Canada: The Emerging Energy Superpower to the North

Oil extraction near Drayton Valley, Alberta, Canada. (Photo: Nathan Schneider/Wikipedia)

Oil extraction near Drayton Valley, Alberta, Canada. (Photo: Nathan Schneider/Wikipedia)

Should the US import still more energy from Canada? Are there better options? Add your thoughts in the comments below.


A few years ago, I traveled to far northern Quebec, paddling the wild Rupert River, where I spotted a gray wolf prowling the banks. It’s the vision of Canada most Americans probably conjure up: empty, pristine and incredibly beautiful.

But recently Americans have been getting to know another Canada, the one at the center of the pitched political battle over the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline. The pipeline would link oil fields in Canada to refineries on the Gulf coast of the US. Supporters say it would be a safe and reliable source of oil for the US, but opponents say the oil it would pump, from the Alberta “tar sands,” is among the dirtiest in the world, and would make an outsized contribution to climate change.

The proposed pipeline is now one of the hottest political footballs in Washington, and the debate has illuminated Canada’s little known role as a major energy exporter. Keystone or no Keystone, the truth is that Americans are already drinking deep from Canadian oil.

Canada is now the largest single foreign supplier of oil to the US, delivering nearly twice as much each year as Saudi Arabia. And in fact Trans-Canada, the company that wants to build the Keystone project, already operates a massive pipeline grid that stretches from Alberta to Oklahoma, and carries about 570,000 barrels of oil a day to the US

Ninety percent of natural gas imports to the US are also piped from Canada. And in the Northeast, one out of every six homes and businesses now runs on Canadian electricity.

And there’s more on its way. The Toronto-based company TDI is developing a new $2 billion dollar cable that will feed electricity from what company chief Donald Jessome calls Canada’s great hydro and wind resources” directly to New York City.

“Canada need markets” for that power, Jessome says. “A thousand megawatts is approximately enough energy for a million homes, so it’s a fairly significant injection into the New York market.”

Industry groups in Canada say the growing interconnection is a perfect fit: their country’s huge energy resources will fuel America’s huge, energy demand. And they’ve been airing ads in the US putting a positive spin on what they call the oil sands by arguing that Canadian energy will help free the US from reliance on countries in the Middle East.

“Why are we paying their bills and funding their oppression?” the ad’s announcer asks. And then it promises, “today there’s a better way, ethical oil from Canada’s oil sands.”

For Canadians, the energy boom has meant new prosperity. Canada was the first G-8 country to emerge from the global recession, and a lot of economists say energy exports fueled the recovery.

But critics say the environmental costs have been staggering.

In 2009, a year after I paddled that wild northern river in Canada, a government agency called Hydro Quebec diverted much of its water, siphoning it away into a massive man-made complex of reservoirs.

Geologist Phil Royc, at St. Lawrence University in New York, says the project “drastically changed the Rupert River, a traditional river that’s been paddled for hundreds and hundreds of years by the Cree Indians. “From a purest wilderness standpoint, it definitely makes me sad to see it all happen,” Royce says.

Royce, who’s been studying the impact of big hydro in northern Canada for seven years, says a chunk of Quebec the size of Connecticut has been industrialized. Rivers have been dewatered. Wolf and caribou habitat is criss-crossed by roads and power lines, with more big dams in the works.

“The next section, the Phase 3 that they’re looking at, in terms of the Little Whale, the Great Whale, the Nastopoka, are some of the most beautiful, pristine rivers that I’ve ever paddled,” Royce says.

Others share those concerns. Elizabeth May, head of Canada’s Green Party, says the direct damage from tar sands oil development in western Canada is even more troubling.

“Some of the largest man-made structures in the world are the dams that hold the thousands of square kilometers of toxic waters and tailing ponds,” May says. “Those tailing ponds are leeching into the Athabascan River. The whole project is an abomination.”

May acknowledges that the energy boom has meant jobs and tax revenues. She says it’s inevitable that her country’s vast resources will be developed over time. But May thinks Canada’s accelerating energy “gold rush” is forcing people here to look in the mirror, questioning their cherished image as environmental leaders.

“We never had a record that matched our reputation,” May says. “We’ve been coasting for years on natural beauty and on a time when we were in the lead.”

A decade ago, Canada championed efforts to protect global biodiversity and curb greenhouse gas pollution. But late last year, Prime Minister Stephen Harper withdrew Canada from the Kyoto climate treaty.

He’s pledged to keep pushing Washington to open the border to more even oil, electricity and natural gas from the North.

Discussion

13 comments for “Canada: The Emerging Energy Superpower to the North”

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=625754419 Peter Thomson

    Hi, Peter Thomson here, The World’s environment editor. Our huge appetite for energy brings with it a lot of difficult choices. How should energy from Canada—oil, natural gas, hydroelectricity—fit into the mix? Are the environmental impacts of energy production there worth the tradeoffs in terms of energy security here in the US, and perhaps avoiding even worse environmental impacts in other energy-producing countries? Let us know what you think.

    • pdjmoo

       Peter.  I have heard that none this dirty oil is being refined for US Export, not for USA consumption.  Is this true?  Also what disturbs me most is the total disregard for the impact on water and environment that all species depend upon for survival.  Additionally, the spin the oil and gas industry is putting on this as they charge ahead with the pipeline regardless of the outcry for the KeystoneXL Pipeline.  When are we going to realize we can’t keep sacrificing our ecosystems and environment for the sake of “old” energy sources?  Climate change and environmental collapse is breathing right down our necks.  It’s time industry became more responsible and focused more on stabilizing our planet instead of destroying it.
      Great that you are on top of this Peter.  Thank you

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=625754419 Peter Thomson

        A number of folks have asked about this.  I started to write a reply to post here but it got away from me and turned into a blog post.  You can find it here: http://www.theworld.org/2012/03/where-would-keystone-xls-canadian-oil-go-and-does-it-matter/.  

        Very short answer is that much of it might end up being exported, but that that’s not especially relevant to the question of whether we should build Keystone or not.  Longer answer?  Well, that’s why it became a blog post!

  • Cody Unrath

    If Rudolph Diesel didn’t go swimming in the middle of the english chanel, at night, alone, fully dressed, I’m pretty sure he would have an opinion as to how Canada could produce enough fuel for most of North America while fixing nitrogen into the soil, and simultaneously producing high quality protien. Hint, it’s not peanuts.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mohassan99 Mohammad Mo Hassanpour

    The US needs to be less reliant on oil in general, via a carbon tax and cultural change in the way cars are viewed.  It makes no sense to go for big gas guzzling fast cars when you cant and shouldn’t be driving and/or accelerating that fast anyway.  Whats best for the environment and people’s pocketbooks are efficient, maybe even electric vehicles, and public transportation.  Since we are going to import oil for a while by any realistic forecast we should be importing from democracies first and the closest ones second.  That said this should always be done with great consideration for environmental externalities that will impact populations for years to come.  In part this means, no big hydro and careful, minimal road-building. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-W-Austin/673496947 John W Austin

      Good luck with that. That gang of pro wrestling impersonators known as the Republican Party will never go along with that. They have enough Americans persuaded that wealthy people are too busy shopping for luxuries to pay taxes, that they just have to whisper ‘higher taxes’ to elect a majority in Congress.

  • canadork

    Good story – but, unfortunately, the image you used at the top of the page is of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline, not of one in Canada. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Megan-Kidwell/1352377937 Megan Kidwell

    Why would we want to oppose clean energy. If we miss this opportunity the oil company’s will come in and destroy the environment. Look at Alberta. The mountainous landscape is being flattened thus, affecting the weather patterns from the Midwest to the pacific northwest. Ask the people there how it’s affected habitat for them and the animals. I’m all for hydro electric, we used it here in Missouri for years when Union Electric existed. If Canada insist on getting energy from fracking, there will be no habitat, and our weather will increasingly be deteriorated into altered patterns affecting the United States.

  • himjiggins

    I remember that President Obama made an early visit to Canada.  He & Stephen Harper talked about ‘energy’ issues,  Neither one of them was specific about what that meant, but I guess it meant Obama was (& is) willing to compromise ecological health for political gain!  Of course Harper has never had a problem doing just that.  What doesn’t get mentioned in this & other similar stories is the cost to Canadian native people in most of the Canadian energy projects-  From mega-hydro to the tar-sands.  Native people have termed it another example of Cultural Genocide!    Jim Higgins

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Brian-Mann/1013800403 Brian Mann

    Hi folks – I thought I’d chime in with a couple of thoughts about where the Keystone oil would go.  First, obviously, a lot of Canadian oil is already being consumed in the US.  They’re our largest single foreign supplier. 

    Secondly, the oil refined on the Gulf Coast goes into a marketplace just like all the Canadian energy discussed in my story.  The final destination for the Keystone oil would change and evolve depending on demand, price, etc. 

    Finally, I think it’s fair to say that as an ‘energy security’ issue, having that additional oil flowing through US refineries gives the US an additional option if, say, the Middle East were to grow more unstable or the Straits of Hormuz were to close. 

    This is obviously somewhat hypothetical, but it’s hard to imagine that during a full-blown energy crisis in the US, tankers full of Canadian would still be pulling away from our shores taking oil overseas.

    As Peter points out, there are plenty of other reasons that building Keystone might be a questionable idea.  But I’m not sure this issue is especially relevant…

     –Brian Mann

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Roger-Louis-Langen/690024250 Roger Louis Langen

    It will all come out in the wash. (Ancient saying.)

  • http://www.filmschoolsonline.com/film-schools/los-angeles-film-school.html LOS ANGELES FILM SCHOOL

    For many, it doesn’t make sense that an emerging energy “superpower” – to quote the Prime Minister and the Alberta Premier – imports 45 per cent of the oil it consumes. It’s an issue rooted a complex global and North American oil supply network that grew in fits and starts over the last century to deliver oil typically produced in remote locations to the population centres that consume petroleum products. Here’s the situation: essentially oil production in Western Canada is outpacing the ability to move it to new markets at optimal prices and it’s potentially limiting economic growth.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-W-Austin/673496947 John W Austin

    If Americans don’t want the ‘dirty oil’, the Chinese will gladly buy it with the interest they earn on your national debt. You are going to pay for it one way or another.