The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines were a planned-but-never-built project for a twin pipeline from Bruderheim, Alberta, to Kitimat, British Columbia. The project was active from the mid-2000s to 2016. The eastbound pipeline would have imported natural gas condensate, and the westbound pipeline would have exported diluted bitumen from the Athabasca oil sands to a marine terminal in Kitimat for transportation to Asian markets via oil tankers. The project would have also included terminal facilities with "integrated marine infrastructure at tidewater to accommodate loading and unloading of oil and condensate tankers, and marine transportation of oil and condensate." The project was first proposed in the mid-2000s but was postponed several times. The project plan was developed by Enbridge Inc., a Canadian crude oil and liquids pipeline and storage company.
When completed, the pipeline and terminal would have provided 104 permanent operating positions created within the company and 113 positions with the associated marine services. First Nations groups, many municipalities, including the Union of BC Municipalities, environmentalists and oil sands opponents, among others, denounced the project because of the environmental, economic, social and cultural risks posed by the pipeline. Proponents argued that the pipeline would have provided Indigenous communities with equity ownership, employment, community trust and stewardship programs. The Federal Court of Appeal ultimately ruled that consultation with First Nations was inadequate and overturned the approval.
The proposal was heavily criticized by Indigenous peoples. Groups like the Yinka Dene Alliance organized to campaign against the project. In December 2010, 66 First Nations bands in British Columbia, including many along the proposed pipeline route, signed the Save the Fraser Declaration in opposition to the project, and 40 more signed since that time. The proposal was also opposed by numerous non-governmental organizations, which cite previous spills, concerns over oil sands expansion, and associated risks in transportation.
In June 2014 the Northern Gateway pipeline project was approved by the federal government, subject to 209 conditions. In 2015 the CBC questioned the silence concerning the Northern Gateway project and suggested that Enbridge might have quietly shelved the project. In June 2016, the Federal Court of Appeal rescinded the project approval, sending it back to Cabinet. On 29 November 2016 the Cabinet officially rejected reapproval for the pipelines despite recommendations by the court. In June 2019, the revised pipeline approval process (Bill C-69) was passed to comply with the ruling. The Trans Mountain Expansion Project (TMX) received final federal approval on June 18, 2019, following a re-evaluation process which effectively replaced the project with a more viable alternative.
In January 2025, following threats of economic sanctions by the United States under President Trump, the project was raised by former supporters and detractors as a way to diversify Canadian energy export customers. However, Enbridge has not expressed any interest in reviving the pipeline.
History The project was proposed in the mid-2000s and was postponed several times. It was announced in 2006. Enbridge signed a cooperation agreement with PetroChina in 2005 to ensure the utilization of pipeline capacity. PetroChina agreed to buy about transported through the pipeline. In 2007, however, PetroChina withdrew from the projects because of delays in starting the project.
On 4 December 2009, the National Energy Board (NEB) and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) issued the Joint Review Panel Agreement and the terms of reference for the environmental and regulatory review of the Northern Gateway Pipelines.
Enbridge Northern Gateway submitted its project application to the NEB on 27 May 2010. The eight-volume regulatory application was assessed by a joint review panel (JRP) established by the CEAA and the NEB. On 19 January 2011, the JRP requested that Enbridge provide additional information on the design and risk assessment of the pipelines due to the difficult access and unique geographic location of the proposed project.
On 17 June 2014 the Canadian government accepted the project's proposal. It set out 209 conditions, identified in 2013 by a JRP, to be resolved during the next phase of the regulatory process.
On 6 May 2016, Enbridge filed a request with the NEB to extend the sunset clause for the Northern Gateway Project. The sunset clause (NEB Condition No. 2) stipulated that construction had to begin before 31 December 2016.
In June 2016, the Federal Court of Appeal recinded the approval over inadequate and irrregular consultion with First Nations. This followed a less binding finding by the BC Supreme Court in January 2016 that the project had failed to consult adequately. This highlighted problems with the Bill C-38 and Bill C-45 pipeline approval process and led to revisions in Bill C-69 to make the process compliant with the courts ruling.
Technical description The planned project consisted of two parallel pipelines between an inland terminal at Bruderheim, Alberta, and a marine terminal in Kitimat, British Columbia, each with a length of . Crude oil produced from oil sands would have been transported from Bruderheim to Kitimat, while natural-gas condensate would have moved in the opposite direction. Condensate would have been used as a diluent in oil refining to decrease the viscosity of heavy crude oil from oil sands, and to make it easier to transport by pipelines. About of pipeline would have run in Alberta and in British Columbia. The crude oil pipeline would have had a diameter of and a capacity of . The condensate pipeline would have had a diameter of with a capacity of . In 2008 Enbridge expected these pipelines to be completed by 2015. The project, including a marine terminal in Kitimat, was expected to cost . The Kitimat terminal would have comprised two tanker berth platforms, one serving very large crude carriers and another serving Suezmax-type condensate tankers. The terminal would have included oil and condensate tanks and a pump station.
Environmental assessment As an inter-provincial pipeline, the project required a public regulatory review process conducted by JRP. The JRP provided a joint environmental assessment and regulatory process that contributed to decision making. The first session of JRP was held on 10 January 2012, in Kitamaat Village, British Columbia.
Other types of studies, such as socioeconomic assessments, were also necessary prior to project approval.Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, R.S.C. 1999, c. 33, s. 37
Competing projects Kinder Morgan Energy Partners operates the Trans Mountain Pipeline System from Edmonton, Alberta, to terminals and refineries in central British Columbia, the Vancouver area and the Puget Sound region in Washington, United States. In 2012 the company wanted to increase the pipeline's capacity by twelve times, up to . According to Kinder Morgan, expanding the existing pipeline would have been cheaper than Northern Gateway and avoided opposition as experienced by the Enbridge's project.
As an alternative, some indigenous groups proposed Eagle Spirit Pipeline from northern Alberta to the Prince Rupert area on the BC coasts. Many indigenous people wanted the economic activity from construction and operation of pipelines to improve conditions of their members.
Another project to export crude oil from western Canada was the XL expansion of TransCanada's Keystone pipeline, which supplies heavy oil to refineries on the US Gulf Coast.
And the Energy East pipeline would have transported oil to refineries in Montreal and the Maritime provinces, which import oil from the Bakken formation in Montana and North Dakota by railway, as well as from overseas by ship. However, project proponent TC Energy cancelled the pipeline in the face of political objections and concerns over economic viability.
Opposition
BC NDP BC NDP leader Adrian Dix promised to pull B.C. out of the federal review process if his party was elected in spring 2013 (which it was not), while also hiring prominent constitutional lawyer Murray Rankin to consider a legal challenge on who had jurisdiction over pipelines. Rankin argued that British Columbia should withdraw from the federal government's pipelines review process and set up a made-in-B.C. environmental assessment.Murray Rankin, "B.C. pipeline review needed to restore legal powers", Times Colonist , 31 August 2012Sunny Dhillon, "B.C. NDP Leader vows to back out of Ottawa's Enbridge review", The Globe and Mail , 22 August 2012 In an August 2012 NDP press conference Rankin argued that "a made-in-B.C. review would ensure that B.C.'s economic, social and environmental interests are fully addressed, that B.C.'s powers and responsibilities are properly exercised and that First Nations' interests are recognized within the new process".Louise Dickson, "NDP would set up B.C.'s own pipeline review, Adrian Dix announces", Times Colonist , 22 August 2012 In response Dix said "Within a week of taking office, we will serve the federal government with 30 days' notice to terminate the 2010 deal in which the Liberals signed away B.C.'s interests."
This policy was blamed for the poor election result for the NDP in 2013. The NDP won nearly every coastal riding in the 2013 British Columbia general election - so it could be argued that there was a division between those who lived in the path of potential environmental harm, and those who lived away from the area. The NDP had been seen as the heavy favourites, until shortly after they clarified their pipeline policy.
First Nations/Aboriginal groups Aboriginal groups' main concern was that the pipeline might spill and pollute the Fraser River. Many Aboriginal groups opposed the Northern Gateway pipeline proposal, though some others signed agreements supporting it. Enbridge and some Aboriginal groups disagreed on the extent of this support and opposition. Several coalitions and alliances produced formal declarations unequivocally rejecting the intrusion of an oil pipeline on aboriginal lands. These included Yinka Dene Alliance, Heiltsuk Nation,http://www.coastalfirstnations.ca/news-release/june-17-2014-308pm Nation responds to Federal Government decision on Enbridge's Northern Gateway Pipeline ProjectKlein, Naomi. This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs the Climate. Alfred A. Knopf Canada. 2014. p.p. 337-342. Coastal First Nations, and Save the Fraser. The Wet'suwet'en First Nation opposed the pipeline, as well as many Dakelh First Nations including the Saik'uz First Nation.Mclean, Tanara. (28 January 2012). Pipeline will not cross Dene Nations land, elders vow, canoe.ca
The JRP travelled to the Heiltsuk Nation in April 2012 for hearings into the pipeline proposal. "By some counts, a third of Bella Bella's 1,095 residents were on the street that day, one of the largest demonstrations in the community's history." Facing non-violent protest as part of the greeting at the airport, the JRP members suspended the hearings for a day and a half. While the hearings did resume, substantial time had been lost, meaning fewer people could present to the JRP than had planned.