Connect with us

Canadian Energy Centre

Indigenous leaders meet G7 diplomats to make case for Canadian LNG

Published

8 minute read

Indigenous leaders meet with U.S. ambassador to Canada David Cohen. Photo courtesy Energy for a Secure Future

From Shawn Logan of the Canadian Energy Centre Ltd.

‘Every official had a real desire to really understand Indigenous sentiment around resource development’

As G7 leaders left Hiroshima, Japan last month, they made a significant admission that liquefied natural gas (LNG) is a critical fuel to help reduce dependence on Russian energy, and that increased natural gas investment is important.

“In this context, we stress the important role that increased deliveries of LNG can play and acknowledge that investment in the sector can be appropriate in response to the current crisis and to address potential gas market shortfalls provoked by the crisis,” wrote the G7 in their final communique last week.

The decision comes just weeks after a small group of Indigenous leaders went to Ottawa to meet face-to-face with diplomats from some of the world’s top economies, convened by Energy for a Secure Future.

Their message to the world was simple: Indigenous communities in Canada can and should be partners at the table when it comes to developing and sharing our country’s vast natural resources. And it may have resonated.

For John Desjarlais, executive director of the Indigenous Resource Network, the vote of confidence for LNG is music to his ears.

“I’d like to think that we were heard – we met with some pretty influential people and heard some of the right things,” he said.

“For them to make that commitment is a big deal, and certainly a difference from some of the early indicators before the G7.”

John Desjarlais, executive director of the Indigenous Resource Network in Bragg Creek, Alta. Photo by Dave Chidley for the Canadian Energy Centre

Tapped earlier this year as the new executive director of the Indigenous Resource Network, Desjarlais found himself in Ottawa with other Indigenous leaders in April, meeting with diplomatic representatives from Canada’s G7 partners – Germany, France, Japan and the United States – as well as delegations from Poland and India.

Desjarlais said he was surprised just how open diplomats were to the notion that Indigenous communities in Canada can be key players in the global energy marketplace.

“What a whirlwind. It was inspiring, especially speaking with the ambassadors,” Desjarlais said of the two-day diplomatic blitz that both challenged perceptions and paved a path for Indigenous voices to play a greater role on the international stage.

“Every official had a real desire to really understand Indigenous sentiment around resource development. There was a sincere desire to learn from our perspective.”

First Nations and Metis have emerged as key partners in Canadian resource projects, particularly the country’s nascent LNG industry.

Global demand for reliable and responsibly produced LNG has continued to grow, with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last year thrusting it into even greater prominence. The leaders of Canada’s G7 partners Germany and Japan both came to Canada last year to make direct appeals for more Canadian LNG – they left with no firm commitments.

Indigenous leaders meet with Karina Häuslmeier from the German embassy in Canada. Photo courtesy Energy for a Secure Future

Desjarlais and a group of fellow Indigenous leaders who are on the advisory council for Energy for a Secure Future – a non-partisan coalition of business, labour and Indigenous representatives – outlined their vision for how Canada and First Nations can help be a solution in the drive for increased global energy security, while also helping lower emissions by providing a cleaner alternative to coal.

Crystal Smith, chief councillor of the Haisla Nation on B.C.’s coast, said the first step is dispelling the notion that Indigenous people oppose resource development in Canada.

“When Europeans, Asians and Americans think of Canada’s Indigenous peoples, they often think we oppose all energy development,” she said during a press conference to mark April’s diplomatic meetings.

“We aren’t victims of development. Increasingly we are partners and even owners in major projects.”

The Haisla Nation has a 50 per cent ownership stake in the proposed $3-billion Cedar LNG project, which was granted regulatory approval earlier this year, and is expected to begin operations in 2027.

It marks the largest Indigenous-owned infrastructure project in Canadian history, as well as the first Indigenous-owned LNG terminal in the world.

Indigenous leaders meet with Japan’s ambassador to Canada Kanji Yamanouchi. Photo courtesy Energy for a Secure Future

Karen Ogen, CEO of the First Nations LNG Alliance, said it’s projects like Cedar LNG and others currently under development that will not only help Indigenous communities achieve prosperity, but help the global community in the quest for vital energy security.

“LNG development has provided immediate- and medium-termed opportunities to lift thousands of Indigenous people and our communities out of inter-generational poverty,” she said.

“We are determined to develop our resources in a socially and environmentally responsible way. We want to work with Canada and our allies in the G7 to bring urgency to the development and export of Canadian LNG.”

Beyond Cedar LNG, dozens of First Nations and Métis communities have entered into equity ownership agreements in pipelines, LNG facilities and carbon capture and storage projects, among others.

The Ksi Lisims LNG project, a joint venture with the Nisga’a Nation in northern B.C., has been granted a 40-year export licence from the Canada Energy Regulator, while in Atlantic Canada the Miawpukek First Nation is a part-owner of the proposed export project LNG Newfoundland and Labrador.

Large consortiums representing Indigenous communities have also acquired or are looking to acquire stakes in major pipeline projects including Coastal GasLink, Trans Mountain, and several oil sands pipelines.

According to Desjarlais, the Ottawa summit proved to be a fruitful meeting of the minds. He said it could signal a more important role for Indigenous communities both as more equal resource partners in Canada, but on the world stage as well. The group has been asked to meet again in June with U.S. ambassador David Cohen.

“I never thought it would accelerate to this point – it’s accelerating so fast,” he said.

“Ownership is reconciliation. There’s a whole cascade of benefits that come from these projects everywhere.”

 

 

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

2025 Federal Election

Canada’s pipeline builders ready to get to work

Published on

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Deborah Jaremko

“We’re focusing on the opportunity that Canada has, perhaps even the obligation”

It was not a call he wanted to make.

In October 2017, Kevin O’Donnell, then chief financial officer of Nisku, Alta.-based Banister Pipelines, got final word that the $16-billion Energy East pipeline was cancelled.

It was his job to pass the news down the line to reach workers who were already in the field.

“We had a crew that was working along the current TC Energy line that was ready for conversion up in Thunder Bay,” said O’Donnell, who is now executive director of the Mississauga, Ont.-based Pipe Line Contractors Association of Canada (PLCAC).

“I took the call, and they said abandon right now. Button up and abandon right now.

“It was truly surreal. It’s tough to tell your foreman, who then tells their lead hands and then you inform the unions that those three or four or five million man-hours that you expected are not going to come to fruition,” he said.

Workers guide a piece of pipe along the Trans Mountain expansion route. Photograph courtesy Trans Mountain Corporation

“They’ve got to find lesser-paying jobs where they’re not honing their craft in the pipeline sector. You’re not making the money; you’re not getting the health and dental coverage that you were getting before.”

O’Donnell estimates that PLCAC represents about 500,000 workers across Canada through the unions it works with.

With the recent completion of the Trans Mountain expansion and Coastal GasLink pipelines – and no big projects like them coming on the books – many are once again out of a job, he said.

It’s frustrating given that this could be what he called a “golden age” for building major energy infrastructure in Canada.

Together, more than 62,000 people were hired to build the Trans Mountain expansion and Coastal GasLink projects, according to company reports.

O’Donnell is particularly interested in a project like Energy East, which would link oil produced in Alberta to consumers in Eastern and Atlantic Canada, then international markets in the offshore beyond.

“I think Energy East or something similar has to happen for millions of reasons,” he said.

“The world’s demanding it. We’ve got the craft [workers], we’ve got the iron ore and we’ve got the steel. We’re talking about a nation where the workers in every province could benefit. They’re ready to build it.”

The “Golden Weld” marked mechanical completion of construction of the Trans Mountain Expansion Project on April 11, 2024. Photo courtesy Trans Mountain Corporation

That eagerness is shared by the Progressive Contractors Association of Canada (PCA), which represents about 170 construction and maintenance employers across the country.

The PCA’s newly launched “Let’s Get Building” advocacy campaign urges all parties in the Canadian federal election run to focus on getting major projects built.

“We’re focusing on the opportunity that Canada has, perhaps even the obligation,” said PCA chief executive Paul de Jong.

“Most of the companies are quite busy irrespective of the pipeline issue right now. But looking at the long term, there’s predictability and long-term strategy that they see missing.”

Top of mind is Ottawa’s Impact Assessment Act (IAA), he said, the federal law that assesses major national projects like pipelines and highways.

In 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada found that the IAA broke the rules of the Canadian constitution.

Construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline. Photograph courtesy Coastal GasLink

The court found unconstitutional components including federal overreach into the decision of whether a project requires an impact assessment and whether a project gets final approval to proceed.

Ottawa amended the act in the spring of 2024, but Alberta’s government found the changes didn’t fix the issues and in November launched a new legal challenge against it.

“We’d like to see the next federal administration substantially revisit the Impact Assessment Act,” de Jong said.

“The sooner these nation-building projects get underway, the sooner Canadians reap the rewards through new trading partnerships, good jobs and a more stable economy.”

Continue Reading

Canadian Energy Centre

First Nations in Manitoba pushing for LNG exports from Hudson’s Bay

Published on

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Will Gibson

NeeStaNan project would use port location selected by Canadian government more than 100 years ago

Building a port on Hudson’s Bay to ship natural resources harvested across Western Canada to the world has been a long-held dream of Canadian politicians, starting with Sir Wilfred Laurier.

Since 1931, a small deepwater port has operated at Churchill, Manitoba, primarily shipping grain but more recently expanding handling of critical minerals and fertilizers.

A group of 11 First Nations in Manitoba plans to build an additional industrial terminal nearby at Port Nelson to ship liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe and potash to Brazil.

Courtesy NeeStaNan

Robyn Lore, a director with project backer NeeStaNan, which is Cree for “all of us,” said it makes more sense to ship Canadian LNG to Europe from an Arctic port than it does to send Canadian natural gas all the way to the U.S. Gulf Coast to be exported as LNG to the same place – which is happening today.

“There is absolutely a business case for sending our LNG directly to European markets rather than sending our natural gas down to the Gulf Coast and having them liquefy it and ship it over,” Lore said. “It’s in Canada’s interest to do this.”

Over 100 years ago, the Port Nelson location at the south end of Hudson’s Bay on the Nelson River was the first to be considered for a Canadian Arctic port.

In 1912, a Port Nelson project was selected to proceed rather than a port at Churchill, about 280 kilometres north.

The Port Nelson site was earmarked by federal government engineers as the most cost-effective location for a terminal to ship Canadian resources overseas.

Construction started but was marred by building challenges due to violent winter storms that beached supply ships and badly damaged the dredge used to deepen the waters around the port.

By 1918, the project was abandoned.

In the 1920s, Prime Minister William Lyon MacKenzie King chose Churchill as the new location for a port on Hudson’s Bay, where it was built and continues to operate today between late July and early November when it is not iced in.

Lore sees using modern technology at Port Nelson including dredging or extending a floating wharf to overcome the challenges that stopped the project from proceeding more than a century ago.

Port Nelson, Manitoba in 1918. Photo courtesy NeeStaNan

He said natural gas could travel to the terminal through a 1,000-kilometre spur line off TC Energy’s Canadian Mainline by using Manitoba Hydro’s existing right of way.

A second option proposes shipping natural gas through Pembina Pipeline’s Alliance system to Regina, where it could be liquefied and shipped by rail to Port Nelson.

The original rail bed to Port Nelson still exists, and about 150 kilometers of track would have to be laid to reach the proposed site, Lore said.

“Our vision is for a rail line that can handle 150-car trains with loads of 120 tonnes per car running at 80 kilometers per hour. That’s doable on the line from Amery to Port Nelson. It makes the economics work for shippers,” said Lore.

Port Nelson could be used around the year because saltwater ice is easier to break through using modern icebreakers than freshwater ice that impacts Churchill between November and May.

Lore, however, is quick to quell the notion NeeStaNan is competing against the existing port.

“We want our project to proceed on its merits and collaborate with other ports for greater efficiency,” he said.

“It makes sense for Manitoba, and it makes sense for Canada, even more than it did for Laurier more than 100 years ago.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X