Trans Mountain ‘pipeline is going to get built’: Trudeau dismisses B.C.’s bitumen ban

Twin_Moose said:

Don't forget all the taxes to be removed for that $0.12/gallon, and in Alberta not 1 Social program would be financed without the tax, never mind the low income kickback from the Carbon tax you said you enjoy.

LINK



Notley unhappy no appeal on Trans Mountain

Click to expand...

Metro Vancouver motorists could see prices at the pump hit a record high by Saturday, according to one industry analyst.
Dan McTeague with Gasbuddy.com said the anticipated soaring fuel prices are yet another byproduct of a natural gas pipeline explosion near Prince George.
That's because three out of four Washington State refineries have been forced to curtail production, he said.
READ MORE: Gas prices expected to drop in Metro Vancouver next week: analyst
"All of them use natural gas from Canada to co-generate and use as feedstock to run the refineries, in other words, to turn crude into gasoline," said McTeague.
According to McTeague, a four-cent-per-litre price hike will arrive on Friday, and a second four-cent hike could happen on Saturday.
"We could see potentially $1.659 here in Vancouver," McTeague said. "[It] could be a new record if it comes to pass."
McTeague said the second hike is not a certainty, and that it will depend on the supply of natural gas available to refineries.
Ironically, McTeague said gas prices for Metro Vancouver had actually been trending downward before the explosion, with wholesale fuel prices dipping across North America.
McTeague said how long the price at the pump stays elevated will depend on how long it takes for natural gas pipeline operations to resume.

Click to expand...

Members of the Lheidli T'enneh First Nation near Prince George in central B.C. say they're worried after homes were rocked by a pipeline explosion Tuesday, despite assurances from Enbridge — the company that owns the pipeline — that safety is its top priority.
Phyllis Seymour said her entire house shook when the natural gas line exploded at about 5:45 pm PST. She thought it was thunder until she looked out the window to see flames shooting into the air.
"To see that big fireball, it was so scary," she said. "You wouldn't even believe it was happening."
Roughly 100 residents of the reserve land north of the Fraser River fled to Prince George, 13 kilometres away, following the explosion. Though they were given the all-clear to go home within hours, many chose to spend the night in hotels, unwilling to take any risks.
Returning home Wednesday, Seymour said she still felt uneasy.
'I'll be scared to go to bed tonight.' - Phyllis Seymour, Lheidli T'enneh member
"Like, is this gonna blow up?" she asked, gesturing to pipeline apparatus alongside the road leading to her home. "I'll be scared to go to bed tonight."
So far, little is known about what caused the incident except that there was a rupture on a 36-inch natural gas transmission line owned by Enbridge. The line is part of a system that transports natural gas from northeastern B.C. south to the Lower Mainland and some customers in the United States.
Police have ruled out a criminal cause, leaving the investigation in the hands of the Transportation Safety Board, the National Energy Board and Enbridge to determine what went wrong.
The initial fieldwork is expected to be complete within days, while the full investigation will extend over several weeks, leaving people who live near the site of the explosion with unanswered questions about what happened, and the integrity of the pipelines that pass near their homes.
'We need to understand what happened here and how we can make sure it doesn't happen again.' - Michele Harradence, Enbridge
"I am concerned, I've always been concerned," said Violet Bazoki, who wasn't home when the explosion happened, but could see the smoke from over 30 kilometres away.
Bazoki recalled a meeting of band members earlier in the year in which another resident asked if there was any risk of the pipeline exploding.
"[Now] something did happen," she said.
National Energy Board chief engineer Iain Colquhoun explained his organization's role is to make sure Enbridge is handling the situation properly, as well as ensuring no other pipelines in the area are at risk. The board has already determined that a nearby 30-inch pipeline — which was shut down Tuesday as a precaution — is safe. It has allowed gas to flow through it once again.
Speaking from Calgary, Colquhoun said the last recorded pipeline rupture and explosion in Canada was in 2013.
"It's quite an unusual event," he said.
Likewise, Lheidli T'enneh Chief Dominic Frederick said he wasn't particularly worried Tuesday's explosion would be repeated.
"[The pipelines] have been there for over sixty years," he said. "We've never had any concerns until now."
Michele Harradence, a senior vice president with Enbridge, said she held herself personally accountable for the safety of the pipeline and those around it.
"It's very understandable that folks are concerned, I don't blame them," she said. "It's extremely distressing to see something like this."
Harradence said the company regularly inspects its pipelines and was concerned the rupture occurred despite those safety measures.
"We need to understand what happened here and how we can make sure it doesn't happen again," she said.

Click to expand...

Hoid said:

The price of Canadian oil has nothing to do with the price that Americans can sell their oil for.

Click to expand...

Anti-oil campaigns have called Alberta's industry "the tar sands," "Alberta's dirty oil" and "Canada's most embarrassing secret."
But during an interview with Global Edmonton anchor Jennifer Crosby on Monday, a British Columbia researcher said the campaign against Alberta oil is more about American economic interests than protecting the environment.
Vivian Krause has been researching the oilsands for nearly a decade and she told her studies have led her to believe the push against the oilsands is funded by American philanthropists in an effort to land-lock Alberta oil so it cannot reach overseas markets, where it would attain a higher price per barrel.
"About $90 million over the last 10 years has gone towards various efforts to restrict oil and gas development and export from Alberta. The problem that I see with this is that they're trying to cap and restrict Alberta production, but there's no such campaign in Texas," Krause said.
"I'm sure the reason they are doing it is because of the environment and because of climate-related problems, but the trouble is it's not helping the environment because the oil, if it doesn't come from Alberta, it's just coming from some other country."
Krause said the campaign was originally funded by charitable organizations from California and the philanthropic organization Rockefeller Brothers Fund, which was created with funding from the famous Rockefeller family.
Krause said the group got together around the time of the Iraq war and California energy crisis in 2003-2004 and strategized how to get control of the United States' domestic energy policy. She said the group now funds the Tides Foundation in San Francisco and the New Venture Fund in Washington, D.C.
"I think they have four goals, three of which are great: renewable energy, energy efficiency, energy security, that's all good. But it's the fourth goal — this idea of keeping Canada out of the global market — that's where I think we need to bring an end to this campaign.
"Because unless we do, I don't see much hope for any pipeline," Krause said.
The Corporate Ethics Tar Sands Campaign website indicates its goal is to land-lock Alberta oil by blocking proposed pipelines, so the crude does not reach the international market where it can garner a high price per barrel. Krause said the acknowledgement on the website has been a game-changer for her, arguing the environmental lobby should applaud Alberta Premier Rachel Notley creation of strong environmental regulations for the oil industry.
"She's done everything that the activists asked for and yet the campaign goes on, the money keeps coming in, and we can see that in the tax returns that the payments to land-lock Alberta crude continue to be made."
Greenpeace Canada climate organizer Mike Hudema said the organization's environmental activism is based on science, and said Krause's research is based on "unsubstantiated conspiracy theories."
"If Vivian wants to talk about, foreign influence, she should look into the massive amount of foreign dollars and foreign ownership of the oilsands that are poured into and influence our government at both the provincial and federal level all the time, but she never asks those questions," Hudema said.
Hudema said Greenpeace is almost entirely funded by individuals who donate between $10-$20 and is not directed by corporate interests.
"We're directed by what is the greatest environmental threat, and where do we think we can make the biggest difference?" he said.
Krause has shared some of her findings with the Alberta government.
"We've got to ask themselves, 'Why Alberta has been singled out, even though it's the only jurisdiction in the world with a cap on emissions from oilsands, the only place with a carbon tax as it is, and even though the province has created a very large boreal forest reserve? Why is there is there still a campaign against Alberta?" Krause said.
"If it was only about the environment, I think it would be over by now."
Krause said the anti-Alberta oil campaign bullies Alberta and Canada, and does nothing to reduce global oil use.
Krause spoke about her research in Edmonton on Monday and will be speaking in Fort McMurray on Thursday.

Click to expand...

When President Donald Trump signed an order in January 2017 to allow TransCanada’s long-delayed Keystone XL oil pipeline to go ahead, the Canadian oil industry was delighted. Nearly two years on, construction has still not started, and the project faces yet another hold-up following a federal court ruling last week.
Oil producers in Alberta still hope that eventually they will be able to use Keystone XL to reach refineries and export terminals in the US, but they are stepping up their investment in other options.
The need for other routes to market has become increasingly urgent as a shortage of pipeline capacity has crushed oil prices in Alberta. Western Canadian Select, the benchmark for the heavy crude produced in Alberta’s oil sands, has been trading at levels last seen at the trough of the industry downturn in early 2016.
Paul Miller, TransCanada’s president of liquids pipelines, told investors at a presentation on Tuesday: “The need for Keystone XL has never been greater.”
As other oil prices around the world have picked up since last year, prices in western Canada have slumped, with WCS opening up a discount of about $40 a barrel to benchmark US crude. On Monday WCS was just $17.78 a barrel, compared to $58.91 for US West Texas Intermediate.
“If you come here and buy crude in western Canada, you can get a hell of a deal,” said Kevin Birn of IHS Markit. “The question is: can you physically move it?”
Not every company has to take those low benchmark prices. Larger groups such as Imperial Oil, which is 69.2 per cent owned by ExxonMobil, Suncor Energy and Husky Energy, which has an oil sands joint venture with BP, often have pipeline capacity booked and their own refineries, so they can sell the oil in higher-priced markets or process it into more lucrative products themselves.
For companies that do not have those options, cash operating costs typically running at about $30 a barrel mean they can be losing money on every gallon they produce. In many oil sands projects, shutting down production completely can damage the reservoir and make it impossible to restart, but companies can throttle back. Jackie Forrest of ARC Financial said oil sands companies including Cenovus Energy, Canadian Natural Resources and Devon Energy had announced curtailments totalling about 120,000 barrels a day, but there were limits to how much further those cuts could go.
The low prices for Canadian oil are particularly galling for producers because of changes in international oil markets that have increased demand for heavy crude. The Gulf of Mexico coast of the US was “the largest heavy oil refining centre in the world”, Ms Forrest said, because refineries there were configured to make more products from heavy crude.
US imports of heavy crude from Mexico and Venezuela have declined as their output has fallen, however. So heavy Maya crude, which traditionally sold at a discount to WTI, has been trading at a premium. If Canadian heavy oil can reach the Gulf Coast, it can be sold for about $50 a barrel more than the WCS price in Alberta.
That benefit could get even larger. Heavy oil is better for making diesel fuel, while the lighter crude produced from US shale oilfields is better for petrol. Anas Alhajji, an energy analyst, argued that because demand growth was stronger for diesel, US shale oil would soon start bumping up against the limits of refiners’ demand, and the price premium for heavy oil would “explode”.
There is not much extra pipeline capacity becoming available. Enbridge’s upgrade of its Line 3, which will add about 380,000 barrels a day of capacity, is expected to enter service next year. Another proposed increase in export capacity, the 590,000 b/d expansion of the Transmountain pipeline from Alberta to Vancouver, was blocked by a Canadian court in August and faces further delays. Keystone XL would have a capacity of 830,000 b/d, but will have to overcome legal challenges in federal courts and in Nebraska.
Mr Miller told investors that while TransCanada remained “fully committed” to Keystone XL, it was too soon to say what impact last week’s court ruling would have on its schedule.
With only limited relief expected from that direction, companies are looking for options. One response was Husky Energy’s C$6.4bn (US$4.8bn) hostile bid for rival oil sands producer MEG Energy, launched last month. Husky stressed its access to “committed transportation capacity” as one of the key advantages of its offer.
Other companies are spending on rail equipment and facilities. Imperial said last week in its annual presentation for investors that it had increased the number of rail tank cars it was using by 20 per cent in 2018. Next year it expects to increase the flow through its Edmonton rail terminal to 170,000 b/d, from 80,000 b/d earlier this year.
Richard Kruger, Imperial’s chief executive, said of the remaining approvals needed for Keystone XL: “We’re hopeful that those things do develop, but we don’t run our business off of hope.”
Cenovus in September signed three-year deals with Canadian National and Canadian Pacific to transport 100,000 b/d of heavy crude from Alberta to the US Gulf Coast.
The cost of rail transport on that route is about $20 a barrel, but the step-up in prices from travelling that 2,000 miles is so great that it is worth doing. In a sign that investment in the oil sands could still pay off, Imperial last week announced it would spend C$2.6bn to develop the 75,000 b/d Aspen project in Alberta. It was the largest investment in the oil sands announced since the slump in crude prices that began in 2014.
Environmental campaigners who have successfully fought to obstruct Keystone XL for a decade have done so on the grounds that it would encourage more investment in the oil sands. Blocking the pipeline has certainly impeded growth in Alberta’s oil production, but it does not seem able to stop it.

Click to expand...

Hoid said:

Sounds to me like something should be done about over production in Alberta.

Perhaps eliminate all these small producers and just leave the multi nats running since they have no problem selling that shit at good prices.

Click to expand...

Cliffy said:

It's astonishing how many Albertans gladly cheer for getting one of the worst business deals in all of human history. .

Click to expand...

The Alberta Party caucus is calling on the province to curtail all oil production.
In a statement released on Saturday, the Alberta Party said the government should require oil producers to reduce production until bitumen prices improve.
”This is a national crisis,” said Greg Clark, Alberta Party caucus energy critic. “Curtailing production is a dramatic step, but it’s the right thing to do to maximize the value of the resource that all Albertans own.
“We’re giving our oil away for free. This has to stop.”
Clark said that production should be reduced for each producer on a percentage basis based on their production.
Alberta Finance Minister Joe Ceci responded, saying the government is pursuing different courses of action.
"We are looking at all options. As you know, we already sent a request to the federal government for rail cars, we are pushing for pipelines and we will consider all the options. But I am not at liberty to say what those are yet," he said.
The massive discount on the price of Alberta oil had Cenovus Energy asking the government to step in, however, energy giants Suncor and Husky rejected that call.

Click to expand...

Cliffy said:

Don't blame the family owned gas stations, it's not their fault we are being raped at the pump.

It's astonishing how many Albertans gladly cheer for getting one of the worst business deals in all of human history. Here's a bit of tar sands math for anyone confronted with lies about oil production being the driver of Canada's economy. The truth is that the majority of ownership and profits from the biggest single greenhouse gas emissions source on the face of the planet are foreign. Any new pipelines we let these people build might as well be designed strictly to speed up the rate that cash flows out of the country.
https://business.financialpost.com/…/majority-of-oil-sands-…
Canada is basically giving its oil away far more cheaply than the rest of the planet does.
https://www.theguardian.com/…/revealed-oil-giants-pay-billi…
Alberta collected just $827-million in royalties on oil-sands company sales of $120-billion.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/…/beyond-p…/article38296846/
Canada produces 45 per cent more petroleum than Norway. Imagine for the sake of argument that Canada collected what Norwegians did per barrel just for the years between 2009 and 2012. In those four years alone, Canada would have enjoyed revenues of $365 billion -- enough to pay off more than half of our national debt.
http://thetyee.ca/Opin…/…/03/31/Canada-Lousy-Oil-Negotiator/
Instead, after asking the oil industry for pocket change as they walk away with our national resources, we also give them nearly $800 taxpayer dollars per citizen in handouts on top of it.
http://ecoopportunity.net/…/fossil-fuel-subsidies-nearly-8…/
The cost to clean up what the oil industry has done to Alberta will be more than a quarter of a trillion dollars, but the province has only collected $1.9 billion (0.6% of what's needed) to pay for it. Expecting that the fossil fuel industry is going to happily shell out the rest once their revenues dry up and bitumen becomes a completely stranded asset is completely absurd. So for screaming angrily for years at the rest of the country, and the planet, for suggesting they might acknowledge climate reality, Albertans will get saddled with an environmental debt six times larger than the province's current financial debt to thank them for it, while the entire planet pays the price in extreme weather and agricultural losses.
https://www.nationalobserver.com/…/silence-albertas-260-bil…
All this so that fossil fuels can cost Canada more jobs than they create,
http://commonsensecanadian.ca/petro-state-economy-costs-ca…/
and make sure that as the renewable energy market, already the fastest growing part of the global economy, really takes off, Canada will be left in its dust, clinging to a dead industry.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/…/act-now-or-forever-play-global-cat…
Not in the national best interest, not in the climate's best interest, and not in the economy's best interest. Bitumen just sucks.

Click to expand...

Hoid said:

Recently revealed that the majors in the oils sands have no problem with pipeline capacity or low prices.

It's just the small Canadian players that are getting shafted.

Click to expand...

Hoid said:

Trouble in the oil patch and the cry is the same as its always been: please save us, government!

Click to expand...