Steam-driven projects may be subject to C-69 reviews
OTTAWA — Environment Minister Catherine McKenna on Wednesday added steam-driven oilsands facilities to the list of projects that are subject to federal environmental reviews, but will exempt those same projects on the condition that Alberta keeps certain environmental policies in place.
The inclusion of so-called in-situ facilities on the project list under Bill C-69 was largely expected by industry and other observers after Ottawa released a consultation paper in June 2018 that openly considered the move. At the time, the federal government said in-situ projects could be exempt “where a jurisdiction has in place a hard cap on greenhouse gas emissions” — a condition widely seen as a way to force Alberta to keep its climate change policies intact.
The long-awaited project list is among the most contentious aspects of Bill C-69, which effectively overhauls the federal review process for major energy projects like oil pipelines and nuclear facilities. Industry groups have long called on Ottawa to keep steam-driven oilsands projects off of the project list, saying it poses a needless overlap in federal and provincial jurisdiction.
The updated list includes new and expanded steam-driven oilsands projects that are above a roughly 12,000 barrel-per-day threshold. The list also subjects offshore wind projects with more than 10 turbines to the federal review process, while removing federal reviews for uranium and apatite mines and high speed rail lines.
In-situ projects are widely seen as the future of the oilsands, expected to account for the vast majority of new production in coming years. Unlike oilsands mines, the in-situ process uses steam to loosen up bitumen deep underground, allowing the oil to flow to the surface in hard-toreach reservoirs.
Oil industry lobbyists have argued that Bill C-69 places overly onerous environmental and regulatory conditions on project proponents, which could stall any future oilsands expansions. Environmental advocates, for their part, argue the bill necessarily aims to account for cumulative environmental impacts.