Category: Energy Page 1 of 56

The CER Approves the Negotiated Settlement for TMX’s Tolls and Tariffs: One More Taxpayer Subsidy for Oilsands Producers

On October 20, 2026

In Administrative Law, Energy, Natural Resources

Decision Commented On: Canadian Energy Regulator, Approval of Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC, Negotiated Settlement, September 28, 2026

PDF Version: The CER Approves the Negotiated Settlement for TMX’s Tolls and Tariffs: One More Taxpayer Subsidy for Oilsands Producers

On September 28, 2026 the Canadian Energy Regulator (CER) approved a negotiated settlement between Trans Mountain and shippers (largely oilsands producers) on the Trans Mountain Expansion project (TMX). While one shipper took no position on the application, all other shippers filed letters in support of the application. One intervenor, the Tsleil-Waututh Nation (TWN) (not a shipper), objected to the settlement.

Experimental Deregulation: Next Steps for the Pacific Link Pipeline as the First Official Building Canada Act Project of National Interest

By David V Wright

On October 5, 2026

In Aboriginal, Energy, Environmental, Indigenous, Natural Resources, Oil & Gas

By: David V. Wright

Matters Commented On: Order in Council PC 2026-0925 (2026) and Explanatory Note for Pacific Link Pipeline Project; Building Canada Act, SC 2025, c 2, s 4

PDF Version: Experimental Deregulation: Next Steps for the Pacific Link Pipeline as the First Official Building Canada Act Project of National Interest

On October 1^st, more than one year after the new Building Canada Act (BCA) SC 2025, c 2, s 4 came into force, the first Project of National Interest (PONI) was added to Schedule 1. That means the proposed West Coast Oil Pipeline, now being called “Pacific Link”, will proceed through the fast-tracking review and approvals process established under the BCA. This post draws on a previous post and works through a series of questions to explain the legal process ahead for Pacific Link Pipeline (PLP). It concludes with short commentary on the rationale provided by the government, the broader context, and hurdles ahead.

What Can We Learn From A Failed Synapse Or Two?

By Nigel Bankes

On August 21, 2026

In Energy, Utility Regulation

By: Nigel Bankes

Matter Commented On: AUC Decision 30732-D01-2026, Synapse Real Estate Corp., Synapse Data Center Power Plant Project, August 17, 2026

PDF Version: What Can We Learn From A Failed Synapse Or Two?

On August 17, 2026, a panel of commissioners of the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) rejected, in trenchant terms, an application from Synapse Real Estate Corp (Synapse) to construct and operate a 1,400?megawatt (MW) combined-cycle natural gas-fired power plant together with massive amounts of backup diesel generation (1,800 MW) (together, the power facilities). The power facilities were to be located within the town of Olds and co-located with a large-scale data centre. The power plant was intended to provide electricity exclusively to the data centre and not be connected to the Alberta Interconnected Electric System (the grid). While the generation and data centre were clearly intended to be functionally integrated, the AUC has no jurisdiction over data centres. The AUC’s jurisdiction is confined to new power facilities under the terms of the Hydro and Electric Energy Act, RSA 2000, c H-16 (HEEA), specifically ss 11 and 19, as supplemented by s 17 of the Alberta Utilities Commission Act, SA 2007, c A-37.2 (AUCA). Section 17 of the AUCA is crucial insofar as it confirmed that a principal criterion for approval is that the project be in the public interest.

The Orphan Well Association Annual Report 2025/2026: The Problem with the AER’s Long Run Plan for Orphan Oil and Gas Sites

By Drew Yewchuk

On July 30, 2026

In Energy, Oil & Gas

By: Drew Yewchuk

Matter Commented On: Orphan Well Association Annual Report 2025/2026

PDF Version: The Orphan Well Association Annual Report 2025/2026: The Problem with the AER’s Long Run Plan for Orphan Oil and Gas Sites

On July 15, 2026, the Orphan Well Association (OWA) released their annual report for 2025/2026. OWA annual reports provide insight into Alberta’s orphan oil and gas site problem and the pace at which the problem is being addressed (see the ABLawg posts on past OWA annual reports: 2022/2023; 2023/2024; 2024/2025). The OWA annual report is separate from the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER)’s annual liability management performance reports, which are concerned with the closure liability of oil and gas sites generally in Alberta, most of which still have operating licensees.

Joint Responsibility Under Alberta’s Mines and Minerals Act

By Nigel Bankes

On July 20, 2026

In Energy, Natural Resources, Oil & Gas

By: Nigel Bankes

Decisions commented on: Terra Energy Corp (Re), 2023 ABKB 236 (CanLII); Alberta (Energy and Minerals) v Spartan Delta Corp, 2026 ABCA 214 (CanLII); Alberta (Energy and Minerals) v Canadian Natural Resources Limited, 2026 ABCA 213 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Joint Responsibility Under Alberta’s Mines and Minerals Act

Alberta’s Mines and Minerals Act, RSA 2000, c M-17 (MMA) refers to the concept of joint responsibility in two places. Both references were added to the MMA in 2003, see SA 2003, c 18. This post reviews three cases that consider these provisions of the MMA: Terra Energy Corp (Re), 2023 ABKB 236 (CanLII) (Terra Energy), Alberta (Energy and Minerals) v Spartan Delta Corp, 2026 ABCA 214 (CanLII) (Spartan Delta), and Alberta (Energy and Minerals) v Canadian Natural Resources Limited, 2026 ABCA 213 (CanLII) (CNRL).