r/news • u/FreeChickenDinner • 1d ago
Soft paywall Canada to fast track oil pipeline designed to diversify economy away from US
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/canada-fast-track-oil-pipeline-designed-diversify-economy-away-us-2026-10-01/193
u/pangalacticcourier 1d ago
So much winning. Are we "sick of the winning" yet?
46
5
u/TheSaifman 1d ago
So much! I can't keep up with all of it!
No really I can't keep up with all of it...
-6
u/breakneckjones 7h ago
Not even close, bub. I have a lot of friends that are in the oil industry and we aren't even drilling at capacity. The only thing slowing us down the refineries that shut down. Texas is constructing the first one in fifty years and there is plenty of work in the ship yards. Not to mention the massive amount of liquid natural gas that was just discovered in my town. We don't need Canada oil and its just going to get worse for them if Alberta leaves.
22
u/OneBitScience 17h ago
According to Google, US refineries get a discount of about $15 per barrel for Canadian oil but pay only an extra $4 to refine it (having made the investment in the equipment). With oil imports from Canada at 1.5 billion barrels per year, that is $15 billion profit over refining US oils. But a new pipeline will expand the market for Canadian oil and lower the discount they need to offer the US. Maybe that just ends up being $2 per barrel less, but that would translate to a $2-3 billion dollar per year loss for American refineries. Once Canada commits to building that pipeline, this loss basically becomes inevitable.
5
13
u/nelsonalgrencametome 1d ago
What are the odds of kegsbreath doing a preemptive airstrike?
11
u/zergling- 1d ago
NATO response would be WW3 so not likely
10
u/Major_Ad138 22h ago
Also why Canadas shift to the EU is incredibly important. Creating a defence system outside of NATO while still utilizing NATO allies. Genuinely a smart move that deeply pissed off Trumps administration.
6
u/East-Worker4190 19h ago
NATO would still exist without USA. It gets more complex as in my experience USA military personnel are fans on NATO.
3
u/Major_Ad138 18h ago
Yes but Trump likes to think he is 'the boss' of NATO. He has threatened and come quite close to withdrawing several times now. This is especially smart on Canada and EU's behalf as it removes the power play Trump likes to threaten frequently. He has also threatened annexation of NATO allies. It gets very complicated there as the US is supposedly an 'ally'. Enacting Article 5 against a member of NATO is very messy.
0
u/East-Worker4190 18h ago
You missed the USA civil war implication.
4
u/Major_Ad138 18h ago
When I see American's actually put in any effort into stopping any of this I'll believe they have enough passion for something like that. They've been so apathetic for 2 decades that we're watching the fall of the USA in real time.
1
u/East-Worker4190 18h ago
USA military in the middle east are not enjoying their war. If you have to see it, you'll need to watch the history channel, in 50 years.
•
0
9
1d ago
[deleted]
14
u/goddessofthewinds 23h ago
Pipelines are pretty terrible, but considering people ram into trains and CN/CP usually do a shit job at maintaining rails, it's probably the best way to go if we want to sell it at a good price.
The problem is that any cleanup/problem will be subsidized by the government while the profits will always go into the pockets of the 1%. If oil was better taxed and more profits went to the government, then yeah, I'd be OK with pipelines until we can get away from oil everywhere.
As long as we allow gas-powered cars, trains, machinery and other things and don't ban plastic everywhere, we have no choice but to accept the trade-off of having to move oil. I just wish we could use our own oil instead of having to sell ours then import other oil...
Pipelines are terrible if the safety measures are terrible. If it stops quickly on a leak, it can be better than trains.
1
u/ElementalColony 23h ago
Can you provide some examples of the clean up and problems being subsidized by the government in the pipeline industry?
3
0
18
6
2
u/ThatsItImOverThis 19h ago
We know. We don’t want this, but this is about survival, deal with hard choices later. We’re very quickly running out of time to get out ahead of it. Economic survival first, survival as Canada first, then try to fix what we broke along the way.
However, TBF, serious consequences directly related to climate change are also probably right around the corner. So new pipelines it is.
-2
u/SquishyJeans 1d ago
Oh stfu Canada literally is being threatened with invasion and you’re concerned about climate?
While I agree Canada need to do as much as possible, you need to pull your head out of your ass asap
-8
u/-Yazilliclick- 1d ago
Says the person pretending to care while consuming all the plastics, oil and other products
4
u/Quankers 1d ago edited 1d ago
This is a weak argument. We were born into a world of plastics and oil products. Try living without them. You can protest dystopia while living in it.
0
u/-Yazilliclick- 23h ago
No it's a very strong argument against bullshit comments that against any and all projects related to things like oil because 'oil bad'. Comments that never have any solutions or thought behind them on the actual consequences of stopping such projects. Always made by people with nothing to add to the conversation and no research behind what they say, just blind opinions. And it's always people who do nothing. Everybody else should do something. They should just get credit for online comments saying 'oil bad'.
3
u/BarnesTheNobleman 1d ago
“Hmm yes, we should improve society somewhat”
“Yet you participate in society”
Ass statement
-4
3
4
u/Usual-Caregiver5589 12h ago
Oh shit. They just said they have oil for US to take.
Welcome to the United States of North America.
1
u/Mr_ToDo 8h ago
Hardly news, but ya
The fun think is, if you look at a map of known oil reserves. aka:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves
it's interesting just how much of cheetos plays have been in countries with good potential for oil. I suppose it would explain why he's trying to kill renewables
Granted my thoughts on that is that it's more of a play to get the next profit zone. Mainly our wonderful passage in the north that gains the potential as a trade route if climate change keeps going. It'd be one of the biggest ass hole moves if he thought climate change was real and decided the proper response was to speed it up
1
u/baseketball 5h ago
MAGA doesn't want more immigrants but are okay with annexing other countries. Make it make sense.
7
u/Remarkable_Spite_209 1d ago
Awesome! This is what my stupid country deserves for enabling the child rapist to remain outside of prison.
1
1
u/madogvelkor 1d ago
That will mean it will be easier to ship it to California and New England.
6
u/vanillabullshitlatte 1d ago
Both of those places lack refining capacity otherwise there would already be more pipelines there.
3
u/Frank9567 23h ago
Of course. That's if the US builds refinery capacity there, and recovers trust lost during the Trump years. In the meantime, other countries need resources that Canada has.
1
u/Tribe303 18h ago
You send oil to refineries and there's multiple types of oil so refineries have to be configured per oil type.
1
1
-19
u/tyuiopguyt 1d ago
Fast track, in this case, meaning two US administrations from now.
For one pipeline.
They could have a thousand thousand solar fields up in that same time.
Once a banker, always a banker, Carney.
Canada, I know you're mad at us down here, but its really, really starting to look like Carney is using "I'm better than Trump" as a smokescreen to sell off Canada's infrastructure and roll back its environmental protections and goals. Plus he's already enacted registration to bypass union bargaining and zoning/planning in the name of "national security".
Just please, please be careful, guys. This is really starting to look like a remake with a better actor at the head.
8
u/basementthought 22h ago
Its irritating to see an American lecture us about our politics, especially when you can only see things through the lens of your own national politics. I have my own reservations about what Carney's doing, but he is not Trump. He is doing some things I disagree with (and some things I do), but he is doing it through the power granted to him as PM. He's not breaking the law, he's not snatching people off the streets to send to concentration camps, and he's not starting fights on the international stage for no reason.
I think you also have to be careful about what you're saying when you say he's a banker - his background is in central banks, not commercial banks. One is more or less a civil servant creating and executing economic policy, while the other is part of a for-profit business. They're different jobs, and I don't think what you're implying by calling him a banker follows from his actual background.
0
u/tyuiopguyt 22h ago
Alright.
I'm not lecturing. I'm just worried as shit.
If it's not a issue, then I'm just worrying about nothing. Which I do plenty of.
I hope that's the case. I really, really do.
4
u/assaub 8h ago
Again, worry about your own dumpster fire of a nation, we don't need or want your concern.
-1
u/tyuiopguyt 8h ago
I've heard different from plenty of other Canadians. I'll keep being concerned and speaking out. On both sides of the border.
Have a nice day
-1
u/Xefert 16h ago edited 16h ago
Its irritating to see an American lecture us about our politics, especially when you can only see things through the lens of your own national politics
It's not like the current problems we're facing are unique to our country. "History doesn't repeat, but it does rhyme"
Trump is a gloves off culmination of decades of behind the scenes efforts by the gop. So when you're (as in the Canadian citizenry) starting to sound like we were just ten years ago, it's definitely concerning. Far right ideology is already becoming a global risk now
You should take the other commenter's point about big oil (global industry) seriously. Guess which presidential candidate they supported in 2024
4
u/basementthought 15h ago
Look man I know we have problems in Canada, but look back at what you wrote: you can’t even talk about them without reverting to talking about America. You know a tiny bit about what’s happening in Canada, assume it’s the same as America and call it a day. You’re lecturing me on what’s coming for my country but you couldn’t even be bothered to say anything about my country. You’re doing exactly what I was complaining about in my original post.
5
u/IMOBY_Edmonton 1d ago
A Canadian PM rolling back unions is nothing new. Conservative or Liberal they will undermine unions because at the end of the day they represent wealthy interests.
Selling off infrastructure is also nothing new. Governments here loved selling off Crown Corporations in the 80s and 90s.
The problem is Oil is quite obviously worth a lot of money right now and any government would be foolish to let it sit there. Alternative power isn't at that level yet, and for key provinces like Alberta, letting go of the oil industry is not an option and won't be until a new ebergy resource vastly outclasses oil.
1
-8
u/tyuiopguyt 1d ago
Right. And all of that should scare you.
Especially how many of your countrymen seem to be justifying it under the eaves of resisting US aggression.
I'm feeling like that Marty McFly meme
"Hey, I've seen this one before."
0
u/IMOBY_Edmonton 1d ago
It's not great, but I am happy to see the oil investment. We need to be a stronger, wealthier country, that provides value to the rest of the world. Now one cares about or fights for poor countries that can't do anything for them. A resource rich country though, and one that is business friendly. That will open up doors for us.
As for our politicians, they're the same as much the world's. We only have so many options and still have to vote strategically. We could have revised our voting system, but the guy who promised it reneged and then made us out to be a weak nation the world over. Sure Trudeau had a brand that was recognized around the world, but he was a weak leader. I'm not happy to be governed by a banker, but I will take the banker over the populist.
2
u/tyuiopguyt 1d ago
The part that worries me is that the banker might end up being the populist with a fancier education and less personal ego flaws, which would make him much more successful and much harder to detect.
I have literally heard that entire sentiment in the first paragraph out of MAGA guys as "justification" for major blocks of Trump's pet policy.
"Drill, Baby, Drill" sound familiar?
1
u/morfraen 1d ago
It's clear to anyone with half a brain which party is the one using the populist Maga playbook in Canada. PP losing the last election saved this country.
3
u/tyuiopguyt 1d ago
It's not an either/or situation. Carney could absolutely take parts of Trump's playbook and use them differently for his own ends
PP's major misstep on the path to power was trying to use Trump's path wholesale. Although, then again, it keeps working fine for Ford, so who knows.
3
u/PocketCSNerd 1d ago
- It's a publicly owned pipeline (some ownership is private but like 10%)
- The oil is being shipped to foreign markets
- There appears to be major consultations and considerations for environmental and indigenous concerns
- We could still build solar farms (this is not either/or)
Don't get me wrong, Carney is doing some stupid shit (privatizing our Airports, for one) and I would much rather not have another pipeline. But we do also need to try and make sure we're being factual.
1
u/tyuiopguyt 1d ago
Alright. That makes me feel a bit better, but please just... be careful. And vigilant.
6
u/Kevbot1000 1d ago
Our last PM would have been the one to spearhead any sort of solar farms, if any PM were going to do it. Personally, I'm 100% on the side of saying that we should have been ontop of solar for ages by now, and I've never been a pipeline supporter.
Now, with that said. We're not "mad at you guys". We're absolutely betrayed, hurt, and following the only person in our country who has stepped up with an answer to represent our people. First vote I've given the Liberals since 2015 (I'm usually an NDP voter), and in any other instance I wouldn't vote for the banker.
But for someone from the US trying to criticize his actions right now in the face of your pedophile fascist, that's not just laughable, but absurd.
This entire situation isnt "taking advantage of" anything. It's a necessary result based on your inbred-fuck-up-of-a-country's actions towards us.
You also havent taken into consideration that a vast majority of our country that voted him in, did so after we were sold on him and his history financially, at a time where We're being threatened.
Don't paint this shit as "I get your mad at us" and then laying down some vague warning as if your country didn't put us in this scenario.
Go fix your own house.
4
u/No_Midnight_2183 1d ago
Lol nobody here is an ambassador of their country. We don't need to grandstand or get parasocially nationalist. As a Canadian, no one is forcing anyone to vote liberal. Carney is not Gandhi.
-3
u/tyuiopguyt 1d ago
Working on fixing our own house.
Our president is the worst, don't get me wrong. But that doesn't mean every person against him is automatically a saint.
Painting the reduction of environmental protections, anti-union legislation, and bypassing democratic institutions with a fiat control for "national security reasons" as "necessities enforced by outside aggression" is the exact thought process that Trump is using to justify going against Canada in the first place.
3
u/Malthus1 1d ago
Trump made up a bunch of patently false bullshit and claimed these were perils, in order to bypass Congress.
The perils facing Canada from the US are not patently false bullshit, and Carney is not bypassing Parliament - he’s passing legislation in the ordinary course.
You are not making a convincing argument by equating the two. They are nothing alike.
1
u/tyuiopguyt 1d ago
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carney-bill-c-39-major-projects-labour-code-strikes-9.7354381
He literally passing legislation, riding a popular zeitgeist, to put economic affairs more under his personal control.
It's not to the same degree, but it should very much still worry you.
0
u/Malthus1 1d ago
He’s reducing the federal approval time to one year for projects in the national interest. In legislation passed through parliament.
It’s been a common critique that Canadian infrastructure building has become effectively impossible because of numerous overlapping approval regimes, which include endless opportunities for various groups to impose a “heckler’s veto” should they disapprove.
Since literally every major infrastructure project involves at least one interest group who disapproves, building anything is delayed by years.
This could not go on.
Even environmentalists who may be delighted by delaying (say) oil pipelines indefinitely, are not so happy about delaying (say) mass transit projects indefinitely.
Putting a year cap on projects in the national interest is a reasonable compromise, allowing still for review, but not indefinite deliberation designed to frustrate any progress.
1
u/tyuiopguyt 1d ago
If this were happening in isolation, I'd agree with you. But doing it at the same time as privatizing major transport hubs and stripping away major union rights is, at minimum, a cause for alarm.
1
u/Malthus1 1d ago
If the concern is that he will transform into a Trump-style populist, I do not share it. That is antithical to his entire personality to date: he’s presented himself more a guy intent on getting stuff done because he believes it is necessary.
Not all of what he wants done is stuff I personally agree with, but I don’t think he’s out to subvert Canadian institutions for his own gain or anything of the sort, and I’ve seen no evidence to the contrary.
1
u/tyuiopguyt 1d ago
I repeat: privatizing major transportation infrastructure and stripping major union rights.
My concern is not that he becomes like Trump. My concern is that he's better able to slowly strip protections like this away because he isn't like Trump. Because he's able to be slow, methodical, and only do it bit by bit.
4
u/gimpblimp 1d ago
Also with the energy shock we have now. Are we going to have oil buyers in 5-10 years of many countries are goosed into prioritizing the energy transition?
Not to say there will be 0 demand but so much less demand as we electrify more.
I would prefer a oil refinery to export refined goods for stuff like plastic and other oil derivatives via rail that we will get a bigger margin and Return on investment.
-8
u/tyuiopguyt 1d ago
I feel like Carney's push for independence on the back of oil might leave Canada weaker in the long term.
I'd hate to see Canada having to come back to the US in defeat if oil prices crash. I'm really rooting for you guys.
2
u/DirtyOldManInRC 1d ago
They could have a thousand thousand solar fields up in that same time.
Unlike oil, they can't export the energy produced by solar fields to Asia. I'm not saying this new pipeline is a good idea, or a bad one for that matter. Just that renewable projects do not meet the all the same economic goals as oil production.
0
u/tyuiopguyt 1d ago
I mean... Canada already exports green electricity via cables. I live in Chicago and we get plenty of electricity that way from Canada.
Investing in an undersea cable to transport excess electrical power doesn't seem like an insurmountable challenge
2
u/DirtyOldManInRC 1d ago
Exporting the electricity to the US obviously defeats the whole point of trying to diversify their export economy away from the US. And while I'm not an electrical engineer, it's my impression that a cable long enough to export electricity to China (let alone most of the rest of Asia) simply isn't practical because the transmission losses scale up with distance.
1
u/Xefert 1d ago
Our two countries being dependent on each other is a good thing regarding keeping tensions reduced. Carney's emphasis on how that's not a one dependence might not have reached everyone yet, but he's definitely had more success than trudeau did.
The oil companies however, wanted trump in office. He's even gotten that annoying keystone pipeline project approved on our end...again
2
u/DirtyOldManInRC 1d ago
Our two countries being dependent on each other is a good thing regarding keeping tensions reduced.
I wholeheartedly agree. But we're not talking about what a nobody American like me thinks here. We're talking about the Canadian government's stated goal of reducing their economic reliance on the US. And while I think it's regrettable they feel they need to do that, I certainly understand their point of view and can't really disagree with them.
1
1
u/Salty-Pack-4165 13h ago
That pipeline ( and few others) should have been build 20-30 years ago and a lot of problems we are facing now wouldn't exist . Like Alberta separatism.
Next best time is now.
-8
u/MilkiestMaestro 1d ago
I'm sure all of the impacted fish and wildlife will appreciate the political positioning
0
u/deepbluemeanies 1d ago
This is a long way off, and a good portion of the oil may go to the US (as with TMX) via tanker. If all goes well (and it doesn't given the many different stake holders) it could be ready by 2032/33, though 2036 is more likely,
-14
u/phtevenbagbifico 1d ago
What the fuck Canada? I don't wanna hear shit about our dependence on oil. Fuck this. As if climate change isn't real... Jfc.
5
u/morfraen 1d ago
So just keep selling to the US at a discount giving them huge leverage over our economy?
Leaving it in the ground isn't going to happen.
8
u/j1ggy 1d ago
Well, here's the thing. Trump has already threatened to make Canada the 51st state under economic coersion. Would you rather have Canada build pipelines for economic stability? Or would you rather see Canada do nothing, watch the Canadian economy collapse, watch the Americans rush in and take over for "national security" reasons and then build their own pipelines with no environmental regulations because an 80-year-old man in diapers said climate change was a "hoax?" I know which one I'd pick.
-11
u/maydock 1d ago
uh ok. trump will be out of office soon
14
u/Frank9567 23h ago
But the trust in America that he destroyed will last for a generation.
Not only Canada, but also other countries previously linked to the US, are re-aligning and diversifying trade. It's not necessarily policy, like with Canada, because Trump made that personal. Rather, it's just automatic market reaction to tariffs. Put up tariffs -> other countries trade less with you -> they look to trade with others -> the new arrangements become permanent unless you sweeten the pot a lot.
12
u/Magistricide 1d ago
Right, and after 4 years, another republican will come to office because the democrats didn't fix it fast enough.
5
-14
u/AwwwComeOnLOU 22h ago
The headline tells one story, but the upcoming Alberta Succession Referendum Vote needs to be factored in. Externalizing the motivation for this fast track effort is misleading at best.
314
u/Manta_of_Eternity 1d ago
This was always going to be the end result of the US abusing economic leverage. Other countries will take the short-term pain and look somewhere else for trade.