Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said this month her province is preparing to announce a proponent and route for a new crude oil pipeline to Prince Rupert, B.C.
But so far, Enbridge Inc.—the former proponent for the cancelled Northern Gateway pipeline—is remaining mum on whether it will pursue a revamped project. The port, meanwhile, said no projects are under consideration.
In a statement to BIV, Enbridge said it would always assess projects to grow and diversify energy markets so long as there is demand.
“While we are pleased to see Canadian policymakers discussing ways to make Canada an energy superpower, any new pipeline project would require careful consideration and real provincial and federal legislative change,” said the company in a statement to BIV.
In June, Smith said she expects a private company will bring forward a proposal to build a new oil pipeline to B.C.’s North Coast within weeks. The pipeline would allow Alberta crude to be exported through Prince Rupert to customers in Asia.
Currently, the most direct way to move Alberta oil to the Pacific is via the recently expanded Trans Mountain pipeline, which began operations in May 2024 and is eventually meant to see a boost in shipping capacity of crude oil to 890,000 barrels from a previous 300,000 barrels.
Hydrocarbons flowing through that pipeline are either sent directly to the U.S. through a pipeline at the Sumas Delivery Point or are loaded onto vessels at the Westridge Marine Terminal in Burnaby and shipped to U.S. and Asian markets through Vancouver harbour. Data from the Canada Energy Regulator shows the pipeline has yet to meet full capacity.
Prince Rupert Port Authority (PRPA) spokesperson Olivia Mowat told BIV there are currently no oil export project proposals involving the Port of Prince Rupert—the closest west coast gateway to Asia.
Mowat said any proposed project would be subject to meeting Canada’s legal and regulatory regime. It would also need to align with the port’s mandate of enabling trade, she said.
“PRPA is not a participant in intergovernmental policy discussions regarding the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act,” Mowatt added.
The mortarium on oil tankers off B.C.’s north coast has been regularly targeted by Smith and major fossil fuel executives as standing in the way of an expansion in Canadian oil exports.
Smith is currently at the Council of the Federation meeting with Prime Minister Mark Carney and other premiers where the issue was expected to be discussed. B.C. Premier David Eby is also attending and unavailable for comment by deadline.
Smith’s press secretary Sam Blackett told BIV that Alberta and Ottawa have appointed several ministers and senior officials to a federal-provincial table “for the purpose of collaborating on the advancement of major energy projects of national interest that involve Alberta.”
In May, Smith said she would appoint a special negotiating team to represent Alberta in negotiations with Ottawa.
“We hope this will result in a binding agreement that Albertans can have confidence in. Call it an ‘Alberta Accord,’” she said at the time.
In a June 18 joint statement, Smith and Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe called on Ottawa to make several reforms. Among other demands, they included establishing a guaranteed corridor and port access to tidewater on all three of Canada’s coasts so the provinces can send their oil, gas and minerals overseas.
Passed in June 2019, Canada’s Oil Tanker Moratorium Act represents a major stumbling block for any such project headed to B.C.’s north coast.
That act prohibits tankers carrying more than 12,500 tonnes of crude oil and certain other types of oil from docking, loading or unloading in Hecate Strait, Queen Charlotte Sound and Dixon Entrance. It covers a significant portion of the Great Bear Sea.
It came 30 years after the foundering of oil tanker Exxon Valdez. The ship ran aground in Alaska’s Prince William Sound March 24, 1989, spilling nearly 41 million litres of oil in one of North America’s worst environmental disasters.
Environmental groups and First Nations have loudly opposed crude oil tankers moving along B.C.’s rugged northern coast, warning an accident could lead to a disaster with devastating ecological consequences.
On July 22, the Coastal First Nations-Great Bear Initiative (CFN) called on Carney to uphold the tanker ban.
In statement issued to Carney, the nations said their stance against oil tankers has not changed since they banned them from their territorial waters in 2010 based on their ancestral laws, rights, and responsibilities.
“There is no pipeline and oil tankers project or proponents that would be acceptable to us on the North Coast,” said Marilyn Slett, CFN president and Heiltsuk Tribal Council chief councillor. “Anything that proposes to send crude oil through our coastal waters is a non-starter.”
Slett said the CFN calls on Carney to reject any new proposal for a crude oil pipeline to the northwest coast.”
“We ask instead that he joins us in focusing on nation-building projects that meet the needs of our future generations, not projects of the past that could destroy our coastal ecosystems and economies.”
For the Canadian Association of Oil Producers (CAPP), however, the tanker ban is one of the things Ottawa needs to jettison to build business in Canada.
In its 2025 Federal Policy Priorities platform document, CAPP mirrored many of the concerns later picked up by Smith.
“Don’t just build—build with speed,” wrote the industry group. “It’s time to get aggressive in attracting the capital to build nation-building projects and compete with the world. We can show we’re serious by abandoning damaging polices like the emissions cap, the West Coast ban on Canadian tankers (C-48), and the aspects of the Competition Act (C-59) that impede free speech.”
Enbridge’s plans to build its Northern Gateway pipeline would have involved construction and operation of a terminal at Kitimat and two 1,170 km pipelines between Bruderheim, Alta., and Kitimat, B.C. But those plans ground to a halt in 2016 after a rigorous environmental review.
The pipeline’s approval was later overturned by Canada’s Federal Court of Appeal, which ruled there had been insufficient Indigenous consultation. Then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau officially rejected plans for the pipeline in November 2016.
In response to BIV’s questions, Enbridge did not rule out getting involved in another pipeline cutting through B.C.’s north.
Still, the company said, several things stand in the way. Those include identifying energy projects as being in the national interest; implementing globally competitive energy and carbon policies; simplifying regulation; reducing regulatory timelines; and creating a robust Indigenous loan guarantee program to allow for more Indigenous consultation, engagement and direct participation in energy projects.
“We will be there to build what is needed for our shippers, for Alberta and for Canada—that’s our job, our mission as a company—but only when the conditions make sense and the right framework is in place,” the company said.
