Energy East Pipeline Debate Resurfaces Amid Push From Premiers

New developments in Canada’s energy sector have reignited a debate around the once-cancelled Energy East pipeline proposal, with several premiers now publicly urging the federal government to revive the project.

The Energy East pipeline was initially proposed by TC Energy, formerly TransCanada Corporation, as a multibillion-dollar project that would transport crude oil from Alberta and Saskatchewan to refineries and export terminals in eastern Canada. At an estimated cost of $15.7 billion, it was set to create thousands of jobs and facilitate an eastward flow of Western Canadian oil, reducing the need for foreign imports.

In 2017, TC Energy officially cancelled the project. The company cited uncertainty surrounding regulatory processes, shifting market conditions, and lower global oil prices at the time as contributing factors. Environmental groups and some provincial governments also raised concerns over the potential impacts on local ecosystems, greenhouse gas emissions, and Indigenous communities’ rights.

Leading the recent charge, Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston delivered a speech in which he underscored the potential of Energy East to move resources from western to eastern Canada, ultimately reaching international markets.

“Certainly during the discussion, you know, I called for the Prime Minister and asked the federal government to immediately approve the Energy East project,” Houston said at a press conference. “That’s something that they could do, and I encouraged them to do it. There was support from a number of premiers on that as well. If we needed more urgency to strengthen our country, we got it, right? So we need to make sure that we have incredible natural resources. We have to recognize that and tap into that potential. That’s a strength we have as a country… A project like Energy East could move resources from the west to the east and then on to Europe. I think it will open up incredible opportunities for our country.”

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith took to social media amplifying the call to reconsider Energy East. “It’s time for Team Canada to get serious about our domestic energy security, nation building, and growing our economy,” Smith wrote on X. “I join Premier Tim Houston on his request to immediately approve the Energy East pipeline.”

An infographic, originally published by The Epoch Times, illustrates that between 2015 and 2020, Canada saw the cancellation of over $176 billion in proposed resource projects, spanning liquefied natural gas, oil sands development, and major pipeline proposals—including Energy East. High-profile examples include:

  • The Frontier Oilsands Mine Project, worth $20.6 billion, shelved by Teck Resources
  • The Mackenzie Valley Gas Pipeline, valued at $16.1 billion, cancelled by Imperial Oil
  • Several LNG terminals, such as ExxonMobil’s West Coast Canada facility in British Columbia

Federal Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre also weighed in on the issue via X, writing, “At least $176 billion. That is the value of all the proposed resource projects on this map that have died under the radical anti-development agenda of the Liberal government of Trudeau, Freeland, Guilbeault & Carney. Now, we are more reliant than ever on the U.S. market. Fire the woke radicals. Repeal C-69.”

Bill C-69, passed by the Canadian Parliament in 2019, reformed the country’s environmental assessment process. Its supporters maintain that it fosters broader public participation and modern environmental accountability. Opponents like Poilievre claim it has slowed or halted major projects, limiting Canada’s capacity to export oil and gas internationally.

As geopolitical tensions place renewed emphasis on secure energy supplies worldwide, Canadian provinces rich in oil and natural gas are seizing the moment to advocate for greater market diversification. Proponents of reviving Energy East argue that Canada could reduce reliance on exporting to a single market—the United States—by opening pathways to Atlantic tidewater and global markets.

The pipeline is also argued that it could stimulate job creation and economic growth across multiple provinces. Additionally, augmented export capacity might strengthen Canada’s position as a stable supplier to allies in Europe and elsewhere seeking alternatives to conflict-prone regions.

While TC Energy has not publicly signaled any intention to revisit the Energy East proposal, the coordinated political push from leaders such as Houston and Smith has sparked new debate on whether conditions might now be more conducive to a national pipeline corridor.

“Now is the time to also, of course, look for diversification, not only across our country but around the world,” Houston emphasized in his remarks. “I think it will open up incredible opportunities for our country.”


Information for this story was found via the sources and companies mentioned. The author has no securities or affiliations related to the organizations discussed. Not a recommendation to buy or sell. Always do additional research and consult a professional before purchasing a security. The author holds no licenses.

One thought on “Energy East Pipeline Debate Resurfaces Amid Push From Premiers

  • January 24, 2025 1:30 PM at 1:30 pm
    Permalink

    Yes, make it happen, the sooner the better.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Share
Tweet
Share
Reddit