The moral, environmental, and risk-management imperative of keeping the northwest coast tanker ban

Re-printed and adapted from our Alberta Views dialogue, January 1st, 2026.

Welcome to the year 2070 in the Great Bear Sea off the north coast of British Columbia. Tankers are everywhere. The waters that once were home to whales, salmon, and communities of people have become a fossil fuel export highway with vessels clogging its waters to bring coastal pilots on board, load cargo, and deal with any incidents; from small onboard fires to major collisions. Fishing vessels need to navigate carefully around the large ocean-going vessels, and are forced further out to rough waters to make their catch. Cruise ships avoid the inside passage because of the danger of collision as the oil tankers race out of port with their full and heavy loads.

How did we get here?

Flashback to 2025. The dystopian future above is impossible because of the hard-won protections of the Oil Tanker Moratorium, which got royal ascent in 2019. The story of the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act is one about organized local communities and businesses already operating in the region. First Nations have been clear that Canada must respect their decision-making about what happens in their traditional lands and waters, and continue to support the moratorium. We – business, local communities, and First Nations alike – all know that the moratorium is a critical piece of legislation that protects an internal sea from the devastation of an oil spill.

From small onboard fires that grow, to sleepiness on ships’ bridges causing groundings, there have been several incidents in recent years off the coast of B.C., which proves that things go wrong on oceangoing ships even under the best conditions. 

A frequent cause of accidents — human error in both vessel operation and manufacturing — is impossible to eliminate completely. Even double-hulled tankers are still subject to extreme weather and wave action. Besides, tankers are primarily designed to cruise the open ocean, not the network of channels and islands in the Great Bear Sea, which require sharp turns and are known for their rough waters.

It is only a matter of time before something catastrophic occurs because someone was asleep on the bridge, or a part in the tanker is defective. A catastrophic spill only needs to happen once to eliminate economic opportunities stewarded over generations.

The proof is in the ban.

We have not had a catastrophic tanker accident in the region because we do not allow tankers to operate with impunity here. However, we have not been so lucky when it comes to other vessels. The tug boat Nathan E. Stewart spilled the fuel in its own tank, which had catastrophic impacts. The Zim Kingston caught on fire and the coast is dotted with its spilled cargo. The increased shipping activity off of B.C. has already put the coast at risk because of ship strikes to whales and underwater pollution. Despite this, it remains a robust home to wildlife and local communities because of the policy protections in place.

In fact, the incredible vision already displayed in the region positions Canada as a leader in Marine Protected Areas led by Indigenous Peoples in their creation and management. All of this is at risk of being lost if a nautical chart is misread by just a hair.

Life thrives here!

The Great Bear Sea is no empty seascape. It is a wondrous place teeming with wildlife and communities supported by the marine ecosystem creating an ancient and consistent economy, which includes wild salmon.

A spill of Canadian tar sands’ oil is impossible to clean up in the wild. In the same way that asphalt sticks, tar sands’ oil coats, sinks, and remains. A spill in a remote location? Forget about recovery. Forget fishing. Forget local livelihoods. Forget B.C. wild fish in restaurants here or around the world. 

Ghost towns will spring up where once tourist sites invigorated locals and visitors alike. Swimming and diving will become a daring sport as locals worry that they will discover the next uncollected pocket of toxic bitumen.

And for what?

The fossil fuel component of the energy sector contributes relatively few jobs, only a small amount of GDP, and keeps very little value within this country. Fossil fuel companies and ownership is dominated by corporations and oligarchs now irrevocably associated with crumbling democracies and human rights violations around the world.

Tar sands and fossil fuels do not build an economy that will serve Canadians, let alone contribute to peace or prosperity globally. LNG Canada owner investors include a multinational, a Japanese company, three state-owned oil companies, and an investor group backed by Saudi Aramco. Fossil energy does more for the MAGA crew than it does for the future of Canadians because major projects have demanded tax payer investment, faced delays, and spewed pollution. A new tanker project uselessly puts at risk diverse interests like fishermen, tourism, and food security. What we have to lose is greater than what there is to gain.

The value that Canadians receive from pipelines and oil tanker traffic is low, especially compared to what is lost in the spills they inevitably cause. The people who live where the impacts will be felt most should get to make that decision, and they already did — they brought in the oil tanker moratorium. There is no business case which can cover the catastrophic risks adding dirty tar sands tankers to B.C.’s northwest coast.