Transmountain Pipeline Has Plans For A Pipeline To Eastern Canada


dumpthemonarchy
#1
Count'em, this would be pipeline number four, one to Kitimat-Northern Gateway, one to Vancouver by Kinder Morgan, two by TransCanada-one to the USA and another to eastern Canada.

Allow me to predict the future, they aren't all gonna happen. I also predict the Kinder Morgan pipeline to Vancouver will die. Pipelines used to be easy to build, not no more. The Keystone pipeline from Alberta straight to the USA is a gimme though from the Alta point of view-still being in the 1970s. Ontario and China will get a pipe, but not Vancouver.



TransCanada eyes oil line expansions south and east




TransCanada eyes oil line expansions south and east



Refiling for Keystone XL permit “imminent” as eastern line considered



By Rebecca Penty, Calgary Herald April 30, 2012





:void(0);" target="_blank">

TransCanada chief executive Russ Girling said a refiling for U.S. approval of the Alberta-to-Texas Keystone XL oil pipeline is “imminent,” and that the company is examining the concept of shipping western crude to eastern Canadian refineries, through its mainline gas line that would be reconfigured.

Photograph by: TODD KOROL , REUTERS




CALGARY — TransCanada Corp. is advancing pipeline plans to move growing volumes of crude from Alberta to the U.S. Gulf Coast just as it considers linking western Canadian production to new markets in Eastern Canada.

Canada’s largest pipeline company based in Calgary is set to re-apply for U.S. federal approval to build its proposed Alberta-to-Texas Keystone XL oil pipeline while it also examines reconfiguring part of its Canadian mainline gas line into a conduit for oil. A repurposed mainline could deliver up to 800,000 barrels per day, according to the proposal, to eastern Canadian refineries eyeing western crude that’s selling at a bargain to world prices.

TransCanada chief executive Russ Girling said Friday that a refiling with the U.S. State Department is “imminent,” for a permit to build the cross-border portion of the $7.6-billion Keystone XL expected online by late 2014 or early 2015, while the firm plans to start a summer build of the southern leg of the line from Cushing, Okla. to the Texas Gulf Coast that doesn’t require presidential approval — split from the larger project in February and expected in service in mid to late 2013.

Girling told reporters following the company’s annual general meeting that last week’s submission by TransCanada to the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality of several alternative pipeline routes around ecologically sensitive lands in the state moves toward satisfying the State Department’s request last November for more study of Keystone XL.

That additional review delayed assessment of the 2,700-kilometre line, then U.S. President Barack Obama rejected the project in January when Congress forced him to make a quick decision.

“Now, we’re in a position to make our application,” Girling said.

TransCanada, which reported a 14 per cent decline in first-quarter profit on Friday on a downturn in North America’s gas industry caused by decade-low prices, is studying ways to revive its mainline business that’s been hit by declining throughput — volume on the system was less than half its capacity during the quarter on what Girling called the warmest winter in 100 years.
That could mean switching one or more pipes on the five-pipe, roughly 14,000-kilometre mainline that stretches from Alberta to Quebec over to oil — either 30- or 40-inch pipes — to deliver between 300,000 barrels per day and 800,000 barrels per day, Girling said.

“We have a lot of work to do, technically, we have a lot of work to do with our shippers, but at that 30,000-foot level, it seems to make sense to people,” Girling said. “We’re going to actively pursue it and see if we can understand it and turn it into an opportunity for both the oil and gas industry and TransCanada.”

Montreal-based research analyst Pierre Lacroix, of Desjardins Securities, said the idea is based on two top-of-mind rationales, that the mainline needs higher volumes and that eastern Canadian refineries are seeking lower-price feedstock than the global barrels they import, which can be satisfied with western Canadian production.


Light and heavy varieties of Canadian crude have faced steep per-barrel price discounts this year to the U.S. West Texas Intermediate benchmark — more than $30 in March for Western Canada Select — on growing production, pipeline bottlenecks and refinery downtime in the U.S. Midwest. WTI has already been hit with a wide differential from the much-pricier North Sea Brent crude for more than a year.

Refineries in Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada can together process 1.2 million barrels per day.
“It’s certainly something that can be entertained at high-level discussions but a lot of details probably need to be nailed down,” Lacroix said.

The mainline, originally six pipes in some areas, had its Line 1 which near Winnipeg juts south over the border converted in 2010 to oil, for the Canadian portion of TransCanada’s first Keystone oil pipeline to Steele City, Neb. Another potential conversion to Eastern Canada is in the “early days,” Girling said, declining to offer a timeline or other details.

“There’s technical feasibility, there’s regulatory process, there’s the right-of-way, there’s a whole host of things.”

Also being examined is a build of about 75 kilometres of new pipe to deliver crude from the end of the mainline in Quebec to the St. Lawrence Seaway, where it could be moved by barge to the Irving Oil refinery in Saint John, N.B. — Canada’s largest.
Irving Oil has been bringing in crude from the west by rail to supply its 300,000 barrel-per-day refinery in recent months and is working on inking long-term supply contracts for continental crude.

TransCanada’s public discussion of moving western oil east on Friday follows a slew of musings from business and political leaders about a Canadian refining sector running on Canadian oil, following the delay and later, rejection, of the Keystone XL line, and recent acknowledgment by Enbridge Inc. that it’s examining a full reversal of its Line 9 oil line so it flows from Sarnia, Ont. to Montreal, citing interest from refineries and producers.

Canada’s largest oilsands producer Suncor Energy Inc., with a refinery in Montreal, has publicly supported moving oil from the West to the East.

TransCanada shares closed up six cents at $43.19 on the Toronto Stock Exchange, on a day the company released quarterly results that came in below a consensus of expectations from analysts surveyed by Bloomberg.Net income fell to $352 million, or 50 cents a share, from $411 million, or 59 cents a share, during the same period last year. Comparable earnings, which exclude most one-time items, dropped to $363 million, or 52 cents a share, from $423 million, or 61 cents a share. Total revenue rose two per cent to $1.91 billion.

TransCanada said it was hit by lower contributions from its mainline gas pipeline as well as from U.S. gas pipelines, gas storage and power, and lower contributions from its Bruce Power division in Ontario on maintenance outages. Partially offsetting lower revenues were incremental earnings from the Keystone oil line and other recently commissioned assets, the company said.








 
petros
#2
4? That's all? Just wait!
 
MHz
#3
One big one to the east and they could refine it to a point that a 'spill' would be cleaning up plastic pellets.
Just have to make sure Ontario doesn't pull of the same **** Quebec did NFLD wanted to ship power across to NY. Ontario is perfect for some NOVA like plants (once our plants can't keep up with demand. As it is they are running at 50% because there are no lines to ship product through. Petro pellets can be the new glass beads for the ones with the valuable furs (or they take that as the raw product and come back with finished gadgets and polluting spills is kept inside Canada)

Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

4? That's all? Just wait!

Isn't Sask going to be a gas exporter (east or south( with all the new lines they are tying in?
 
petros
#4
Going to be?
 
taxslave
#5
I bet the usual suspects protest this pipeline as well. Fact is that the leftards do not want any economic activity in Canada.
 
dumpthemonarchy
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

I bet the usual suspects protest this pipeline as well. Fact is that the leftards do not want any economic activity in Canada.

Yes, some leftards are like some aboriginals, they don't want to work or have the economy create jobs. That's not most of us though, but they get out and protest. But not even the premier of BC has come out in favour of the new pipelines, not that it would make a difference right now as Christie Clark and the Liberals are the Titanic, going down fast.
 
MHz
#7
BC might as well shut down the rail and highways then. A line built these days is going to be as safe as possible, the Province shout be compensated for stocking the supplies that make responding to a spill enviro friendly and the locals get the funds. (rather than corexit being delivered via water bombers) Sask and Man have has pipes on their land and they survived.

With tunneling technology in use today most of it would be through ranges rather than up and over so line pressure is not going to vary much.
 
dumpthemonarchy
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

BC might as well shut down the rail and highways then. A line built these days is going to be as safe as possible, the Province shout be compensated for stocking the supplies that make responding to a spill enviro friendly and the locals get the funds. (rather than corexit being delivered via water bombers) Sask and Man have has pipes on their land and they survived.

With tunneling technology in use today most of it would be through ranges rather than up and over so line pressure is not going to vary much.

Speaking of safety, Enbridge should use rail cars to ship the oil to Prince Rupert, which doesn't have the fjords to navigate thru like Kitimat does. Too slow and expensive.
 
B00Mer
#9
Probably right to Irving Oil's door step..



you what this reminds me of.. late 1800's and the rail way barons.. "it,s for the good of the country, so we are going to take your property.."
 
TenPenny
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by B00Mer View Post

Probably right to Irving Oil's door step..

you what this reminds me of.. late 1800's and the rail way barons.. "it,s for the good of the country, so we are going to take your property.."

That's funny.

Cause guess what Irving is building this summer?
 
petros
#11
An upgrader?
 
B00Mer
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

That's funny.

Cause guess what Irving is building this summer?

dunno what?? New refinery??

Never mind.. Google is wonderful..$50 million dollar refinery.

http://www.irvingoil.com/newsroom/ne...on_turnaround/
 
TenPenny
#13
System for unloading railcars of Alberta crude.
 
petros
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

System for unloading railcars of Alberta crude.

They won't be carrying any from SK or MB? Sweet!
 
TenPenny
#15
Hope not, it's bad enough that PCS used to bring in trainloads of SK potash to be processed here, we don't want SK crude oil.
 

Similar Threads

3
Obama rejects Canada Oil Pipeline
by AndyF | Jan 21st, 2012
1
A 'Great Pipeline Race' in Canada
by Paranoid Dot Calm | Dec 7th, 2005