‘This is not a quick fix’: Energy expert on the possibility of a West Coast oil pipeline

Richard Masson on Alberta Primetime Oct 2, 2025

Energy industry expert Richard Masson with the University of Calgary School of Public Policy speaks with Alberta Primetime host Michael Higgins about UCP government’s plan to spend $14 million on initial planning for a West Coast pipeline.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Michael Higgins: What do you see being accomplished here?

How much does this move the needle potentially on a new pipeline?

Richard Masson: I don’t think it moves it very far.

The challenge is, this is a committee who’s supposed to do a very preliminary scoping study over the next six or so months to determine what a route could be. To engage along that route with Indigenous and local stakeholders to see if they can support such an initiative. To figure out what the capital cost might be and what the tolls could be. $14 million is a pretty small budget for that amount of work to be done in such a short period of time.

MH: How necessary is it for the Government of Alberta to be at the front end of this?

RM: Unfortunately, this is the only option that was left. The pipeline companies have said they’re not interested in pursuing this. They have all been burned before. I hear the CEO of Enbridge this summer say they had lost $600 million on Northern Gateway by the time it was cancelled, and they weren’t interested in doing that again.

We have had really bad outcomes for building pipelines over the last number of years, and pipeline companies are just not interested in it, and none of them are putting any of their money in to this endeavor. So Alberta is essentially saying, ‘We’ll lean on your expertise, we’ll ask for your guidance.’ We will hope we can move this far enough along to start to de-risk some of the big issues that are facing such a project, to get it to a point where it might be attractive enough for you to consider.

MH: On the point of de-risking, if regulatory hurdles are cleared and this is one of the projects green lit by the federal government, might the private sector invest?

RM: This is part of the challenge the premier calls “the chicken and egg problem,” right? Because the emissions cap on oil and gas activity has dampened investment appetite for producers. The tanker ban is something that stands in the way of a pipeline going to the West Coast. There just isn’t a lot of oil expected to come over the next few years to fill up a million barrel a day diluted bitumen pipeline.

You need to have confidence that you’re going to be able to get your product to market at a reasonable toll before you’re going to embark on big projects. But the problem is right now, without the big projects coming, there probably isn’t enough oil for companies to sign up for 20 year take-or-pay commitments on a pipeline that would likely be quite expensive.

MH: Is there a realistic timeline for the completion of such a pipeline?

RM: Again, I heard the CEO of Enbridge say the best case scenario might be seven to 10 years, which I would concur with. The front-end work — picking a route, picking a size, doing the capital cost estimates, getting the right of ways, working with all the Indigenous stakeholders, impact-benefit agreements, equity ownership structures — that’s years. That’s probably two or three years to get to the point where you would have enough to submit a good regulatory application.

Then the feds are talking about two-year approval process after that, then the construction period will be three to four years, so it’s a long time. This is not a quick fix to any problem. It is something that’s going to take determined effort.

The consultation requires senior executives spending years of their life engaging one on one with Indigenous leaders and hearing their concerns and addressing their concerns. If you don’t do that, you’re just not going to get the buy in that’s required. And there is no way to shortcut that step.

MH: Given such a lengthy timeline, is there a way to predict how much of a market there will be for Alberta oil that far down the road?

RM: I don’t think global demand is an issue at all. It’s continuing to grow every year and we’re a small player in it, and our oil is quite desired. The heavy oil we produce has got a narrow differential, because other places in the world are not able to produce it. Venezuela is in tough shape. Mexico is declining. Our oil’s in demand. That’s not the issue.

The issue is, can we find a way to get it to a market that allows for long term support from all the stakeholders, Indigenous stakeholders, hopefully environmental groups. Because this is, as the prime minister would say, “decarbonized” oil because of pathways. There are so many people who have an opinion about this, and it’s such a big project, probably minimum $20 billion. Could easily be quite a bit more than that. It takes a lot of effort to line everybody up to make you have a sense that this is actually something that can be delivered there.

MH: How likely is an announcement like this to turn the tide on a major player like Imperial planning to cut jobs significantly?

RM: I don’t think it’s going to have any effect. Imperial is cutting jobs globally and centralizing functions to be more efficient. They’re not saying we’re going to produce less in Canada. They’re not trying to sell assets. They’re quite comfortable with what they own here, the question becomes, will they expand? And they’ll only expand if they think they have good market access, and pipelines are one way to do that.

You can get more down Enbridge over time. You can de-bottleneck. Transmountain expansion. Rail is another option, and any new pipeline has to be competitive with those other options. It’s not like there’s a unlimited amount of capital that can be spent here. It needs to be something that’s done well.

Just say the Gateway project was two pipelines. It was 525,000 barrels a day of diluted bitumen going to Kitimat, and almost 200,000 barrels a day of diluent coming back, because you need diluent to go with the bitumen to ship it in a pipeline. So for this, if it was a million barrels a day pipeline, it would be 700,000 barrels a day of bitumen, 300,000 barrels a day of diluent coming back. There’s a lot to be put together to get that done.

If you think about 700,000 barrels a day of 20-year toll commitments, that is all the big players signing up for more than 100,000 barrels a day each. That’s a big commitment and it doesn’t happen unless they have a high level of confidence that the pipeline can be done economically and will have Indigenous support, and that they can actually develop the projects here in Western Canada to fill the pipeline.