody’s winning with these kinds of infrastructure projects.”

The MEI report noted that Energy East and GNL Quebec would have generated nearly $30 billion of capital investment for their construction.

“We would need a lot of workers to build an Energy East or GNL Quebec, and these are high paying jobs,” Giguère said.

Amid trade tension with the United States, the projects are seeing an increase in support.

In a recent poll released by Montreal-based La Presse, a majority of Quebecers supported both projects.

“It was interesting, we saw that 61 per cent of Quebecers were for the renaissance of a project like Gazoduq/GNL Quebec, with only 20 per cent against it,” Giguère.

Energy East has also seen an uptick in support, with 59 per cent of Quebecers in support, according to the La Presse poll.

“It’s pretty clear that there’s a big majority, or at least a very clear majority of support for both projects,” said Giguère.

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to Canadian Energy Centre Ltd.

]]>

Building pipeline export capacity from west to east would benefit Canadians by diversifying trade, says the Montreal Economic Institute (MEI).

In a recent report, MEI found that if the proposed Energy East and Gazoduq/GNL Quebec projects had been built, Canada would have been able to export $38 billion worth of oil and gas to non-U.S. destinations last year.

“Based on the 2024 export numbers, this would have been equivalent to as much as 27.7 per cent of Canada’s oil and 15 per cent of natural gas,” said MEI senior policy analyst Gabriel Giguère.

Canada is already seeing the benefits of increased export capacity on a smaller scale.

The completion of the Trans Mountain expansion last year saw oil shipments off the West Coast to markets other than the United States dramatically increase by 59 per cent, according to Statistics Canada.

But those increased exports represent only about four per cent of Canada’s total oil production.

Building export capacity in Eastern Canada, especially for liquefied natural gas (LNG), could further increase the diversity of Canada’s energy trade, something that our allies are looking for, said Giguère.

“People want our natural resources. We saw during the pandemic South Korea, Germany, Poland [and] Japan asking for Canada’s LNG. The dynamic with the United States is shifting. It will be more appealing to look toward Canada who is still a reliable ally,” he said.

“We would be able to have more prosperity for Canada, more revenue for governments because they collect royalties that go to government programs. So, I believe everybody’s winning with these kinds of infrastructure projects.”

The MEI report noted that Energy East and GNL Quebec would have generated nearly $30 billion of capital investment for their construction.

“We would need a lot of workers to build an Energy East or GNL Quebec, and these are high paying jobs,” Giguère said.

Amid trade tension with the United States, the projects are seeing an increase in support.

In a recent poll released by Montreal-based La Presse, a majority of Quebecers supported both projects.

“It was interesting, we saw that 61 per cent of Quebecers were for the renaissance of a project like Gazoduq/GNL Quebec, with only 20 per cent against it,” Giguère.

Energy East has also seen an uptick in support, with 59 per cent of Quebecers in support, according to the La Presse poll.

“It’s pretty clear that there’s a big majority, or at least a very clear majority of support for both projects,” said Giguère.

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to Canadian Energy Centre Ltd.

]]> https://www.canadianenergycentre.ca/saskatchewan-indigenous-leaders-urging-need-for-access-to-natural-gas/ Wed, 02 Apr 2025 15:22:34 +0000 https://www.canadianenergycentre.ca/?p=15550

Indigenous communities across Canada need access to natural gas to reduce energy poverty, says a new report by Energy for a Secure Future (ESF).

It’s a serious issue that needs to be addressed, say Indigenous community and business leaders in Saskatchewan.

“We’re here today to implore upon the federal government that we need the installation of natural gas and access to natural gas so that we can have safe and reliable service,” said Guy Lonechild, CEO of the Regina-based First Nations Power Authority, on a March 11 ESF webinar.

Last year, 20 Saskatchewan communities moved a resolution at the Assembly of First Nations’ annual general assembly calling on the federal government to “immediately enhance” First Nations financial supports for “more desirable energy security measures such as natural gas for home heating.”

“We’ve been calling it heat poverty because that’s what it really is…our families are finding that they have to either choose between buying groceries or heating their home,” Chief Christine Longjohn of Sturgeon Lake First Nation said in the ESF report.

“We should be able to live comfortably within our homes. We want to be just like every other homeowner that has that choice to be able to use natural gas.”

At least 333 First Nations communities across Canada are not connected to natural gas utilities, according to the Canada Energy Regulator (CER).

ESF says that while there are many federal programs that help cover the upfront costs of accessing electricity, primarily from renewable sources, there are no comparable ones to support natural gas access.

“Most Canadian and Indigenous communities support actions to address climate change. However, the policy priority of reducing fossil fuel use has had unintended consequences,” the ESF report said.

“Recent funding support has been directed not at improving reliability or affordability of the energy, but rather at sustainability.”

Natural gas costs less than half — or even a quarter — of electricity prices in Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan, according to CER data.

“Natural gas is something NRCan [Natural Resources Canada] will not fund. It’s not considered a renewable for them,” said Chief Mark Fox of the Piapot First Nation, located about 50 kilometres northeast of Regina.

“Come to my nation and see how my people are living, and the struggles that they have day to day out here because of the high cost of energy, of electric heat and propane.”

According to ESF, some Indigenous communities compare the challenge of natural gas access to the multiyear effort to raise awareness and, ultimately funding, to address poor water quality and access on reserve.

“Natural gas is the new water,” Lonechild said.

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to the Canadian Energy Centre.

 

]]>

Indigenous communities across Canada need access to natural gas to reduce energy poverty, says a new report by Energy for a Secure Future (ESF).

It’s a serious issue that needs to be addressed, say Indigenous community and business leaders in Saskatchewan.

“We’re here today to implore upon the federal government that we need the installation of natural gas and access to natural gas so that we can have safe and reliable service,” said Guy Lonechild, CEO of the Regina-based First Nations Power Authority, on a March 11 ESF webinar.

Last year, 20 Saskatchewan communities moved a resolution at the Assembly of First Nations’ annual general assembly calling on the federal government to “immediately enhance” First Nations financial supports for “more desirable energy security measures such as natural gas for home heating.”

“We’ve been calling it heat poverty because that’s what it really is…our families are finding that they have to either choose between buying groceries or heating their home,” Chief Christine Longjohn of Sturgeon Lake First Nation said in the ESF report.

“We should be able to live comfortably within our homes. We want to be just like every other homeowner that has that choice to be able to use natural gas.”

At least 333 First Nations communities across Canada are not connected to natural gas utilities, according to the Canada Energy Regulator (CER).

ESF says that while there are many federal programs that help cover the upfront costs of accessing electricity, primarily from renewable sources, there are no comparable ones to support natural gas access.

“Most Canadian and Indigenous communities support actions to address climate change. However, the policy priority of reducing fossil fuel use has had unintended consequences,” the ESF report said.

“Recent funding support has been directed not at improving reliability or affordability of the energy, but rather at sustainability.”

Natural gas costs less than half — or even a quarter — of electricity prices in Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan, according to CER data.

“Natural gas is something NRCan [Natural Resources Canada] will not fund. It’s not considered a renewable for them,” said Chief Mark Fox of the Piapot First Nation, located about 50 kilometres northeast of Regina.

“Come to my nation and see how my people are living, and the struggles that they have day to day out here because of the high cost of energy, of electric heat and propane.”

According to ESF, some Indigenous communities compare the challenge of natural gas access to the multiyear effort to raise awareness and, ultimately funding, to address poor water quality and access on reserve.

“Natural gas is the new water,” Lonechild said.

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to the Canadian Energy Centre.

 

]]> https://www.canadianenergycentre.ca/the-beauty-of-economic-corridors-inside-albertas-work-to-link-products-with-new-markets/ Mon, 31 Mar 2025 17:46:16 +0000 https://www.canadianenergycentre.ca/?p=15530

 

Devin Dreeshen, Alberta’s Minister of Transportation and Economic Corridors.

CEC: How have recent developments impacted Alberta’s ability to expand trade routes and access new markets for energy and natural resources?

Dreeshen: With the U.S. trade dispute going on right now, it’s great to see that other provinces and the federal government are taking an interest in our east, west and northern trade routes, something that we in Alberta have been advocating for a long time.

We signed agreements with Saskatchewan and Manitoba to have an economic corridor to stretch across the prairies, as well as a recent agreement with the Northwest Territories to go north. With the leadership of Premier Danielle Smith, she’s been working on a BC, prairie and three northern territories economic corridor agreement with pretty much the entire western and northern block of Canada.

There has been a tremendous amount of work trying to get Alberta products to market and to make sure we can build big projects in Canada again.

CEC: Which infrastructure projects, whether pipeline, rail or port expansions, do you see as the most viable for improving Alberta’s global market access?

Dreeshen: We look at everything. Obviously, pipelines are the safest way to transport oil and gas, but also rail is part of the mix of getting over four million barrels per day to markets around the world.

The beauty of economic corridors is that it’s a swath of land that can have any type of utility in it, whether it be a roadway, railway, pipeline or a utility line. When you have all the environmental permits that are approved in a timely manner, and you have that designated swath of land, it politically de-risks any type of project.

CEC: A key focus of your ministry has been expanding trade corridors, including an agreement with Saskatchewan and Manitoba to explore access to Hudson’s Bay. Is there any interest from industry in developing this corridor further?

Dreeshen: There’s been lots of talk [about] Hudson Bay, a trade corridor with rail and port access. We’ve seen some improvements to go to Churchill, but also an interest in the Nelson River.

We’re starting to see more confidence in the private sector and industry wanting to build these projects. It’s great that governments can get together and work on a common goal to build things here in Canada.

CEC: What is your vision for Alberta’s future as a leader in global trade, and how do economic corridors fit into that strategy?

Dreeshen: Premier Smith has talked about C-69 being repealed by the federal government [and] the reversal of the West Coast tanker ban, which targets Alberta energy going west out of the Pacific.

There’s a lot of work that needs to be done on the federal side. Alberta has been doing a lot of the heavy lifting when it comes to economic corridors.

We’ve asked the federal government if they could develop an economic corridor agency. We want to make sure that the federal government can come to the table, work with provinces [and] work with First Nations across this country to make sure that we can see these projects being built again here in Canada.

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to the Canadian Energy Centre.

]]>

 

Devin Dreeshen, Alberta’s Minister of Transportation and Economic Corridors.

CEC: How have recent developments impacted Alberta’s ability to expand trade routes and access new markets for energy and natural resources?

Dreeshen: With the U.S. trade dispute going on right now, it’s great to see that other provinces and the federal government are taking an interest in our east, west and northern trade routes, something that we in Alberta have been advocating for a long time.

We signed agreements with Saskatchewan and Manitoba to have an economic corridor to stretch across the prairies, as well as a recent agreement with the Northwest Territories to go north. With the leadership of Premier Danielle Smith, she’s been working on a BC, prairie and three northern territories economic corridor agreement with pretty much the entire western and northern block of Canada.

There has been a tremendous amount of work trying to get Alberta products to market and to make sure we can build big projects in Canada again.

CEC: Which infrastructure projects, whether pipeline, rail or port expansions, do you see as the most viable for improving Alberta’s global market access?

Dreeshen: We look at everything. Obviously, pipelines are the safest way to transport oil and gas, but also rail is part of the mix of getting over four million barrels per day to markets around the world.

The beauty of economic corridors is that it’s a swath of land that can have any type of utility in it, whether it be a roadway, railway, pipeline or a utility line. When you have all the environmental permits that are approved in a timely manner, and you have that designated swath of land, it politically de-risks any type of project.

CEC: A key focus of your ministry has been expanding trade corridors, including an agreement with Saskatchewan and Manitoba to explore access to Hudson’s Bay. Is there any interest from industry in developing this corridor further?

Dreeshen: There’s been lots of talk [about] Hudson Bay, a trade corridor with rail and port access. We’ve seen some improvements to go to Churchill, but also an interest in the Nelson River.

We’re starting to see more confidence in the private sector and industry wanting to build these projects. It’s great that governments can get together and work on a common goal to build things here in Canada.

CEC: What is your vision for Alberta’s future as a leader in global trade, and how do economic corridors fit into that strategy?

Dreeshen: Premier Smith has talked about C-69 being repealed by the federal government [and] the reversal of the West Coast tanker ban, which targets Alberta energy going west out of the Pacific.

There’s a lot of work that needs to be done on the federal side. Alberta has been doing a lot of the heavy lifting when it comes to economic corridors.

We’ve asked the federal government if they could develop an economic corridor agency. We want to make sure that the federal government can come to the table, work with provinces [and] work with First Nations across this country to make sure that we can see these projects being built again here in Canada.

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to the Canadian Energy Centre.

]]>