'The economic benefits are, in fact, already shared across the country' - Macleans.ca

‘The economic benefits are, in fact, already shared across the country’


While former environment minister David Anderson rips Enbridge and praises Christy Clark, Joe Oliver declines comment.

Pressure is now building on the federal Conservative government to step in and respond to B.C.’s demands – by stating, among other things, whether Ottawa is willing to share some of the billions of dollars of federal tax revenue that would be generated by the pipeline or pony up cash for environmental protection.

Federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said Monday that Ottawa has a role to play in pipeline safety and maritime environmental protection, and that “we’re going to fulfil our obligations in that regard.” However, the government doesn’t sound too interested at this time in sharing more of the economic benefits with British Columbia, although it won’t directly state a position on the matter. “The economic benefits are, in fact, already shared across the country,” Oliver said in an interview with Postmedia News. “I just don’t want to get into that specific issue at this time.”

Last week, both Jason Kenney and John Baird lamented for the idea that a province would “tollgate” another the movement of another province’s resources.

A report from the Canadian Energy Research Institute projects that the vast majority of tax revenues from three proposed pipelines—Keystone XL, Northern Gateway and Trans Mountain—would go to Alberta.


‘The economic benefits are, in fact, already shared across the country’

  1. The Enbridge Kalamazoo river spill was roughly 20,000 barrels at a cost of over $800 million clean-up. Which averages $40,000/barrel.

    (The diluted bitumen was worth say $70/barrel.)

    Now, if a good portion of the $40,000/barrel was due to the fact that the bitumen sank, and was difficult to access and recover, and required special equipment and procedures, wouldn’t YOU as an insurance company or a pipeline company have an epiphany of sorts:?

    Hey, maybe shipping diluted bitumen is not the best product for the remote and difficult to access Enbridge Northern Gateway project. License it solely for SCO (synthetic crude oil -upgraded bitumen )

    Of course, this would require a departure from industry groupthink. Will it happen? I’m not optimistic in the forthcoming Canadian Energy Research Institute (CERI) analysis. Why? Look at its make-up, as reported in the G&M story:

    CERI, which released its report Tuesday, is funded by the federal Department of Natural Resources, the Alberta Department of Energy, and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, an industry lobby group.Alberta and the federal government are fierce supporters of the projects, although they face stiff opposition from environmentalists, first nations, and lawmakers on both sides of the border.Even Gwyn Morgan, former head of EnCana (and now Victoria BC based, I believe) in yesterdays opinion piece in the ROB G&M suggested a different approach from industry/gov’t is needed. This would be a good start (shipping only SCO on NGP).

    • Yes, Morgan lives here on the Saanich Peninsula which has some spectacular waterfront homes. And interestingly, he helped Clark win the leadership of her party.

    • Just reviewed the CERI report. As I suspected, they don’t touch the upgrading issue at all.

      “The choice whether to ship bitumen or synthetic crude – the value of upgrading at the source in Alberta versus other locations has to be analyzed.”

      Found in Executive Summary (ix) and Conclusion (pg 47)


      So, CAPP and other agencies simply consolidate what individual companies are planning – and then pipelines are designed/built according to the collective projects – ie no overall industry/gov’t co-ordination and strategy.

      No effort to optimize.

      • Good stuff, Dot.

  2. “A study by Calgary’s Canadian Energy Research Institute said what’s good for Alberta is good for Ontario, albeit on a vastly smaller scale. The study found while 94% of oilsands economic benefits stay in Alberta, Ontario gets the bulk of the remaining 6%.”

    If economic benefits are, in fact, already shared across the country, they are, in fact, not shared very much…

    (Gotta love the way the Harper Government spins the facts. Reminds me of used-car salesmen…)


  3. He’s talking about the heat wave and massive crop failure, isn’t he? That ironic so-and-so.