Carney CHANGED Enbridge's Mind — The CEO Who Said No Just Called It a Page-Flip

Ajouté : 2026-05-23

[00:00:00]Good evening. I am James Carter and this is Canada Current. Three months ago, the CEO of Canada's largest pipeline company said no. Flat no. His company would not build the West Coast pipeline, would not fund it, would not take the risk.

[00:00:13]Yesterday, he called it a page flip.

[00:00:15]That is the story today. And it matters more than almost anything else that has happened in Canadian energy this week.

[00:00:21]Because when Greg Eel of Enbridge changes his mind about a pipeline, the financial world listens. Here is the exact sequence. In February 2026, Enbridge CEO Greg Eel went on an earnings call and said directly that his company would not take on the development risk of a new oil pipeline from Alberta to British Columbia's coast. He cited the Northern Gateway disaster. The pipeline Enbridge spent $600 million developing before the Trudeau government killed it in 2016. He said no infrastructure company or investor should be exposed to that kind of regulatory risk again. Hard no. In March, Bloomberg asked him again at Sierra Week in Houston. He softened slightly. He said he would not call it a hard no that Enbridge was watching, that the regulatory environment would need to change. Then on May 15th, Mark Carney and Danielle Smith signed their implementation agreement in Calgary. And by May 15 that same evening, Eel was on Bloomberg television using language nobody expected from the man who had spent three months saying no. He called the deal a big step forward for Canada.

[00:01:23]He said it was definitely a page flip.

[00:01:25]He said Enbridge would definitely consider getting involved. 96 days from hard no to page flip. That is what Carney's pipeline deal actually accomplished. Not just the paper, not just the dates. It changed the calculation of the world's largest pipeline company in less than 3 months.

[00:01:42]Here is what that means and why it changes the entire outlook for Canada's West Coast pipeline. 90% of people watching this video are not subscribed.

[00:01:51]If you want to understand why NBridge's position change is the most important signal yet that Carney's West Coast pipeline is actually going to get built, hit subscribe, ring the bell, and share this with someone who needs to see it.

[00:02:04]Now, let's continue. To understand why Eel's reversal is significant, you need to understand what Nbridge is and what it is not. Enbridge is not a junior mining company making optimistic announcements to pump its share price.

[00:02:17]It is a 120 billion infrastructure giant. the largest pipeline company in the world by market capitalization. It moves roughly 30% of all oil produced in North America and about 20% of all natural gas consumed in the United States. It has 40,000 kilometers of pipeline. It operates in Canada, the United States, and internationally. It raises debt in the billions of dollars at investment grade rates and it has a fiduciary obligation to its shareholders, including the pension funds and retirement accounts that hold Enbridge units, to not say things it does not mean. When Greg Ael says on Bloomberg television that Enbridge would definitely consider building a West Coast pipeline, he is not making a casual remark. He is signaling to capital markets, to potential co-investors, to Asian oil buyers, and to the Canadian government that Enbridge sees a viable project where three months ago it saw an unacceptable risk. What changed his mind? Three things, and each one is worth understanding. The first is the regulatory environment. In February, Abel said the core problem was not economics, it was regulatory risk. He pointed to Northern Gateway, $600 million spent, a federal approval in hand, and then a government that canled it anyway. He said no private company should put its capital at risk in a regulatory framework where the rules can change after the money is spent.

[00:03:42]Carney's pipeline reform changed that calculation. The new building Canada Act, the framework we covered in detail two weeks ago, creates a cabinet designation process that happens before the expensive technical review begins. A company knows whether Ottawa is behind the project before it spends the billions. It does not go through seven years of review and find out at the end that a minister said no. The political risk is answered first. The technical conditions are determined second. That is the structural change EEL was waiting for. The second thing that changed is the carbon price. Enbridge like all major Canadian energy companies needs regulatory certainty to model 20-year financial projections. The carbon price path, how high it goes, how fast, and when, affects the economics of every pipeline project that moves fossil fuels. Under the old framework, the carbon price was on a trajectory to $170 per ton by 2030 with no ceiling in sight. Under the Carne Smith agreement, the industrial carbon price is capped at $130 per ton by 2035 and $140 by 2040.

[00:04:43]That is not zero, but it is a known number. It is a ceiling financial models can be built around. Evil said on Bloomberg that new infrastructure depends on how oil producers react to the pipeline deal and producers react when they can see the cost structure clearly. The third factor is the straight of Hormuz. This is the one nobody was modeling 18 months ago. The narrow waterway between Iran and Oman through which roughly 20% of the world's oil flows has been an active military conflict for most of 2026. Iran and the United States have been in a low-level naval standoff. Tanker traffic through the Gulf has been disrupted repeatedly.

[00:05:20]Oil briefly touched $115 per barrel before falling back to the mid90s as a ceasefire held. And throughout all of it, Asian buyers, Japan, South Korea, China, India have been watching their energy security assumptions collapse in real time. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith made this point on Bloomberg television on May 15. Asian demand for new and reliable oil supplies has been bolstered by the Hormuz situation. She said that is not spin. It is a structural shift in how the world's largest oil consuming region thinks about supply security. A pipeline from Alberta to the BC coast from one of the most stable democratic rule of law jurisdictions on the planet is not just an economic proposition. It is a geopolitical one. Enbridge builds infrastructure for 20 30 40 years. The Asian demand case just got significantly stronger. Now, let us be direct about what Enbridge has and has not said because there is a real difference between a page flip and a check. Abel said Enbridge would definitely consider getting involved. He said it is a big step forward. He did not say Enbridge will build the pipeline. He did not name a dollar figure. He did not announce a consortium. He did not submit a bid to Alberta's major projects office. What he said is that the conditions are improving to the point where his company is back in the conversation after spending three months outside it. That is meaningful. It is not a final investment decision. And the obstacles Eel himself identified in February have not disappeared. The biggest is BC.

[00:06:51]David Eie, BC's NDP premier, was not at the Calgary signing on May 15th. He has not endorsed the pipeline. He gave grudging approval to the second narrows dredging because it improves what already exists. On a new pipeline cutting through BC's mountain ranges and coastal wilderness, a project that would bring hundreds of oil tankers per year to BC's northern or southern coast. Eie has been silent or skeptical. And Nbridge of all companies knows what happens when BC says no. Northern Gateway died because the province would not permit it. Evil spent $600 million finding that out. The second obstacle is the indigenous co-ownership model.

[00:07:30]Alberta's official description of the West Coast pipeline on the government's own website calls it a worldclass indigenous co-owned pipeline. That is the vision. The structure of how that co-ownership works, which nations are partners, how economic benefits flow, and how consultation obligations are met. All of that is still being designed. Enbridge has deep experience with indigenous partnerships. Its line three replacement in Minnesota involved extensive tribal consultations and produced some of Canada's largest indigenous equity participation agreements. It is not naive about this, but it is also not a process that can be compressed into six months. The third obstacle is the no proponent gap.

[00:08:13]Alberta's government is still acting as proponent for the July 1 submission. No private company, Nbridge, Trans Mountain, or South Bow has announced that it will be the builder. Eel's comments yesterday moved Enbridge from hard no to definite consideration, but consideration is not commitment. The July 1 submission goes to Ottawa's major projects office without a named private builder attached to it. The expectation stated by both Carney and Smith is that the private sector steps up after the national interest designation in October. Eel's shift suggests that step up is more likely than it was 3 months ago. It does not guarantee it. Here is the financial picture for every Canadian investor watching this story. Enbridge shares trading on the TSX as ENB are up year-to- date, partly reflecting the broader pipeline investment thesis and partly reflecting the improving regulatory environment in Canada.

[00:09:04]Enbridge has raised its dividend for 31 consecutive years. It has a $40 billion secured capital backlog and another $50 billion in unsanctioned opportunities under evaluation. If it steps forward as the builder or lead equity partner for the West Coast pipeline, a 15 to2 billion dollar project, it would represent the single largest capital commitment in NBridg's history for pension funds and RRSP holders who own ENB units. That is not necessarily a risk to fear. Enbridge builds pipelines that run for 40 years and generate stable regulated cash flows. The Trans Mountain precedent is instructive. It was built by the government because the private sector walked away, but now it is running at 96% capacity and generating revenue that the government wants to monetize. A privately built West Coast pipeline with Enbridge's balance sheet and operational expertise would not carry the cost overrun risk that plagued the government-managed Trans Mountain expansion. Enbridge builds pipelines on budget. It is what the company does. The question is whether the conditions get to the point where Enbridge converts consideration into commitment. Eel said the answer depends on how oil producers respond to the pipeline deal. Whether they commit to long-term shipping agreements that underwrite the economics. That shipper commitment process will not begin formally until after the July 1 submission and the October National Interest designation. The real commercial test, the moment analogous to South Bose's Prairie Connector open season, is still months away. But the fact that Canada's largest pipeline company has gone from hard no to page flip in 96 days is not a small development. It is the clearest market signal yet that Carney's deal with Smith moved something real. Not a pipeline.

[00:10:48]Not yet. But the company that could build it just put itself back in the room. I am James Carter. This is Canada Current. Subscribe if you are not already and I will see you when the announcement drops.