Environmentalists size up Canada’s commitment to the Paris climate accord.

Last year, many environmentalists let out a sigh of relief at the news that Canadians had elected a new prime minister, Justin Trudeau. They had watched in dismay as his predecessor, Stephen Harper, muzzled climate scientists and gutted environmental laws. With Trudeau, the whole country looked greener. There were plans for a nationwide carbon tax, an end to fossil fuel subsidies, and a goal of net zero emissions by 2050. Just last month, Trudeau announced a freeze of offshore leasing in Canada’s Arctic waters. During last year’s Paris climate negotiations, the new prime minister boasted, “Canada is back, my friends.”

But a rash of approvals for new fossil fuel projects has left many of those hopes dashed – alongside doubts about Canada’s ability to meet its climate goals. In November, the Canadian government announced long-awaited decisions on three major oil sands pipelines, approving two of them – Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain expansion and Enbridge’s Line 3, while rejecting Enbridge’s Northern Gateway project, citing its proximity to the fragile Great Bear Rainforest and the overwhelming opposition from local communities and First Nations groups.

For Trudeau, the mixed pipeline decisions reflect an effort to find balance between environmental protection and economic growth. Alberta’s tar sands account for roughly 3 percent of Canada’s economy and a large chunk of its exports, helping fund government. Though the new pipelines will allow Canada’s carbon-intensive oil industry to expand, they will not, Trudeau insisted, compromise its commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions under the Paris Agreement. In support, he cited Canada’s plan to phase out coal-powered electricity by 2030 and Alberta’s pledge to cap tar sands emissions at 100 megatons per year.

Trudeau said it was “inconceivable that a country would find billions of barrels of oil and leave it in the ground while there is a market for it.” But allowing the oil and gas industry to grow “puts a lot of pressure on the rest of the economy to pick up the slack,” says Dale Marshall, the national program manager for the Canadian nonprofit Environmental Defense. With the new pipelines, Marshall says, Canada will be hard-pressed to meet its emissions reduction target by relying on less certain carbon reduction strategies such as buying forestry credits and investing in cleaner public transport.

The impacts of two new oil pipelines will extend south of the border, too. According to a recent report by the Natural Resources Defense Council, the approvals will create carbon emissions equivalent to 105 coal-fired power plants. Transporting that oil will mean 1,005 new tankers and barges traveling through North American waterways, putting coastal environments like Washington’s Puget Sound at increased risk of an oil spill.

The new prime minister had the opportunity to depart from his predecessor on two fronts: committing to global climate change agreements and moving Canada away from its oil and gas affinity. “He’s only done one of those things,” Marshall says.

This story first appeared in High County News on Dec. 21.