Ontario pipeline corridor proposal faces pushback over lack of Indigenous consultation, environmental risks

Note: This is the second story in a three-part look at the East-West Energy Corridor project. You can read the initial story here.

A group representing seven First Nations in northern Ontario says the province’s push for a cross-country pipeline is moving ahead without their voices and is in conflict with federally funded conservation work already underway.

If approved, the East-West Canadian Energy Corridor would carry oil and gas from Alberta to refineries in southern Ontario.

But Lawrence Martin, lands and resources director for the Mushkegowuk Council, is frustrated that the province has not yet met with the council or the seven First Nation communities it represents, even though projects are being proposed on their territory along the James Bay coast.

“It’s as if we’re invisible throughout this whole discussion, everything that’s happening in the territory on the land or on the water. So it’s quite amazing,” Martin said.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford said the corridor is a nation-building project meant to strengthen energy security and boost exports, in part to respond to U.S. economic threats such as tariffs. 

The province also wants to explore the idea of new port outlets on James Bay, Hudson Bay and the Great Lakes, according to a news release this month. It has tied the proposed project to its broader push for critical mineral development in the north, and its effort to position the province as a hub for energy and manufacturing.

Ford has said the corridor would bring thousands of jobs and attract global investment.

Ontario has promised to “develop an Indigenous engagement roadmap” while studying the pipeline proposal, but Martin dismissed that as “lip service.”

He said he only learned of the province’s request for proposals, to study the feasibility of the energy corridor, when contacted by CBC. 

CBC also reached out to Ford’s office and the office of George Pirie, minister of northern economic development and growth, for comment.

“The recent request for proposals is an initial step in determining the feasibility of energy corridors and new trade infrastructure across the province,” Sam McCormick, a spokesperson for Pirie, said in a statement.

“Our government has begun productive conversations with First Nations communities who share the vision of unlocking economic opportunity and critical infrastructure in their communities. These meetings with First Nation communities will directly inform the development and next steps of these nation-building projects,” it said. 

Conflict with conservation work

Martin said Ontario’s interest in a deep-sea port on James Bay clashes with research the council has conducted with Parks Canada. Those studies, aimed at establishing national marine conservation areas (NMCAs), indicate the coast is unsuitable for large shipping infrastructure due to shallow waters, tides and ice cover.

In December 2022, the federal government announced it would commit $800 million to support four major Indigenous-led marine conservation projects across Canada.

The proposed marine conservation area on the James Bay and Hudson Bay was one of them. It would cover a 91,000-square-kilometre area along the southwestern shorelines of James Bay and north along Hudson Bay.

Martin said Mushkegowuk Council recently re-entered negotiations with Parks Canada. 

“The feasibility study is done and we have determined through that study that it is feasible to have an NMCA in James Bay and Hudson Bay.

“Now we have to start negotiating with the federal government on what the operations would look like and how we would have the Indigenous-led conservation ideas merged into the existing policies of the federal government,” said Martin, who thinks an agreement could be finalized in the next year. 

Ontario’s corridor plan, Martin argued, undermines that federal work.

“It’s a contradicting situation for the federal government. They’re funding the feasibility study to establish a national marine conservation area, and specifically some of the ‘do not do these things’ include dredging. Dredging is part of the rules of having an NMCA in place.”  

 He hopes the community’s ideas will be incorporated in establishing any NMCA. 

“But however the outcome, it’s probably going to be the same as what we’re seeing here from a common-sense logistical perspective. James Bay is not that kind of body of water that would accommodate deep sea.” 

James Bay is within tidal waters, with tides coming in roughly every five to six hours, moving the earth on the bottom of the sea. Martin said if there’s any kind of dredging, it would have to be continuous. It would also have to address the ice that’s on James Bay. 

“We were just out there about a month ago, and there’s still lots of ice out on James Bay and certainly a lot of ice in Hudson Bay. So you’re talking about ice breakers and so forth, so it’s going to be a lot of disturbance. … that part is scary,” Martin said. 

“Meeting invitations were sent to First Nations communities in regions impacted by the potential for a new energy corridor — these meetings are underway,” said McCormick, the spokesperson for Pirie.

“Our government has also met with First Nations partners regarding the proposed national marine conservation areas.”

It’s always a concern when we are digging into our natural resources and when that can actually have ecological impacts on other natural resources such as our Great Lakes.– Mike McKay, director, Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research

Heather Exner-Pirot, director of energy, natural resources and environment at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, also questioned the economic case for oil and gas exports from James Bay because of ice and the short shipping season. 

“Even on the more southernly edge of the bay, you have a longer season. Even then, it’s only a couple of months, certainly not all year. What your problem is going to be is Hudson Strait and what is that season going to be over the tip of northern Quebec and underneath Nunavut for the rest of the year,” said Exner-Pirot. 

“What this means is that you can’t export every day, and it’s very difficult to build a pipeline and LNG [liquefied natural gas] export terminal if you’re only using it for four to five or six months a year. That’s half your business, half your revenues, half your usage gone immediately. I don’t even think with nine or 10 months you could be that viable or competitive.”

Where a northern port might make more sense, she said, is for critical minerals. Mining operations in Quebec, Labrador and Nunavut already stockpile ore during the winter and ship it out during the open-water season.

Is energy security worth it? 

Ontario’s feasibility study for an east-west corridor will also consider the viability of a new or expanded refinery along the pipeline route. The province said boosting refining capacity could create jobs and open up new export opportunities.

Exner-Pirot said the only rationale for building a new refinery would be to reduce dependence on American facilities.

“The case for the federal government getting involved as a nation-building project is about energy independence — how much do we think we need to spend to be energy independent from the United States, knowing that they’re extremely energy dependent on us, and take up to 4 million barrels a day from us.”

As of 2024, Canada has 17 refineries with a total capacity of 1.93 million barrels per day, according to Canada Energy Regulator. The agency, under Natural Resources Canada, is responsible for licensing, supervising, regulating and enforcing applicable Canadian laws concerning interprovincial and international oil, gas and electric utilities.

Alberta has the largest share of refining capacity at 30 per cent, followed by Ontario and Quebec holding 21 per cent, New Brunswick at 17 per cent, Saskatchewan at eight per cent and Newfoundland at one per cent. 

Alberta holds the largest portion of Canada’s refining capacity at 30 per cent, followed by Ontario and Quebec each with 21 per cent. New Brunswick accounts for 17 per cent, Saskatchewan for eight per cent and Newfoundland for one per cent, according to the Canada Energy Regulator.

In 2023, Canadian refineries operated at 89 per cent capacity on average and consumed 1.6 million barrels of crude oil per day. Canada was the primary foreign supplier of crude oil to the U.S., accounting for 60 per cent of total U.S. crude oil imports and 23 per cent of U.S. refinery crude oil intake. 

Scientists warn of Great Lakes risks

Mike McKay, director of the Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research at the University of Windsor in southwestern Ontario, said the corridor aligns with government goals to boost trade and reduce dependence on the U.S. — but comes with risks.

“It’s always a concern when we are digging into our natural resources and when that can actually have ecological impacts on other natural resources such as our Great Lakes,” McKay said. 

“I would say the Great Lakes are the most important natural resources in North America. [They provide] over 20 per cent of the world’s surface freshwater drinking water for tens of millions of people, both sides of the Canada–U.S. border and many First Nations and tribal groups as well.”

McKay explained that if you took the eight states and the two provinces that make up the Great Lakes basin, the region would account for the third largest gross domestic product (GDP) in the world. 

“Part of that is because the lakes serve as drivers, whether it’s industrialization, the agricultural activity surrounding the lakes, but they’re important economic drivers in our region.” 

Yet researchers still know little about how oil behaves in freshwater, according to McKay. 

The Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research and Algoma University in Sault Ste. Marie are studying the effects through a project, funded through Natural Resources Canada, that’s led by Lake Superior State University in Sault Ste. Marie, Mich. 

It involves building mesocosms — a small, human-made ecosystem designed for scientific research that includes all the components of a natural ecosystem on a smaller scale — to simulate what may happen if oil is spilled in a wetland environment, for example.

He said simulations were run last fall and this summer, with another one planned for this fall. 

“We need to be prepared in case there is an oil spill given that we already have pipelines that traverse the Great Lakes and plans for maybe even more within the basin.” 

Call for meaningful dialogue

Martin said the Mushkegowuk Council has repeatedly tried to sit down with the Ontario government to talk about the studies that have been done, to try to establish James Bay an NMCA through the federal government. 

“Despite the number of times we’ve been trying to set up meetings and establish a relationship with Ontario, it just hasn’t happened,” Martin said. 

“However, the federal government does have all of our studies that we have done and also with the universities that were involved in these particular studies. But will they come to us to seek that kind of information? I don’t think so. But if they do, we’re still willing to work with them to provide our two cents.” 

Martin said he would like the province to contact Mushkegowuk Council, since it works with all First Nations along the coast of James Bay: Moose Cree First Nation, Fort Albany First Nation, Attawapiskat First Nation, Kashechewan First Nation, Chapleau Cree First Nation, Taykwa Tagamou Nation and Missanabie Cree First Nation.

“We’re working with all those communities on this conservation plan, and they are deeply involved with the studies and sharing the knowledge that they have. They also share how much they care for the way James Bay and Hudson Bay are being used now by the people and by the animals,” he said.

“Their voices need to be part of that picture that’s being put together of whether or not James Bay is a suitable place for a seaport.”