Could Churchill Manitoba be the light at the end of the tunnel?
As it stands, Alberta’s prospects of delivering oil to tide water are grim, if not non-existent. Following the calamitous finale of the Energy East pipeline, and the mismanagement of the western Trans Mountain Pipeline, it seems that our one-customer energy policy could remain in effect indefinitely. But what if there was one more option to consider that could present significantly less inter-provincial conflict, potentially reduced cost outlays, plus economic opportunity for a struggling provincial economy. Would it not be worth investigating?
While the prospect of creating a port utilizing the Hudson Bay once seemed improbable, the recent environment in Canada has one wondering if it could be the solution to our public policy woes.
There are two potential port locations that could be studied and developed in order to transport oil from Alberta to global markets – Churchill and Port Nelson, Manitoba. There is currently a railway line that runs through the muskeg, permafrost and lake region of Northern Manitoba along the Nelson River before jogging north to Churchill, Manitoba. This would be the natural route that a pipeline could be developed, either following the line to Churchill’s deep-water port, or straight out to Port Nelson. The railway has presently fallen into disrepair due to disagreements between the Canadian federal government, the Manitoba provincial government and a U.S. Railway Company, over who is responsible for repairing and maintaining the line. Frustratingly, this has left the people of northern Manitoba with inadequate access and connectivity. A pipeline project could ignite a fire in economically struggling Manitoba by providing thousands of jobs and capital projects, as well as pushing the issue of regaining access for Churchill and northern Manitoba.
One of the more compelling arguments for studying Manitoba as a viable port is the natural downhill flow that could be harnessed from Alberta to the Hudson Bay. The North Saskatchewan River in Edmonton and the Bow River in Calgary flow east, feeding straight into the Hudson Bay via Manitoba. The cost savings that could be achieved by constructing a pipeline that follows the natural contours of the Canadian Prairies, rather than forcing it uphill through mountain ranges, would be significant. While there are challenging natural elements to work around in Manitoba, fortunately there is a 40-year-old case study in Alaska’s pipeline, which operates successfully through similar arctic conditions. Additionally, tankers continue to evolve in hull design and safety, recently including a new “ice-class” specification (Polar Class 4) which provides adequate strength to operate safely through “first-year” ice, being ice that is composed of salt water and is therefore half the strength of fresh water ice, and also what is found in the Hudson Bay’s icy winter water. For a more in depth look on the current innovations and realities of tanker transportation in Canada, see my previous blog, “The truth about Canada’s tanker traffic…and its lack thereof”.
This is undoubtedly not as clear cut as I’ve elaborated, significant research and consultation would need to be taken to ensure all environmental and First Nation concerns were addressed, but the prosperity and new resource it could provide to the province of Manitoba, as well as the overall Canadian economy, would be a worthy reason to get on board. By opening up new export lanes outside of the one channel we currently use, it would create a more prosperous country for everyone, with ultimately more capital to invest in the social programs and environmental conservation efforts that are so important to all Canadians.