The future of oil tank ban in northern British Columbia waters is now in doubt after the federal and Alberta governments signed an energy agreement Thursday that creates the framework for pipeline to the West Coast.
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) includes Ottawa's commitment to “ensure the export of bitumen from the strategic deepwater port to Asian markets, including, if necessary, by adjusting the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act accordingly.”
Alberta and federal Conservatives have long argued that a 2019 federal law prevents the construction of new pipelines and therefore limits the oil and gas industry, and have called on the federal government to repeal it.
But the British Columbia government and coastal First Nations are vowing to do everything in their power to maintain the tanker ban, citing the “catastrophic” impact a future oil spill could have on the region.
Canadian Energy Minister Tim Hodgson told Global News the memorandum of understanding does not guarantee a change to the tanker ban or that the future pipeline will go to northern British Columbia.
“There is no route today,” he said. “Under the MOU, (Alberta) will need to work with the affected jurisdiction – British Columbia – and work with the affected First Nations in order for this project to move forward. That's what the work plan in the MOU calls for.”
Here's what you need to know about the oil tanker ban and what changing or repealing it would mean for Canada.
Bill C-48 – Oil Tanker Moratorium Law – was first introduced by the Liberal government in 2017 and became law two years after protracted battle in the House of Commons and Senate and opposition from Alberta and the oil industry.
The legislation prohibits tankers carrying more than 12,500 metric tons of oil from entering waters off British Columbia's north coast. The affected area extends from the northern tip of Vancouver Island to the Alaska border and covers the island of Haida Gwaii.
The Haida Nation and other indigenous peoples in the coastal region have long called for the government to implement a voluntary moratorium on oil tanker traffic in the area, which has been in place since 1972. The law provides for fines of up to $5 million for those who do not comply.
Then-Transport Minister Marc Garneau, who sponsored the bill, defended it at the time, citing the region's “navigational hazards” that he said would complicate the oil spill response.
Green Party leader Elizabeth May has in recent weeks pointed specifically to the Hecate Strait between Haida Gwaii and mainland British Columbia, which she called “the most dangerous body of water on the Canadian coast.”
“There are extraordinary tides and currents here – 10 to 30 meters (high). Sometimes they go so low that they expose the ocean floor,” she told reporters in Ottawa earlier this month.
Receive daily national news
Get the day's top news, political, economic and current affairs headlines delivered to your inbox once a day.
“You can't throw away science and you can't pretend that an oil tanker won't break apart and pollute the coast, carrying oil back and forth between the north coast of mainland British Columbia and the east coast of Haida Gwaii.”
How might the tanker ban change?
Either Kitimat, home to Canada's LNG export facility, or the coastal port city of Prince Rupert could become export points for a future bitumen pipeline from Alberta under a federal memorandum of understanding if a proponent comes forward with such a plan.
This would require either exempting the project from the tanker ban or changing its boundaries to allow oil tankers to pass through the Dickson Inlet and ship oil to Asia.
In their statement, Coastal First Nations made it clear that this was not an option.
“We will never tolerate any exceptions or exceptions, period,” they said.
“There is no technology that can clean up an oil spill in the sea or salmon river, and there is nothing in this Memorandum that overrides our inherent constitutional powers and stewardship responsibilities as the rights holders of the Central and Northern Coast and Haida Gwaii.”
In September The British Columbia Supreme Court has affirmed the Haida Nation's title to Haida Gwaii.giving indigenous peoples authority over the land and surrounding waters they have called home for generations.
May similarly stated that “there is no chance on God's green earth that there will ever be an oil tanker off the north coast of British Columbia” and that First Nations and the British Columbia government “will not tolerate it.”
“They're not just barking up the wrong tree, they're barking up the wrong forest,” she said this month, referring to the federal and Alberta governments.
Earlier this monthThe British Columbia government and coastal First Nations have signed a joint declaration to maintain a ban on oil tankers.
British Columbia Premier David Eby said lifting the tanker ban would “jeopardize” short-term major projects and the consequences of a crude oil spill in these waters would be “generations of lost livelihoods and irreversible environmental damage.”
Eby said his government has emphasized in numerous meetings with federal ministers and with Prime Minister Mark Carney that the oil tanker ban is a “fundamental and critical catalyst” for economic activity in British Columbia.
The premier said he supports expanding the capacity of the Trans Mountain Pipeline, which transports bitumen from Alberta to Metro Vancouver, rather than building an entirely new pipeline to the north.
What are the current rules in this area?
Pipeline and energy advocates noted that tankers don't have to go through the Hecate Channel to get to and from the port in northern British Columbia. U.S. oil tankers also avoided the tanker ban zone when sailing between Alaska and West Coast ports in Washington, Oregon and California.
In a statement, Transport Canada said “comprehensive and robust” safety regulations are in place for ships operating in the Hecate Channel, including cruise ships and other transport vessels.
Rules for compulsory pilotage It also applies to the broader northwest coastal region affected by the tanker ban, requiring some vessels to have a certified marine pilot to help ships navigate the sometimes dangerous waters and small islands in the area.
These specially trained pilots serve as additional observers for vessels in certified pilotage areas along the coast of British Columbia and in other parts of Canada. They are not required for vessels transiting outside these zones or for small private vessels.
Vessels that must comply with these regulations include tankers transporting liquefied natural gas to and from LNG Canada's Kitimat export facility. However, these ships enter the Port of Prince Rupert and transit through Dixon Inlet north of Heidi Gwaii, bypassing Hecate Strait entirely.
Will lifting the ban help build the pipeline?
Experts say lifting the tanker ban would remove just one of many obstacles keeping the private sector from backing the pipeline project.
Smith and industry leaders have repeatedly said that no pipeline project makes sense while the tanker ban is in place.
Enbridge CEO Greg Ebel said as much in a speech last month. his company would not build a “pipeline to nowhere,” citing the industry's inability to export oil off the British Columbia coast due to the tanker ban.
Zach Parston, national infrastructure leader at KPMG in Canada, said lifting the tanker ban would be a “helpful symbolic gesture” but would likely not be “on its own enough to change the investment calculus.”
“Ultimately, these projects need to continue to mitigate risk,” Parston said.
“Things like certainty of corridors, predictability of permitting, support from local communities and First Nations, and a competitive investment climate will be critical to the decision to invest in pipelines in Canada.”
— with files from Global's Jordan Armstrong and Amy Judd and The Canadian Press.
