This article originally appeared in The Hub.
By Heather Exner-Pirot, July 10, 2026
Two years ago, another West Coast oil pipeline in Canada was not a topic of discussion, not an inkling of an idea, not anyone’s passion project. Energy East, Keystone XL, and Northern Gateway were buried six feet under, and the Trans Mountain Expansion was hobbling over the finish line without fanfare or ribbon-cutting.
The speed and extent to which the political zeitgeist has shifted is almost disorienting, like waking up to see Bobby Ewing showering in Dallas. Pipelines are now being thrust by governments onto producers who need coaxing to fill them.
We are living in a different world and have entered a different time. The Carney Liberal government has embraced its leadership of turning Canada into a resource and energy superpower through a series of announcements across sectors and regions—an announcementpalooza, if you will—since it got its fragile majority in April. Even the skeptics must admit it is better for government to be pushing projects than blocking them.
But it remains to be seen whether the private sector will begin making more of the announcements.
A pipeline of pipelines
We obsess, of course, over pipelines in this country, and there has been no shortage of things to talk about. The Alberta-Canada MOU from last November evolved into the Alberta-Canada Implementation Agreement in May, which nailed down some details on industrial carbon pricing, clean electricity regulations and carbon capture. This paved the way for the announcement of a new west coast pipeline right after Canada Day, on a southern route to Vancouver, to be advanced by a joint ownership group including the federally-owned Trans Mountain corporation, the Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission (APMC), and a 10 percent stake from Pembina Pipeline Corporation.
If all goes well, the project will be designated a project of national interest by October—right before Alberta’s referendum on a secession referendum—and could be approved by next fall, with commercial operations beginning around 2034.
In the meantime, Trans Mountain, which has been full the past two months in the wake of the Iran crisis, is planning an expansion of 300,000 barrels by 2028 to meet strong Asian demand.
Not to be outdone, Doug Ford and Danielle Smith announced at Stampede this week the next steps in the patriotically named Northern Shield pipeline that would send Alberta oil to Ontario refineries without going through the United States: a show of national unity and sovereignty that needs to be fleshed out, and is moving into the feasibility study stage.
While many are pleased with this newfound enthusiasm for pipelines, criticism has come from those who would prefer to see private proponents leading them.
Wouldn’t we all!
But there is a price to be paid for the more than 10 years of delays, challenges, protests, and political rejections this country imposed on the pipeline industry. The cost is that governments now have to step in to de-risk projects that are in the public interest, but that the private sector is still wary can be accomplished through the course of normal business.
There is no option for a private proponent to build a West Coast pipeline at this time, and so the second-best option, vastly superior to not building one at all, is for Alberta and Canada to advance it. Conveniently, the Canadian public already owns a West Coast oil pipeline company that can do the job. The head of the Major Projects Office, that workhorse of the federal government’s infrastructure ambitions, Dawn Farrell, is the former CEO of Trans Mountain.
Electrifying!
Falling under the radar, but at least as consequential, was the triad of announcements this spring at the nexus of electrification and AI.
While oil and gas exports butter our bread, we are in an era where the availability of affordable and reliable electricity is increasingly a strategic and competitive advantage: to attract industrial activity, improve voter affordability, and especially to compete in AI.
On May 14, Ottawa announced a National Strategy for an Electrified Canadian Economy, with the ambitious goal of doubling Canada’s electricity supply by 2050. It is ambitious because Canada’s electricity supply has been flat for 20 years. This lack of growth is absolutely untenable given our bulging population, the drive to electrify heating and transportation, the development of AI data centres, the need for air conditioning, and the increasing demands of the oil and gas, mining, defence, and manufacturing sectors.
Because electricity is under provincial jurisdiction, the federal government’s role will largely be in financing this build-out, and frankly, many of our Crown utilities require a helping hand. For the past decade, policymakers spoke earnestly about the trilemma: balancing sustainability, affordability and reliability, and the federal Liberals prioritized sustainability every time. Now our choice will be between reliability and affordability, and reliability must win.
It will be painful for both ratepayers and politicians, and Ottawa intends to step in and soften the blow. It will ultimately be painful for taxpayers. But there is no alternative to this solution because we have already dug ourselves into too deep a hole, and without intervention, some provinces and territories will see blackouts. We need to start being honest about our situation.
This was followed on June 8 with the National Artificial Intelligence Strategy. While there are many things to quibble with, it is notable that the Liberal government is unabashedly in support of AI at a time when it has become deeply polarizing and unpopular with the American Left.
We need AI, and we need AI data centres. This is non-negotiable at a defence and economic level in 2026. Perhaps the most significant non-government economic announcement made this year was for a gigawatt-scale AI data centre outside Edmonton, a massive 11-figure investment from Meta. Notably, it includes a $4.6 billion 932 MW natural gas plant from Pembina, with the potential to expand to 1.8 GW, something only made possible from the Clean Electricity Regulations carve out Alberta was granted in the November MOU.
Finally, on June 22, the federal government announced a Nuclear Energy Strategy for Canada. This also was refreshing in its unapologetic boosterism for uranium and nuclear energy, a sea change from just four years ago when Ottawa inexplicably excluded nuclear energy from its Green Bond Framework, alongside a sin list of sectors such as fossil fuels, arms manufacturing, gambling, tobacco, and alcohol. With the goal of 10 new large-scale reactors, nuclear will play a necessary role in our electrification and AI goals.
But government intends to play an outsized role here, too, not only in financing nuclear energy, but in picking winners and losers on the reactor technology side. The strategy mentions Atkins Realis’ “CANDU” 42 times, but Brookfield and Cameco’s “Westinghouse” only three times.
What changed?
These announcements represent a sea change in Canadian politics. For years, our energy policy was simply a subset of our climate policy, and the energy sector a beast to be tamed in service of the Paris Agreement. Energy policy in Canada is now about economic development, international affairs and national security.
The recalibration of the energy transition, the election of President Trump, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and the rise of AI all catalyzed the shift. But it was always inevitable. Energy is Canada’s superpower, and it is in our interests to unleash it.
The question that remains is whether Ottawa intends to be primarily an investor or an enabler. Let us hope the former.
