TheEnbridgeNorthernGatewayProject:GrandVision,MissedOpportunity

Sunday,July29,2018RyanLemiski

TheNorthernGatewayProjectwasanambitiousproposaltocreateanewtransportationroutebetweenCanadianoilproductioninnortheastAlbertaandworldoilmarkets.In2009,EnbridgeInc.anditspartnersmadetheirprojectplanspublicbyannouncingtheirintentionstoseekfederalregulatoryapproval.Duringafive-yearreviewperiod(2009–2014),socialandenvironmentalriskswereidentified,andestimationsofeconomicbenefitswereevaluatedandpresented.Thisperiodoftimealsosawtheriseofconsiderablepoliticaloppositionandresistancebysomeoftheaboriginalcommunitiesimpactedbytheprojectproposal.Thevastmajorityofthecriticismwasrelatedtowhatwasperceivedasasensitivelocationfortheproposedmarineterminal,pipelinecrossingsatimportantwatercourses,thepotentialforacatastrophicspill,andtheproject’scontributiontotheeffectsofanthropogenicclimatechange.NorthernGatewaypresentedCanadawithapotentialeconomicboon,withestimatedgrossdomesticproduct(GDP)gainsontheorderof312billionCanadiandollars(CAD).Theprojectwassupportedbyamajorityoftheaboriginalcommunitieslocatedalongtheproposedpipelineright-of-way(RoW),andboththeNationalEnergyBoard(NEB)andtheFederalCourtofAppeallaudeditforitsefforts.Nonetheless,federalcabinetrejectedtheproposalinNovemberof2016.ThisresponseraisedmanyquestionsaboutCanada’sregulatoryreviewprocess,itsdutytoconsult,whetherornottheprojectwasdeniedforappropriatereasons,andtheimpactofthisdecisiononfutureinvestment.ThispaperexaminestheseconcernsbybeginningwithanoverviewofNorthernGatewayandtheregulatoryreviewprocessusedtoevaluatetheprojectproposal.RisksandbenefitsassociatedwithconstructionandoperationofNorthernGatewayarethenpresented.Finally,thepaperconcludeswithadiscussiononthewinnersandlosersthatemergedafterNorthernGateway’srejection,andanopinionpiecethatchallengesthejustificationsforitscancellation.IntroductionInOctober2005,NorthernGatewayPipelinesLimitedPartnership(NGPLP),orNorthernGateway,proposedtobuildandoperateamarineterminalatKitimat,BritishColumbia(B.C.),andtwopipelinesbetweenBruderheim,Alberta,andthemarineterminal(Figure1)(Enbridge,2005;NEB,2013a).NorthernGateway’sprojectscopeinvolvedthreemajorcomponents:

1) One91.4centimetre(36inch)diameterpipelinethatwouldtransportanaverageof525,000barrels

ofoilproductsperdaywestfromBruderheimtoKitimat;2) Aparallelpipeline,50.8centimetres(20inches)indiameterthatwouldcarryanaverageof193,000

barrelsofcondensateperdayeastfromKitimattoBruderheim;and,3) TheKitimatterminal,consistingoftwotanker-mooringpositions,threecondensatestoragetanks,

and16oilstoragetanks.

Figure1.MapoftheproposedNorthernGatewayPipelineproject.Source:Enbridge

NGPLP’sapplicationwiththeNEBidentifiedaonekilometre-widecorridorfortheproposed1,178-kilometreroute.Withinthiscorridor,thepipelineswouldsharea25-metrewideRoW.Additionally,tenelectric-poweredpumpingstationswouldbeconstructedalongtherouteinordertofacilitatethemovementofproducts.NGPLPestimatedthattheNorthernGatewaywouldcost7.9billionCADtobuild,includingpre-developmentcostsandthecostsassociatedwithmarinenavigationenhancements(NEB,2013a).NorthernGatewaywasscheduledforcompletioninlate2018,andonceinoperation,roughly220tankerswoulddockattheKitimatterminalonanannualbasis(NEB,2013a).Studiespreparedfortheprojectindicatedthatthemajorityoftheshipmentswouldconsistofdilutedbitumen(or“dilbit”),whichisablendofcondensateandbitumenfromtheoilsandsregionofeasternAlberta(Figure1)(NEB,2013a).

EnbridgeandthetenothercompaniescomprisingNGPLP(fourofwhichwereCanadianbased)investedmorethan450millionCADtodeveloptheirprojectproposal.Anequitypackagerepresentingamaximumof10percentoftheprojectcostswasofferedto40aboriginalgroups.65percentofthegroupsacceptedtheofferinordertobecomeparticipantsintheproject(NEB,2013a).RegulatoryReviewandCurrentStatusofNorthernGatewayMr.GaétanCaron,ChairoftheNEB,andMr.JimPrentice,federalMinisteroftheEnvironment,referredNorthernGatewaytoaJointReviewPanelonSeptember29,2006.Inearly2009,theformalreviewprocessbeganwhenNGPLPindicatedthatitintendedtoseekregulatoryapprovalofitsprojectproposal(Figure2).OnJanuary20,2010,theNEBappointedthreememberstotheJointReviewPanel.ThesemembersincludedMs.SheliaA.Leggett,Vice-ChairoftheNEB;Mr.HansMatthews,professionalgeologistwithover25yearsofexperienceinthemining,mineralsandresourcemanagementindustries;and,Mr.KennethM.Bateman,lawyerandformerseniorexecutiveintheCanadianenergysector.Panelmemberswerechosenbasedontheirdiversebackgroundsandtheirextensiveexperienceinfieldsrelatingtoaboriginalcommunitydevelopment,academia,law,regulations,andtheCanadianresourcesector.Duringtheregulatoryreview,panelmembersconsideredenvironmental,social,andeconomiceffectsarisingfromconstructionandoperationofthepipelines,theKitimatTerminal,andtankertrafficwithinB.C.’scoastalwaters.Thepanelwasresponsiblefordeterminingthesufficiencyoftheprojectapplication,hostingpublichearings,conductingatechnicalanalysisoftheproject,andultimatelymakingarecommendationonwhetherornotitshouldbeapproved(NEB,2013a).

Figure2:Projecttimeline.Thereviewprocessbeganinearly2009whenNorthernGatewayindicatedthatitintendedtoseekregulatoryapprovalofitsprojectproposal(NEB,2013a).

InJune2014,theJointReviewPanelrecommendedapprovalofNorthernGateway,subjectto209conditionsandadditionalconsultationwithaboriginalcommunities(NEB,2013a;CBC,2014).Thepanelconcludedthattheproject,ifconstructed,wouldbeinthepublicinterestofCanada,andthattheproject’spotentialbenefitsoutweighitspotentialburdensandrisks(NEB,2013a).Afewmonthsaftertherecommendation,theprojectreceivedapprovalbytheHarpergovernment.InJune2016,theFederalCourtofAppealoverturnedthisapprovalafterfindingOttawahadfailedtoadequatelyconsulttheFirstNationsaffectedbythepipelines(CBC,2016a).InNovember2016,theTrudeaugovernmentoptednottopursuefurtherconsultationsandrejectedNorthernGatewayarguingthat“theprojectisnotinthebestinterestofthelocalaffectedcommunities,includingIndigenousPeoples,”andthat“theGreatBearRainforestisnoplaceforapipelineandtheDouglasChannelisnoplaceforoiltankertraffic”(Figure3)(CBC,2016b).Currently,BillC-48,anactregulatingvesselsthattransportcrudeoilfrommarineinstallationsalongB.C.’snorthcoastisreceivingsecondreadingintheSenate(OpenParliament,2018).Thebillisexpectedtoreceiveroyalassentduringthefall2018sittingofparliament,andoncepassed,tankeractivityoffthecoastofnorthernB.C.willnotbepermitted.

Figure3:Flankedbymembersofhiscabinet,PrimeMinisterJustinTrudeauannouncesthatthefederalgovernmenthasrejectedtheNorthernGatewayprojectproposal(photocredit:SeanKilpatrick,CanadianPress).

EconomicCaseNorthernGatewaywouldhaveprovidedadirectroutetorapidlygrowing,energyhungrymarketsintheAsia-Pacificregion.Onceconstructed,theprojectcouldhavesupportedincreasesinCanadianoilexports,allowedfordiversificationtomarketsbeyondNorthAmerica,andeaseddemandforthecondensatethatisusedtodilutebitumenproducedinwesternCanadainordertofacilitateitslong-distancetransporttomarket(NEB,2013a).Growingbitumendemandresideswithcomplexrefineriesthatareabletoproduceahigherproportionoftransportationfuelsbyrefiningbitumen.ByvirtueofthefactthatwesternCanadianbitumenproductionisgrowingatapacefasterthanitsupgradingcapacity,theGovernmentofAlbertaargues

thatinordertoobtainfullvalue,bitumenneedstoreachcomplexrefineriesbeyondthosecurrentlyservedbythenorth-centralandGulfCoastregionsoftheUnitedStates(NEB,2013a).Thenext-nearestconcentrationofcomplexrefineriesexistsineastAsia,mainlyinChina.InadequatetakeawaycapacityinrecentyearshasresultedindepressedpricesforwesternCanadiancruderelativetotheUnitedStatesandglobalbenchmarks.Thismanifestsitselfaslostrevenueforoilproducers,aswellastheentireeconomy(AliakbariandStedman,2018).AccordingtotheFraserInstitute,thediscountedpriceforCanadiancrudehasresultedinarevenuelossof20.7billionCADbetween2013and2017.AstudyconductedbyWrightMansellResearchLtd.(2012)determinedthattheeconomicimpactsofNorthernGatewayovera30-yearperiod,includingitsdirect,indirect,andinducedeffectsarewidelydistributed.Theseinclude:• A312billionCADgaininGDP;• Increasesof70billionCADinlabourincome;• Governmentrevenuegainsof98billionCAD,includingexpectedfederalgovernmentaccrualsof44

billionCAD,andgainsof54billionCADbyprovincialandterritorialgovernments;and,• Increasesof907,000personyearsofemployment.Figure4(below)providesaprovince-by-provincebreakdownoftheestimatedtotaleconomiceffectsofNorthernGatewayconstructionandoperation(NEB,2013a).

Figure4:Regionalbreakdownofthedirect,indirect,andinducedbenefitsassociatedwithNorthernGatewayovera30-yearperiod(NEB,2013a).ConsideringthataGDPgainof312billionCADisequivalenttoapproximatelytwomonthsofoutputfortheentireCanadianeconomyat2012levels,NorthernGatewaypresentedasignificanteconomicopportunityforCanada.DetrimentalAspectsoftheProjectTheJointReviewPaneldeterminedthatthelargestpotentialeffectsontheenvironmentwouldoccuralongtheRoWduringthethreeandahalfyearsofconstruction,andthatlimited,short-termeffectsonlocalairqualityweretobeexpected(NEB,2013a).Post-constructionroutineoperationofthepipelines,terminal,andtankerswereestimatedtohavesmallereffectsthroughouttheprojectlifespan.

DetrimentalaspectsrelatedtotheprojectincludedlinearforestclearingsassociatedwithpipelineconstructionandthefactthattheproposedRoWincluded527hectaresofold-growthforest.Enbridgeadmittedthattheimpactontheseforestswoulddependonfinalrouteselection;however,thecompanyestimatedthat69percentoftheRoWwouldbeonlandwithahumanfootprintpreviouslyleftbyforestry,oilandgasactivity,mining,roads,railways,andpowerlines(NEB,2013a).AccordingtoEnbridge,theproposedpipelineswouldhavecrossedhundredsofwatercourses,themajorityofwhichareunnamed,minorandephemeraldrainages.Bethatasitmay,crossingsweretooccuratseverallargeriversandimportantwatercourses,namely,theheadwatersoftheFraserandSkeenarivers(Enbridge,2005;WestCoast,2012).Notably,thesesystemssupportallfivePacificsalmonspecies,aswellastrout,steelhead,andchar.Traditional,commercial,andsportfisheriesthroughoutcoastalandinteriorB.C.allrelyonthefishthatoriginatefromtheseareas(NEB,2013a).NorthernGatewayplannedtocrossthesmaller,non-fishbearingwatercoursesbyusingconventionalmethodssuchlayingpipewithinatrench,temporarilydivertingchannelsifnecessary.Thecompanyproposedtousetrenchlesscrossingsonthelarger,fish-bearingwatercourseswhereverpossible(NEB,2013a).Thismitigationmethodwouldavoidsurfacedisturbancesbyusinghorizontaldrillingtoboreandplacepipebeneaththeriverchannel(Figure5)(NEB,2013a).Enbridgesaidthattrenchlesswatercrossingswouldpreventsiltanderosionissuesthatarepotentiallyharmfultofishpopulations.

Figure5:Directionaldrillingwasproposedinordertopreventhabitatdestructionwithinfish-bearingwatercourses(NEB,2013a).Althoughfulllifecycleconsiderationsofgreenhousegas(GHG)emissionswasbeyondthescopeoftheNEBhearings,thepaneldeterminedthatthemainsourcesofemissionswouldberelatedtotheroutineuseofdieselenginesthatpowertankersandtugboats.Lee(2012)estimatedthatthecarboncontentoftheproductstransportedthroughNorthernGatewayonadailybasiswouldtranslateintoannualglobalemissionsofapproximately70megatonnesofcarbondioxideequivalent(MtCO2e).Whenincludingtheemissionsassociatedwithresourceextraction,theenergyrequiredtooperatethepipelines,andGHGdischargefromupgradingandrefiningbitumen,thetotalannualemissionsyieldrangesfrom80to100MtCO2e(Lee,2012).At2016levels,thisequatestonearlyoneseventhofthetotalannualGHGemissionsproducedinCanada(704MtCO2ein2016)(GovernmentofCanada,2018).

OppositiontotheProjectManyrisksandconcernswerediscussedduringtheNEBhearings.Participantsraisedtheissueofhumanerrorasariskfactorfortheproperoperationofpipelinesandmarinetraffic.Otherswereconcernedthatthecombinationofsevereweatherandthenarrow,twistingchannelsneartheKitimatterminalcouldincreasethelikelihoodoftankercollisionsandspills(NEB,2013a).Additionalrisksthatwereconsideredincludedtheproject’simpactonlocalaboriginalbusinessesandtraditionallifestyle,thechancethatearthquakesortsunamiscoulddamageprojectinfrastructure,theenvironmentalconsequencesofaspill,andwhetherornotdilbitcanbecleanedfromcoastalwatersifreleased(NEB,2013a;Steward,2015).ConsiderableoppositionmaterializedafterEnbridgeanditspartnersannouncedtheirintentiontoseekregulatoryapproval.OnMonday,October22,2012,thousandsdemonstratedinfrontoftheB.C.legislaturetoprotesttheenvironmentalmeritsoftheproject(Figure6).InJune2014,StewartPhillip,PresidentoftheUnionofBCIndianChiefs,encouragedattendeesatananti-NorthernGatewayrallyinVancouverto“gooutontothelandandontothewatersandphysicallystopanyeffortonthepartofEnbridgetodopreparatorywork,sitepreparation,surveyingwhilethismatterisinthecourts”(Bailey,2014).InadditiontothosewhoopposedNorthernGatewayforenvironmentalreasons,oppositiontotheprojectwasarguedonprotectionistgrounds(Leach,2013).TheseindividualscontendedthatCanadawouldcapturemorevaluefromtheresourcebysellingrefinedproductsasopposedtoexportingrawbitumen(Leach,2013).OthersarguedthatCanadashouldnotbeexportingoilfromthewestwhileremainingdependentonimportedoiland/orrefinedproductsonitseastcoast(Leach,2013).

Figure6:DemonstratorsparticipateinarallyinfrontoftheBritishColombialegislaturetoprotesttheproposedNorthernGatewaypipelineonMonday,October22,2012(photocredit:JonathanHayward,CanadianPress).

WhenitcomestoaprojectascomplexasNorthernGateway,allconcernsshouldbeheard,evaluatedandaddressed.Oneofthemajorconcernsrelatedtotheprojectinvolvedthebehaviorofdilutedbitumenwhenspilled.NorthernGatewayarguedthatlaboratorytestsindicatedthatdilbitwouldfloat(NEB,2013a).Localcommunitymembersandotherstakeholdersdisagreedsayingthatthereisevidencethatdilbitsinks,makingitnearlyimpossibletocleanupshouldaspilloccur.Theonlyspillofabitumen-basedproductinCanadianwatersoccurredonJuly24,2007.Inthisincident,abackhoeoperatedbyathird-partycontractorrupturedtheTransMountainpipeline.Thisresultedinthereleaseof224cubicmetres(1,530barrels)ofcrudeoilontoInletDrive,andthesurroundingresidentialareainBurnaby,B.C.(Figure7).SomeoftheoilenteredthestormdrainsystemandwasdischargedintoBurrardInlet(TransMountain,2018b);however,95percentofthebitumen-basedproductwasrecovered,andnoneofitwasobservedtohavesunk(NEB,2013a).

Figure7:AerialviewofInletDriveinBurnaby,B.C.AthirdpartycontractorrupturedtheTransMountainpipelinewhilediggingwithabackhoespilling1,530barrelsofdilutedbitumen(photocredit:IanLindsay,VancouverSun).Duringtheregulatoryreview,participantsreferredtotheJuly2010EnbridgepipelinerupturenearMarshall,Michigan.Thiseventresultedinthereleaseof3,180cubicmetres(20,000barrels)ofdilbitintoTalmadgeCreekneartheKalamazooRiver.Inthiscasesomeoilreachedtheriver,mixedwithsedimentsinthewatercolumn,andsunktothebottom.Thisprovedmoredifficulttodealwithduringcleanupeffortsthatcontinuedmorethanthreeyearsafterthespill.EnbridgewascriticizedbytheUnitedStatesNationalTransportationSafetyBoardforallowingtheoilreleasetooccurfor17hoursbeforethelinewasshutdown(NEB,2013a),andthoseinoppositiontoNorthernGatewayreferencedthiseventinordertoarguethatEnbridgecannotbetrustedasasafepipelineoperator.However,taking

alookatthecompany’ssafetyrecordrevealsanoperatorthatperformsataremarkablyhighstandard.Forinstance,in2017Enbridgetransportedmorethan3.7billionbarrelsofoil.Duringthattimethecompanyexperienced11leaks,spillingatotalof8,394barrels,or0.00022percentofthetotalvolumetransportedduringthatyear(Enbridge,2017).Byfar,thegreatestconcernrelatedtoNorthernGatewaywastheriskofatankerspillinthecoastalwatersofnorthernB.C.Thereisnoquestionthatacatastrophicspillinthisareawouldbedevastating,buthowlikelyisthisscenario?Since1956,vesselsfromKinderMorgan’sWestridgeMarineTerminalhavebeentransportingpetroleumproductssafelythroughPortMetroVancouverwithoutasinglespillfromatanker(TransMountain,2018a).ThisimpressivetrackrecordisnoteworthygiventhattheSecondNarrowsofVancouverarelessthanone-tenthaswideasthenarrowestportionoftheproposedsearoutestoKitimat(NEB,2013a).Furthermore,thePacificPilotageAuthorityhasstatedthattheweatherconditionsalongtheroutestoKitimatarenoworsethantheconditionsthatoiltankerscurrentlyencounteratportsalongCanada’seastcoast(NEB,2013a).A2016studypublishedbytheCouncilofCanadianAcademiesindicatesthatCanadianwatersasawholehavebeengettingsaferoverthepastdecade(CCA,2016).Someofthemeasuresbehindthistrendincludetheimplementationofvisual,auditoryandelectronicaidsthatwarnofobstructions,theregulardeploymentofmarineinspectorsinordertoensurethattankersareinsafeoperatingcondition,andthemandatoryrequirementthatalltankerspossesstwowatertightlayersonthebottomandsidesoftheships(inotherwords,double-hulled)(ClearSeas,2018).WhilethoseopposedtoNorthernGatewayarejustifiableintheirconcernsaboutthepotentialofatankerspill,thevolumeandfrequencyofoilspillshasbeendecreasinggloballysincethe1970s(Figure8)(ClearSeas,2018).

Figure8:Worldwideseaborneoiltradeandnumberoftankerspillincidentspeakedbetween1972and1985.Sincethattimeseaborneoiltradehasincreased,whilenumberofspillshasdecreasedsignificantly(ClearSeas,2018).WinnersandLosersThefederalgovernmentdecisiontorejectNorthernGatewayresultedintheemergenceofclearwinnersandlosersasfarastheimpactoftheprojectisconcerned.Winnerscanbeconsideredallofthestakeholdersthatwereopposedtotheproject.TheseincludeindividualsandgroupsthatdisagreewithtankeractivityalongthewestcoastofCanada.ItalsoincludesenvironmentalorganizationsandahandfulofB.C.coastalFirstNationsthatwagedrelentlesscampaignsagainsttheproject,arguingthattheriskofspillsoutweightheeconomicbenefitsofopeninganewmarketforCanadianoil.ThecreationoftheGreatBearRainforestbytheB.C.governmentin2016(Figure9),andthesoontobepassedBillC-

48arewinsforpoliticiansthathaveattemptedtodemonstratebalanceregardingresourcedevelopment,aboriginalreconciliation,nationalcommitmentstotheParisClimateAccord,andtheircareers.Finally,foreignsupplierscanbeconsideredwinners,astheywillnotbesubjectedtoincreasedcompetitionifCanadaweretotakealargestepintotheglobaloilmarket.

Figure9:TheGreatBearRainforest(greenpolygon)wasofficiallyrecognizedinFebruary2016.Thisregionhostsahighlydiverseplant,animal,andmarinefaunalassemblage,alongwithequallydiversegeographyandclimate.Withinthisarea,85percentoftheold-growthforestsarenowprotectedfromindustriallogging.TheproposedshippingterminalinKitimat,B.C.(annotated)islocatedoutsideandtotheeastoftheGreatBearRainforest(modifiedfromB.C.Government,2018).NorthernGatewayranksasoneofthemostsignificantCanadianinfrastructureprojectseverconceived.RejectionofthisprojectisatremendouslosstoCanadiancitizens,theireconomy,andtothegovernmentsthatwouldhavereceivedconsiderabletaxandroyaltybenefitsasaresultofitsconstructionandoperation.MostaboriginalcommunitiesimpactedbyNorthernGatewaysupportedtheprojectandwerelookingforwardtosharingintheconstructionandlong-termbenefits.ElmerGhostkeeper,aleaderfromtheBuffaloLakeMetisSettlementsaidthatmorethan30ofthe42bandsalongtheAlbertatowestcoastpipelineRoWsupportedNorthernGateway(Cattaneo,2017).ThecancellationofthisprojectwasparticularlycrushingforGhostkeeperandhiscommunityastheirexpectations“werereallyraisedwiththepromiseof2billionCADsetasideinbusinessandemploymentopportunities”(Cattaneo,2017).AsofJuly2018,communitieswithintheNorthernBritishColumbiaeconomicregion(whereNorthernGatewaywouldhavebeenbuilt)exhibitedthehighestunemployment

rateintheprovince(GovernmentofCanada,2018b).Thesecommunitieshavebeenlefttoinvestigateothermethodsofeconomicdevelopmentinaregionthathastraditionallyseenfewopportunities.TheinternationalinvestmentcommunityviewedthedecisiontocancelNorthernGatewayashavingbeenmadeforreasonsthatwerepoliticalratherthaneconomic(Yedlin,2016).ThecombinationoftheoverturnedapprovalbytheFederalCourtofAppeal,thecreationoftheGreatBearRainforest,andfederalcabinet’srejectionoftheprojectproposalhasresultedinadegradationofCanada’sreputationasabusinessfriendlyenvironment.Canadahaslongreliedonforeigncapitalinordertodevelopitsnaturalresources;andtherefore,failuretoaccesstheseexternalsourcesoffundingcouldhaveseriousimplicationsontheresourcesectorandthenationaleconomy.In2014,WorleyParsonsconductedastudythatcomparedtheenvironmentalpolicies,lawandregulatorysystemsofAlbertawithotheroilproducingregionsaroundtheworld.ThestudyfoundthatAlbertanotonlyleadsinthesecategories,itconsistentlysetsstandardsforrigidityofenvironmentallaws,therulesthatenforcecompliance,andindustrytransparency(WorleyParsons,2014).ThefossilfueltransportedbyNorthernGatewaywouldhavebeenobtainedfromthemosthighlyregulatedoilandgasjurisdictiononearth.Unfortunately,itscancellationcanbeviewedasalosstotheCanadianoilandgasindustryandthepractices,standards,andvaluesthatittriestopromoteglobally.Opinion:WastherationalebehindNorthernGateway’srejectionjustified?Wheredowegofromhere?TheleaduptoadecisionontheNorthernGatewaypipelineprojectensuredthatitwouldbecontroversial.Intheend,thefederalgovernmentdecidedthatitwasintheirbestintereststoapprovetheexpansionoftheKinderMorganTransMountainpipelineandthereplacementofEnbridgeLine3.NorthernGatewaybecametheunfortunatecasualtyofagovernmentthatwantedtoappearbalancedintermsofresourcedevelopment,aboriginalrelations,anditscommitmenttoaddressingclimatechange.Ineffect,thisdecisionsawthegovernmentsidewithasmallgroupofpeacefulprotestors,andaminorityoftheaboriginalcommunitiesthatwereimpactedbytheproject.Thisraisesanimportantquestiononwhetherornotoneortwoaboriginalcommunitiesthatareopposedtoaprojectlikethisshouldbeallowedtoimposetheirwillonanotherwiseunifiedgroupofaboriginalcommunities.AtacomplicatedtimeinCanadianhistory,withreconciliationunderway,aboriginalconsensusonaprojectthelikesofNorthernGatewayisprobablynotachievable.However,inthiscase,astrongmajorityoftheindigenousgroupsimpactedbytheprojectproposalweresupportiveofNorthernGateway,anditwasinthebestinterestoftheentireregiontohaveitbuilt.TheNorthernGatewayprojectproposalmeanderedthroughoneofthemostrigorousregulatoryreviewsinCanadianhistory.Thisreviewincluded180hearingdays,175,000pagesofevidence,9,400letters,1,179oralpresentations,389witnesses,and60interveners(NEB,2013b).Athree-memberpanelwithrelevantexpertiseevaluatedallofthematerialthatwaspresented,andtheydeterminedthattheproject,ifconstructed,wouldbeinthepublicinterestofCanada.Unfortunately,theJointReviewPanelcanonlyprovidearecommendation.Finaldecisionrestswiththefederalgovernment.Thisraisestheissueofauthority.Shouldafederalcabinet,withlessknowledgeandexpertise,havetherighttovoteagainstarecommendationfromapanelofexpertsthathasconductedanextensivereview?ItwouldbewisetomoveawayfromthisstructureinordertopreventpoliticalinterferenceofimportantinfrastructuredecisionssuchasNorthernGateway.ThefederalgovernmentjustifieditsrejectionofNorthernGatewaybystatingthattheprojectisitisnotinthebestinterestsoflocallyaffectedindigenouscommunities,theenvironmentoftheGreatBear

Rainforest,andtheDouglasChannel.Asthispaperhasdemonstrated,Enbridgehasanexcellenttrackrecordoftransportingcrudebypipeline.Intermsoftankersafety,wearelivinginaneraofunprecedentedsafetyperformancewheretankerincidentsareextremelyrare.Forexample,theWestridgeTerminalinVancouverismuchnarrowerthantheDouglasChannelnearKitimat,yetithasneverrecordedatankerincident.Giventhesedata,thereisastronglikelihoodthatNorthernGatewaywouldoperateincidentfree;andtherefore,thegovernment’senvironmentalpositiondoesnotseemjustifiable.Ontheissueofindigenouscommunities,theFederalCourtofAppealchastisedOttawaforfailureinitsdutytoconsult.Althoughthecourtdecisionwasnotunanimous,itdoeshighlightthefactthattheinterestsofsomeofthecommunitiesmayhavebeenoverlooked.IfenergyinfrastructurecompanieslikeEnbridgedecidetoreturntoCanadatopursuegreenfieldinfrastructureopportunities,theyshouldapproachanyprojectproposalinpartnershipwithaffectedaboriginalcommunities.Inthepast,aboriginalshavebeentreatedastokens;todaytheydeservetobetreatedasequals.Partneringoninfrastructureprojectspresentsstrategicbenefitstobothcompaniesandcommunities.Companiescanlookforwardtofasterregulatoryreviewsperiodsascommunityalignmentanddutytoconsultissuescanbeavoided,whilecommunitieswillhavetheopportunitytoprovidevaluableinputontheproject,andparticipateinbuildingarobustandsustainablelocaleconomy.

Enbridgeanditspartnersproposedoneofthemosttechnologicallyadvancedpipelineseverconceived.Thecompanyprovidedmorethanadequatemitigationresponsestonearlyeveryconcernbroughtupduringtheregulatoryreviewprocess.AlthoughNorthernGatewaywasdeemedtobeinthepublicinterestofCanadians,politicalinterventionhaspreventedanamazingvisionfrombecomingreality.Thisisablowtoanindustrythatisheldtothehigheststandardsonearth,andwhenCanadafailstogetitsresourcestoothermarkets,itsvaluesloseontheglobalscale.Asglobaloildemandslowlysurpasses100millionbarrelsperday,theresultismoresupplyfromproducerswithfarpoorercorruption,socialandenvironmentaltrackrecords.

ReferencesAliakbari,E.,andStedman,A.,2018.TheCostofPipelineConstraintsinCanada.FraserInstitute,CentreforNaturalResourceStudies,May2018,10p.Bailey,I.,2014.‘Thewarison’:ProtestorssetsightsonHarperafterNorthernGatewaydecision.TheGlobeandMail,June18,2014.https://fnbc.info/news/war-protesters-set-sights-harper-after-northern-gateway-decisionB.C.Government,2018.GreatBearRainforest.https://greatbearrainforest.gov.bc.caCanadianBroadcastingCorporation(CBC),2014.NorthernGatewaypipelineapprovedwith209conditions.June17,2014.http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/northern-gateway-pipeline-approved-with-209-conditions-1.2678285CanadianBroadcastingCorporation(CBC),2016a.NorthernGatewaypipelineapprovaloverturned.June30,2016.https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/northern-gateway-pipeline-federal-court-of-appeal-1.3659561CanadianBroadcastingCorporation(CBC),2016b.TrudeaucabinetapprovesTransMountain,Line3pipelines,rejectsNorthernGateway.November29,2016.https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-cabinet-trudeau-pipeline-decisions-1.3872828Cattaneo,C.,2017.‘Weareverydisappointed’:LossofNorthernGatewaydevastatingformanyFirstNations,chiefssay.FinancialPost,April10,2017.https://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/we-are-very-disappointed-loss-of-northern-gateway-devastating-for-many-first-nations-chiefs-sayCCA,2016.CommercialMarineShippingAccidents:UnderstandingtheRisksinCanada,WorkshopReport,CouncilofCanadianAcademies,84p.ClearSeas,2018.OilTankersinCanadianWaters#clearfacts#tankers101.ClearSeasCentreforResponsibleMarineShipping,https://clearseas.org/tankers/Enbridge,2005.PreliminaryInformationPackage,EnbridgeGatewayProject.GatewayPipelineLimitedPartnership,October2005,142p.Enbridge,2017.EnbridgeSafetyPerformance2017.https://www.enbridge.com/~/media/Enb/Documents/About%20Us/2017_ENB_SafetyReporttoTheCommunity.pdf

GovernmentofCanada,2018a.Greenhousegasemissions.https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions.htmlGovernmentofCanada,2018b.EIProgramCharacteristicsfortheperiodofJuly08,2018toAugust11,2018.http://srv129.services.gc.ca/regions_ae/eng/rates_cur.aspxLeach,A.,2013.ThreeverydifferentreasonspeopleopposeNorthernGateway.TheGlobeandMail,December20,2013.https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/the-three-very-different-reasons-people-oppose-northern-gateway/article16069972/Lee,M.,(2012).EnbridgePipeDreamsandNightmares,TheEconomicCostsandBenefitsoftheProposedNorthernGatewayPipeline.CanadianCentreforPolicyAlternatives.March2012,27p.Leung,D.,2013.NorthernGatewayPipelinemap,OttawaCitizen.http://www.vancouversun.com/Northern+Gateway+Pipeline/9306640/story.htmlNationalEnergyBoard(NEB),2013a.Connections,ReportoftheJointReviewPanelfortheEnbridgeNorthernGatewayProject,Volume1,76p.NationalEnergyBoard(NEB),2013b.Considerations,ReportoftheJointReviewPanelfortheEnbridgeNorthernGatewayProject,Volume2,425p.OpenParliament,2018.BillC-48,OilTankerMoratoriumAct.https://openparliament.ca/bills/42-1/C-48/Steward,G.,2015.WhyB.C.FirstNationsopposetheNorthernGatewaypipeline.TheTorontoStar,August28,2015.https://www.thestar.com/news/atkinsonseries/2015/08/28/why-bc-first-nations-oppose-the-northern-gateway-pipeline.htmlTertzakian,P.,2018.Finally,athumbs-upforCanadianoil—butwillanybodynotice?FinancialPost,June12,2018.https://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/canadian-oil-bashers-are-shooting-themselves-and-the-environment-in-the-footTransMountain,2018a.SpillHistory.https://www.transmountain.com/spill-historyTransMountain,2018b.Westridge2007Spill.https://www.transmountain.com/westridge-2007-spillTransparencyInternational,2017.CorruptionPerceptionsIndex2017,February2017.https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2017WestCoastEnvironmentalLaw,2012.EnbridgeNorthernGatewayPipeline–risksfordownstreamcommunitiesandfisheries.February,2012.4p.https://www.wcel.org/publication/enbridge-northern-gateway-pipeline-risks-downstream-communities-and-fisheries-0

WorleyParsons,2014.AnInternationalComparisonofLeadingOilandGasProducingRegions,EnvironmentalRegulations.WorleyParsonsResourcesandEnergy,24p.www.capp.ca/~/media/capp/customer-portal/documents/249637.pdf

WrightMansellResearchLtd.,2012.PublicInterestBenefitEvaluationoftheEnbridgeNorthernGatewayPipelineProject:UpdateandReplyEvidence,July2012,148p.Yedlin,D.,2016.Lessonstobelearnedfromgovernment’srejectionofNorthernGateway.CalgaryHerald,December1,2016.https://calgaryherald.com/business/energy/yedlin-lessons-to-be-learned-from-governments-rejection-of-northern-gateway