Frontier Mine emerges as the latest test of Trudeau’s climate credibility

CHELSEA, QUE.—Apparently under the erroneous impression that he won the recent federal election, Alberta Premier Jason Kenney marched through the salons and wood-panelled political offices of Ottawa last week brandishing his usual “demands” (sometimes framed as “proposals," depending on his audience)—including a brand new one. Premier of Alberta Jason Kenney, pictured on Dec. 9, 2019, speaking at a Canadian Club of Ottawa lunch in Ottawa. The Hill Times photograp by Andrew Meade This time—besides emergency federal funding to counteract sagging employment in Alberta, exemption from serious environmental scrutiny for some future resource projects, and a guaranteed deadline for completion of the TMX pipeline—Kenney is insisting the Trudeau cabinet approve a massive new oilsands play in northern Alberta (one of the largest ever) by the end of February. If the government rejects Teck Resources’ Frontier Mine, Kenney declared, it leaves the oil industry in his province “no way forward.” Pretty dire words and, presumably, far from the “torqued” rhetoric that Kenney so deplores in critics of the oilsands. In fact, he deplores it so much he is spending $30-million on a newly launched war room “to tell the truth in response to a campaign of lies, defamation and disinformation … torqued, dated, incomplete and out-of-context attacks on our energy sector.” Yet the premier’s defence of the Frontier Mine—a $20-billion open-pit operation, 120 kilometres north of Fort McMurray—doesn’t rest on a rock solid foundation, either. If it goes ahead as planned in 2026, the Frontier Mine will operate for 41 years, produce 260,000 barrels of bitumen a day and add anything from four to six megatonnes of carbon to the atmosphere (the exact amount is in dispute, as are other details.) Premier of Alberta Jason Kenney, pictured on Dec. 9, 2019, talking to reporters after speaking at a Canadian Club of Ottawa lunch. The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade It is largely conceded, however, that the 292-square-kilometre project will have ruinous impact on the old growth forest, extensive wetlands and several animal species—including whooping cranes and a woodland buffalo herd—that currently occupy the site. A joint review by the Alberta Energy Regulator and the Canadian Environment Assessment Agency concluded in July that if the project is built it will have “significant adverse impact” on the local environment and some nearby Indigenous communities. As to its carbon impact, the panel cautiously noted “it may make it more difficult to achieve Canada’s targets under the Paris Accord.” Despite this, the panel approved the project, deciding the economic benefits were paramount—including jobs for the 14 Indigenous communities who have signed “support” agreements with Teck. It now rests with Trudeau’s cabinet to decide Frontier Mine’s fate. Cabinet might begin by verifying the claim—echoed by Kenney—that the mine will produce lower intensity oil than half the oil refined in the U.S., thanks to technological advances. In fact, in a submission to the regulatory panel, the federal Environment and Climate Change Department disagreed, noting that when all operations taken into account, the project will actually be 24 per cent more carbon intensive than the best on offer. Kenney also claims the amount of carbon generated will be small in relation to overall emissions—only three per cent by 2050 by some accounts—and will not push the province beyond its self-imposed 100-megatonne limit. But the independent Canadian Energy Research Institute estimates emissions will hit the cap by 2026, which doesn’t leave much time for game-changing technological improvements. Finally, oil is oil and emissions are emissions. While there has been progress over decades in reducing the carbon intensity of a single barrel of oil, improvements have stalled as different mining methods are used and overall production increases overwhelm any intensity gains. The Canada Energy Regulator (the reconfigured National Energy Board) estimates production of crude to grow 50 per cent by 2040, enabled by the construction of new pipelines. As to the economic benefits: Teck is promising 7,000 short-term construction jobs and 2,500 permanent jobs, many for Indigenous people, in an area where jobs are scarce. This sounds like a hugely expensive and inefficient job creation program, considering the environmental consequences, locally and globally—and, especially when other job alternatives, including cleaning up orphaned wells, are possible. As to the advertised $12-billion tax haul for the federal government and $55 billion for Alberta, in taxes and royalties, these seem paltry sums when spread over 41 years. Nor are they assured: everything—including whether the project is ever built—depends on future demand for Alberta bitumen and the fluctuating price of oil. It is hard to imagine how a government that describes climate change as a crisis, that campaigned on a promise to act, that committed to zero emissions by 2050 at the Madrid climate conference last week, that has already bought Alberta a $4.5-billion pipeline, could justify yet another huge oil mine. It would be entertaining to see them try, if the stakes were not so high. Susan Riley is a veteran political columnist who writes regularly for The Hill Times. The Hill Times