A different view of a northern link

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 16/08/2023 (792 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

With all due respect to Professor Scott Forbes’s opposition to any expansion of fossil fuel use (Bad ideas and Tory premiers: the Prairies, Aug. 11), let’s not toss out the baby with the bath water. It’s important to consider the Hudson Bay corridor and gateways more broadly.

Hudson Bay is the “east coast” of the Prairies. In theory, it provides the shortest and least expensive route to markets in Europe, Africa and to some extent, South America.

In practice, the Hudson Bay route has never lived up to expectations. The short navigation season and the problematic stretch of the Hudson Bay Railway (HBR) from Gillam to Churchill has limited interest and investment. The silent grain terminal at the port speaks to the years of disappointment.

Climate change is altering this reality. The ice on Hudson Bay is thinning and the route could be kept open to navigation with icebreakers. At the same time, however, the permafrost underlying the railway line is becoming more active and threatening its existence. Efforts are being made to deal with the rail bed instability, but rising global temperatures increase the problem.

One alternative is to construct a new railway line from Gillam to Port Nelson and develop a new port near the mouth of the Nelson River. This would avoid the permafrost problem, but not necessarily offer a complete solution. The reason that the original route made a hard right turn north at Gillam, instead of a beeline for Port Nelson, still remains. My colleagues at the University of Manitoba hold the view that silting and ice flows challenge any port development there.

The second alternative could be to relocate the HBR line farther west in the rocky terrain and avoid the frozen peat bog. Relocating the rail line involves significant infrastructure investment, but it would be a permanent solution to roadbed instability. Financially, it might be no more expensive than laying new railway track to Port Nelson and regular port dredging to maintain a navigation channel.

The third alternative is to do nothing. This would please environmentalists who fear any increase in fossil fuel production. But does anyone believe that blocking Canada’s energy exports will not just increase those from Saudi Arabia, Russia, or the U.S.? We still need to meet energy demands, as well as reducing carbon emissions.

A middle ground is to develop hydrogen exports. Alberta has plans to strip the carbon off natural gas and sequester it deep underground, leaving hydrogen that could be shipped in a pipeline to Hudson Bay. Manitoba electricity could be used at the port to convert the hydrogen into ammonia, which is easier to transport. The ammonia can be used as a sustainable fuel, fertilizer, or for electricity.

However, concern about carbon emissions should not distract attention from the real opportunity posed by a new trade corridor. A viable port on Hudson Bay could handle bulk products, like potash, and sea containers, as well as a possible pipeline. A Hudson Bay port would reduce the cost of shipping potash to markets on the Atlantic Ocean. A container port on the bay would reduce inbound and outbound freight costs and improve the speed of service to and from the Prairies. An eastern gateway would also provide an option to using the west coast ports when labour actions leave prairie shippers stranded.

The North has been denied the prosperity enjoyed by the rest of Canada. It is worth noting that the proponents of these corridor initiatives are not just the Prairie premiers. The First Nations who have property rights want to develop the route to create a permanent source of income and create opportunities for more employment. The Wáwátéwák Corridor and the port development proposed by the NeeStaNan group could go a long way toward economic reconciliation.

Nation building does not come cheap. Large investments are needed to build/expand a port, to build the appropriate rail lines, construct a hydrogen pipeline, and establish terminal facilities for bulk products and containers. Prairie governments appear to be ready to step forward and marshal the public and private sector resources, as well as the First Nations co-operation needed to create long-term economic development.

Rather than castigate the Prairie politicians who are trying to think big, its time to get behind them. Climate change is causing lots of problems, but it is also creating opportunities. This is a once in a lifetime chance to fulfil the dream of the western farmers who pioneered the Hudson Bay route. Their slogan, “the old way in, is the best way out” still reflects the economic geography of developing the Prairie’s eastern coast.

Barry E. Prentice is a professor and the director of the University of Manitoba Transport Institute.