Canadian Energy Centre
‘Big vulnerability’: How Ontario and Quebec became reliant on U.S. oil and gas

From the Canadian Energy Centre
ARC Energy Institute leaders highlight the need for a new approach in a new reality
Despite Canada’s status as one of the world’s largest oil and gas producers, more than half of the country’s own population does not have true energy security – uninterrupted, reliable access to the energy they need at an affordable price.
Even though Western Canada produces much of the oil consumed in Ontario and Quebec, in order to get there, it moves on pipelines that run through the United States.
“It’s only energy secure if the Americans are our partners and friends,” leading energy researcher Jackie Forrest said on a recent episode of the ARC Energy Ideas podcast.
Amid rising trade tensions with the United States, energy security is taking on greater importance. But Forrest said the issue is not well understood across Canada.
“The concern is that in the worst-case scenario where the Americans want to really hurt our country, they have the ability to stop all crude oil flows to Ontario,” she said.
That action would also cut off the majority of oil supply to Quebec.
The issue isn’t much better for natural gas, with about half of consumption in Ontario and Quebec supplied by producers in the U.S.
“Tariffs or no tariffs, there is a real vulnerability there,” said Forrest’s co-host Peter Tertzakian, founder of the ARC Energy Research Institute.
The issue won’t go away with increased use of new technology like electric cars, he said.
“This isn’t just about combustion in engines. It’s about securing a vital commodity that is an input into other parts of our manufacturing and sophisticated economy.”
Oil: The Enbridge Mainline
The Enbridge Mainline is the main path for oil from Western Canada to reach refineries in Ontario and Quebec, according to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP).
Originating in Edmonton, Alberta, the Enbridge Mainline moves crude oil, refined products, and natural gas liquids through a connected pipeline system. At Superior, Wisconsin, the system splits into Line 5, going north of Lake Michigan, and Lines 6, 14, and 61, going around the southern tip of the lake. The two routes then coalesce and terminate in Sarnia, Ontario, where it is interconnected with Line 9, which is terminated in Montreal, Quebec. Source: Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers
Originally built in 1950 from Edmonton to Superior, Wisconsin, in 1953, it was extended to Sarnia, Ontario through a segment known as Line 5.
CAPP said that at the time, politicians had pushed for an all-Canadian path north of the Great Lakes to increase energy security, but routes through the U.S. were chosen because of lower project costs and faster timelines.
In 1979, an extension of the pipeline called Line 9 opened, allowing oil to flow east from Sarnia to Montreal.
“Line 9 was built after the oil crisis and the OPEC embargo as a way to bring western Canadian crude oil into Quebec,” Forrest said.
But by the 1990s – before the massive growth in Alberta’s oil sands – there was a lack of crude coming from Western Canada. It became more economically attractive for refineries in Quebec and Ontario to import oil from overseas via the St. Lawrence River, CAPP said.
A reversal in 1999 allowed crude in Line 9 to flow west from Montreal to Sarnia.
By the 2010s, the situation had changed again, with production from the Alberta oil sands and U.S. shale plays surging. With more of that oil available, the offshore crude was deemed to be more expensive, Forrest said.
In 2015, Line 9 was reversed to send oil east again from Sarnia to Montreal, displacing oil from overseas but not resolving the energy security risk of Canadian pipelines running through the U.S.
CAPP said the case of Line 5 illustrates this risk. In 2020, the Governor of Michigan attempted to shut down the pipeline over concerns about pipeline leak or potential oil spill in a seven-kilometre stretch under the Straits of Mackinac.
Line 5 has been operating in the Straits for 72 years without a single release.
Enbridge is advancing a project to encase the pipeline in a protective tunnel in the rock beneath the lakebed, but the legal battle with the State of Michigan remains ongoing.
Natural gas: The TC Canadian Mainline
The natural gas pipeline now known as TC Energy’s Canadian Mainline from Alberta was first built in 1958.
The TC Canadian Mainline (red dashed line) transports natural gas produced in Western Canada to markets in Eastern Canada. Red lines show pipelines regulated by the Canada Energy Regulator, while black lines show pipelines regulated by the United States. Source: Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers
“This pipeline brought gas into Ontario, and then it was extended to go into Quebec, and that was good for a long time,” Forrest said.
“But over time we built more pipelines into the United States, and it was a better economic path to go through the United States.”
The Mainline started running not at its full capacity, which caused tolls to go up and made it less and less attractive compared to U.S. options.
According to CAPP, between 2006 and 2023 the Mainline’s deliveries of gas from Western Canada to Ontario and Quebec were slashed in half.
“We should have said, ‘We need to find a way for this pipeline, over our own soil, to be competitive with the alternative’. But we didn’t,” Forrest said.
“Instead, we lost market share in Eastern Canada. And today we’re in a big bind, because if the Americans were to cut off our natural gas, we wouldn’t have enough natural gas into Quebec and Ontario.”
A different approach for a new reality
Forrest said the TC Mainline, which continues to operate at about half of its capacity, presents an opportunity to reduce Canada’s reliance on U.S. natural gas while at the same time building energy security for oil.
“Those are the same pipes that were going to be repurposed for oil, for Energy East,” Tertzakian said.
“The beauty of the thing is that actually, I don’t think it would take that long if we had the will… It’s doable that we can be energy secure.”
This could come at a higher cost but provide greater value over the long term.
“That’s always been the issue in Canada, when it comes to energy, we always go with the cheapest option and not the most energy secure,” Forrest said.
“And why? Because we always trusted our American neighbor to never do anything that will impact the flow of that energy. And I think we’re waking up to a new reality.”
Canadian Energy Centre
Saskatchewan Indigenous leaders urging need for access to natural gas

Piapot First Nation near Regina, Saskatchewan. Photo courtesy Piapot First Nation/Facebook
From the Canadian Energy Centre
By Cody Ciona and Deborah Jaremko
“Come to my nation and see how my people are living, and the struggles that they have day to day out here because of the high cost of energy, of electric heat and propane.”
Indigenous communities across Canada need access to natural gas to reduce energy poverty, says a new report by Energy for a Secure Future (ESF).
It’s a serious issue that needs to be addressed, say Indigenous community and business leaders in Saskatchewan.
“We’re here today to implore upon the federal government that we need the installation of natural gas and access to natural gas so that we can have safe and reliable service,” said Guy Lonechild, CEO of the Regina-based First Nations Power Authority, on a March 11 ESF webinar.
Last year, 20 Saskatchewan communities moved a resolution at the Assembly of First Nations’ annual general assembly calling on the federal government to “immediately enhance” First Nations financial supports for “more desirable energy security measures such as natural gas for home heating.”
“We’ve been calling it heat poverty because that’s what it really is…our families are finding that they have to either choose between buying groceries or heating their home,” Chief Christine Longjohn of Sturgeon Lake First Nation said in the ESF report.
“We should be able to live comfortably within our homes. We want to be just like every other homeowner that has that choice to be able to use natural gas.”
At least 333 First Nations communities across Canada are not connected to natural gas utilities, according to the Canada Energy Regulator (CER).
ESF says that while there are many federal programs that help cover the upfront costs of accessing electricity, primarily from renewable sources, there are no comparable ones to support natural gas access.
“Most Canadian and Indigenous communities support actions to address climate change. However, the policy priority of reducing fossil fuel use has had unintended consequences,” the ESF report said.
“Recent funding support has been directed not at improving reliability or affordability of the energy, but rather at sustainability.”
Natural gas costs less than half — or even a quarter — of electricity prices in Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan, according to CER data.
“Natural gas is something NRCan [Natural Resources Canada] will not fund. It’s not considered a renewable for them,” said Chief Mark Fox of the Piapot First Nation, located about 50 kilometres northeast of Regina.
“Come to my nation and see how my people are living, and the struggles that they have day to day out here because of the high cost of energy, of electric heat and propane.”
According to ESF, some Indigenous communities compare the challenge of natural gas access to the multiyear effort to raise awareness and, ultimately funding, to address poor water quality and access on reserve.
“Natural gas is the new water,” Lonechild said.
Alberta
The beauty of economic corridors: Inside Alberta’s work to link products with new markets

From the Canadian Energy Centre
Q&A with Devin Dreeshen, Minister of Transport and Economic Corridors
CEC: How have recent developments impacted Alberta’s ability to expand trade routes and access new markets for energy and natural resources?
Dreeshen: With the U.S. trade dispute going on right now, it’s great to see that other provinces and the federal government are taking an interest in our east, west and northern trade routes, something that we in Alberta have been advocating for a long time.
We signed agreements with Saskatchewan and Manitoba to have an economic corridor to stretch across the prairies, as well as a recent agreement with the Northwest Territories to go north. With the leadership of Premier Danielle Smith, she’s been working on a BC, prairie and three northern territories economic corridor agreement with pretty much the entire western and northern block of Canada.
There has been a tremendous amount of work trying to get Alberta products to market and to make sure we can build big projects in Canada again.
CEC: Which infrastructure projects, whether pipeline, rail or port expansions, do you see as the most viable for improving Alberta’s global market access?
Dreeshen: We look at everything. Obviously, pipelines are the safest way to transport oil and gas, but also rail is part of the mix of getting over four million barrels per day to markets around the world.
The beauty of economic corridors is that it’s a swath of land that can have any type of utility in it, whether it be a roadway, railway, pipeline or a utility line. When you have all the environmental permits that are approved in a timely manner, and you have that designated swath of land, it politically de-risks any type of project.
CEC: A key focus of your ministry has been expanding trade corridors, including an agreement with Saskatchewan and Manitoba to explore access to Hudson’s Bay. Is there any interest from industry in developing this corridor further?
Dreeshen: There’s been lots of talk [about] Hudson Bay, a trade corridor with rail and port access. We’ve seen some improvements to go to Churchill, but also an interest in the Nelson River.
We’re starting to see more confidence in the private sector and industry wanting to build these projects. It’s great that governments can get together and work on a common goal to build things here in Canada.
CEC: What is your vision for Alberta’s future as a leader in global trade, and how do economic corridors fit into that strategy?
Dreeshen: Premier Smith has talked about C-69 being repealed by the federal government [and] the reversal of the West Coast tanker ban, which targets Alberta energy going west out of the Pacific.
There’s a lot of work that needs to be done on the federal side. Alberta has been doing a lot of the heavy lifting when it comes to economic corridors.
We’ve asked the federal government if they could develop an economic corridor agency. We want to make sure that the federal government can come to the table, work with provinces [and] work with First Nations across this country to make sure that we can see these projects being built again here in Canada.
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
MORE OF THE SAME: Mark Carney Admits He Will Not Repeal the Liberal’s Bill C-69 – The ‘No Pipelines’ Bill
-
2025 Federal Election19 hours ago
‘I’m Cautiously Optimistic’: Doug Ford Strongly Recommends Canada ‘Not To Retaliate’ Against Trump’s Tariffs
-
2025 Federal Election24 hours ago
‘Coordinated and Alarming’: Allegations of Chinese Voter Suppression in 2021 Race That Flipped Toronto Riding to Liberals and Paul Chiang
-
International2 days ago
Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ defense shield must be built now, Lt. Gen. warns
-
Business11 hours ago
California planning to double film tax credits amid industry decline
-
Business2 days ago
Saskatchewan becomes first Canadian province to fully eliminate carbon tax
-
Business19 hours ago
Canada may escape the worst as Trump declares America’s economic independence with Liberation Day tariffs
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Mark Carney refuses to clarify 2022 remarks accusing the Freedom Convoy of ‘sedition’