Canadian Oil

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
22,033
6,155
113
Twin Moose Creek
Yes sir.

More black gold traveling through Kinder Morgan to Burnaby and Vancouver

 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
Do you refuse the cash?

Will you blackmail us, too? You know, "let the Eastern Bastards Freeze in the dark"? The Russians do that to the Europeans too and either Europe will eventually have to say "no" or cave in to Russia's demands.

By the way, which way is the cash flowing this year? Has it reversed it's course again and returned to the East-to-West trajectory that it had prior to the mid-1980's? If the price of crude hits the skids because of all of the new supply coming on line in the US, will you accept our cash?
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
Will you blackmail us, too? You know, "let the Eastern Bastards Freeze in the dark"? The Russians do that to the Europeans too and either Europe will eventually have to say "no" or cave in to Russia's demands.

The Russians weren't paying equalization payments to Europe

By the way, which way is the cash flowing this year? Has it reversed it's course again and returned to the East-to-West trajectory that it had prior to the mid-1980's? If the price of crude hits the skids because of all of the new supply coming on line in the US, will you accept our cash?

Sask and possibly BC (maybe even AB) will be paying in more than they receive. It's not accurate, let alone possible, that Eastern provinces will be paying in more cash in order to support the West

... But the question remains, was the cash refused?
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
The Russians weren't paying equalization payments to Europe



Sask and possibly BC (maybe even AB) will be paying in more than they receive. It's not accurate, let alone possible, that Eastern provinces will be paying in more cash in order to support the West

... But the question remains, was the cash refused?

I would say that over the longer term, no, we should not be taking transfer payments from the West as it encourages economic inefficiencies in Ontario and Quebec. If we "import" Western crude oil, we should use it only as a secondary source as it will be inherently more expensive for us than Gulf of Mexico sources and that also creates economic inefficiency in the East. The question of oil blackmail needs to be looked at seriously as the incident with BC is the second time that cutting off supplies to another region has been threatened by a populist Alberta politician. Is Alberta a reliable source? Maybe. Is Venezuela a reliable source? They've never threatened us.
 

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
22,033
6,155
113
Twin Moose Creek
The only way the East will be paying West is if they include Hydro power resources to the equalization formula, Western economies are starting to gather steam again.

I would say that over the longer term, no, we should not be taking transfer payments from the West as it encourages economic inefficiencies in Ontario and Quebec. If we "import" Western crude oil, we should use it only as a secondary source as it will be inherently more expensive for us than Gulf of Mexico sources and that also creates economic inefficiency in the East. The question of oil blackmail needs to be looked at seriously as the incident with BC is the second time that cutting off supplies to another region has been threatened by a populist Alberta politician. Is Alberta a reliable source? Maybe. Is Venezuela a reliable source? They've never threatened us.

So you are already dismissing the pipelines I showed you that already exist which carry western crude including Oilsands oil piped all the way to Montreal.? *Cough* Suncore *Cough* an Alta. Oilsand company with a refinery in Montreal.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
I would say that over the longer term, no, we should not be taking transfer payments from the West as it encourages economic inefficiencies in Ontario and Quebec.

In principle, Equalization was not unreasonable, however, it morphed into a system of provincial welfare to the point that there was less incentive for a recipient jurisdiction to take more aggressive measures in growing their economies.

On a related note, it was supposed to provide funds such that goods, services, etc were of equal accessibility and cost across the nation.

One can simply look at the tuition fee differential(s) at various Universities or $7/day daycare in Que vs $20 or more elsewhere to see that the philosophy of Equalization has not lived up it's intended goals

If we "import" Western crude oil, we should use it only as a secondary source as it will be inherently more expensive for us than Gulf of Mexico sources and that also creates economic inefficiency in the East.

That is a inaccurate statement. Transportation of oil or refined product is far less expensive in the medium and long terms.

Add in the notion that you are also purchasing that oil in market priced USD and the feedstock (from Western Canada) is purchased at a discount, it is actually costing you more than if you purchased from Western sources.

In any event, the belief that it would be too expensive makes no sense based solely on the reality that the US can pipeline it down to the Gulf and later put in on a boat and sell it internationally or refine it and distribute (by pipeline) through the US for domestic use

The question of oil blackmail needs to be looked at seriously as the incident with BC is the second time that cutting off supplies to another region has been threatened by a populist Alberta politician. Is Alberta a reliable source? Maybe. Is Venezuela a reliable source? They've never threatened us.

In each case, the blackmail was initiated by either the Feds and most recently, BC.

This also begs a deeper question... Can AB have concerns over the ecological consequences of BCs forestry practices and therefore ban any wood products from traveling through AB?

How about the many worries associated with auto manufacturing in Ontario relative to GHGs from manufacturing and therefore place hard restrictions on the number of Ontario built cars/trucks... However, all of the additional vehicles can be bought direct from US or Japanese/Asian sources without restriction as they were manufactured offshore?

... Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?
 

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
In principle, Equalization was not unreasonable, however, it morphed into a system of provincial welfare to the point that there was less incentive for a recipient jurisdiction to take more aggressive measures in growing their economies.

On a related note, it was supposed to provide funds such that goods, services, etc were of equal accessibility and cost across the nation.

One can simply look at the tuition fee differential(s) at various Universities or $7/day daycare in Que vs $20 or more elsewhere to see that the philosophy of Equalization has not lived up it's intended goals



That is a inaccurate statement. Transportation of oil or refined product is far less expensive in the medium and long terms.

Add in the notion that you are also purchasing that oil in market priced USD and the feedstock (from Western Canada) is purchased at a discount, it is actually costing you more than if you purchased from Western sources.

In any event, the belief that it would be too expensive makes no sense based solely on the reality that the US can pipeline it down to the Gulf and later put in on a boat and sell it internationally or refine it and distribute (by pipeline) through the US for domestic use



In each case, the blackmail was initiated by either the Feds and most recently, BC.

This also begs a deeper question... Can AB have concerns over the ecological consequences of BCs forestry practices and therefore ban any wood products from traveling through AB?

How about the many worries associated with auto manufacturing in Ontario relative to GHGs from manufacturing and therefore place hard restrictions on the number of Ontario built cars/trucks... However, all of the additional vehicles can be bought direct from US or Japanese/Asian sources without restriction as they were manufactured offshore?

... Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?


HAHAHAHAHA!!!! AS if Venezuela is a reliable source of oil! Or a source of CHEAPER OIL! HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Venezuela is a CHARTER MEMBER of OPEC! IN fact a TVO documentary suggest that a Venezuelan oil Minister INVENTED the idea of OPEC!

When all is said and done oil supplies are so interlocked that there is little room to move! The Seven Sisters- the big oil companies control virtually all oil production in western countries- with so many long term contracts that onw cannot easily manipulate the markets!

WE Cdns CAN cease purchasing Venezuelan oil if we wish- and we CAN START shipping Alberta oil east- but that oil WILL go through refineries mostly owned by Yankees!

In addition- although Alberta is closer than Venezuela and there should be some reduction in shipping cost- that saving will be eaten up by the extra cost of refining tar sand oil.

So why bother changing things around? BECAUSE WE CAN PUT CDNS TO WORK!

And what will happen to Venezuela if we stop buying their oil? Maybe the amount of corruption in their socialist govt will be reduced? Less cash looking for a home means less reason for bribery and such? And maybe they can sell it to the Chinese since Our idiot Boy Justin is so hostile to shipping Alberta oil to China on any terms?

The "ship Alberta oil east plan" sounds like a win/win deal to me! First we improve our balance of trade by not shipping cash out of Canada.

Second we put lots of Cdns to work and how can that be bad?

Third, Our idiot Boy can be the one to write the regulations under which the pipeline will operate and he can make sure there are NO LEAKS! AS for Venezuelan tankers- who knows what safety precautions they use?

So what is wrong with the above plan? For one thing LIE-berals do NOT want us peasants driving on THEIR roads! They have places to go- they are important and time is money- so we who have been allowed the privilege of driving for too long now must be forced off the road for the benefit of LIE-berals!

WE peasants dirty the air with our cars- but LIE-beral sh+t smells like perfume- so THEY believe!
 

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
22,033
6,155
113
Twin Moose Creek
My understanding was that Irving was already or in the process of adapting their refinery over to accept the heavy crude partially because of the Venezuelan tar sands that it was already accepting. Also Energy East was approved before it hit the Montreal cartel and Whale road block.
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
In principle, Equalization was not unreasonable, however, it morphed into a system of provincial welfare to the point that there was less incentive for a recipient jurisdiction to take more aggressive measures in growing their economies.

On a related note, it was supposed to provide funds such that goods, services, etc were of equal accessibility and cost across the nation.

One can simply look at the tuition fee differential(s) at various Universities or $7/day daycare in Que vs $20 or more elsewhere to see that the philosophy of Equalization has not lived up it's intended goals



That is a inaccurate statement. Transportation of oil or refined product is far less expensive in the medium and long terms.

Add in the notion that you are also purchasing that oil in market priced USD and the feedstock (from Western Canada) is purchased at a discount, it is actually costing you more than if you purchased from Western sources.

In any event, the belief that it would be too expensive makes no sense based solely on the reality that the US can pipeline it down to the Gulf and later put in on a boat and sell it internationally or refine it and distribute (by pipeline) through the US for domestic use



In each case, the blackmail was initiated by either the Feds and most recently, BC.

This also begs a deeper question... Can AB have concerns over the ecological consequences of BCs forestry practices and therefore ban any wood products from traveling through AB?

How about the many worries associated with auto manufacturing in Ontario relative to GHGs from manufacturing and therefore place hard restrictions on the number of Ontario built cars/trucks... However, all of the additional vehicles can be bought direct from US or Japanese/Asian sources without restriction as they were manufactured offshore?

... Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?

A Province shouldn't have the power to set trade policies .... free trade within Canada, the Feds negotiate with the World. I know that here are all sorts of barriers to internal trade and labour mobility within Canada. I suppose that they are an ancient legacy of the time when what became provinces were separate colonies, calling a lot of their own shots. Interprovincial barriers clearly do not make Canada a better place.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
A Province shouldn't have the power to set trade policies

That is exactly what BC, and more specifically, the MD of Burnaby is effectively doing.

For purely personal and political reasons, they are manipulating federal jurisdiction in the hope of preventing the transportation of heavy crude oil.

I mention heavy crude (ie bitumen) as apparently they are OK with lighter crude, gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel (they use massive quantities I might add) but a product they don't use daily is magically an environmental concern and therefore verboten

.... free trade within Canada, the Feds negotiate with the World.

Part of the duties of the Feds is to manage all of the provinces/territories in addition to assuming control and leadership on things like ports, interprovincial railways/highways, pipelines, airports, etc.

They have dropped the ball on this file in a big way and are deserving of their share of the blame

Interprovincial barriers clearly do not make Canada a better place.

Agreed, however, where we are today is being in a position where inter-Canadian trade wars will be the weapon du jour whenever an individual in power decides what's best for the globe.
 

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
That is exactly what BC, and more specifically, the MD of Burnaby is effectively doing.

For purely personal and political reasons, they are manipulating federal jurisdiction in the hope of preventing the transportation of heavy crude oil.

I mention heavy crude (ie bitumen) as apparently they are OK with lighter crude, gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel (they use massive quantities I might add) but a product they don't use daily is magically an environmental concern and therefore verboten



Part of the duties of the Feds is to manage all of the provinces/territories in addition to assuming control and leadership on things like ports, interprovincial railways/highways, pipelines, airports, etc.

They have dropped the ball on this file in a big way and are deserving of their share of the blame



Agreed, however, where we are today is being in a position where inter-Canadian trade wars will be the weapon du jour whenever an individual in power decides what's best for the globe.

Its all about LIE-berals BUYING VOTES! Our idiot Boy Justin is under attack from airhead environmentalists because he has not halted all oil and gas exploration in Canada! Environmentalists do not care if we end up living in mud huts and eating our daily bowl of Dandelion greens col because wood is sacred and not for burning!

Our idiot Boy cannot simply shut down the economy as airheads demand and he cannot simply approve pipelines because he will loose votes to Green Party and Ndp morons! So LIE-beral hypocrites give "approval" to pipelines and then bury the "approval" process in red tape that cannot be cut- so no pipelines will be built! It is a typical LIE-beral fake!



Here is an article illustrating the real level of LIE-beral interest in environmental issues and their lack of commitment to logical solutions to long term problems because sensible and economical solutions do not give them the gravy they think they are entitled to! With some comments of my own in brackets):

50-year-old leaking pipeline has no record of provincial inspections

Dan Healing, THE CANADIAN PRESS. First posted: Thursday, January 26, 2017 09:05 PM EST | Updated: Thursday, January 26, 2017 09:17 PM EST

A pipeline owned by Tundra Energy spilled approximately 200,000 litres (200 cubic metres) of oil on farmland owned by the Ocean Man First Nation near Stoughton, Sask. The leak was discovered on Jan. 20, 2016.

(With such a crap maintenance records as this it is no wonder that many Cdns are opposed to pipelines!)

CALGARY — A pipeline that leaked 200,000 litres of oil into a frozen pond in the southeast corner of the Saskatchewan is nearly 50 years old and there’s no record of it ever being inspected by provincial authorities, the government said Thursday.

(One has to wonder if Tundra Energy ever did maintenance checks on their pipe? Or if we can trust and believe any records they may produce at an inquiry?)

The spill on the Ocean Man First Nation was discovered and reported last Friday but initially neither the government nor suspected owner Tundra Energy Marketing Ltd. of Calgary said they knew for sure where the oil had come from.

An excavation Wednesday identified the two-kilometre pipe as belonging to Tundra.

(Great-at first, Tundra denies even owning the pipe line! As the line is 50 years old- we have to assume those who installed it are now long retired and none of the new kids knew where the line ran?)

On Thursday, Doug MacKnight, assistant deputy minister of Economy, said a small hole on top of the four-inch-diameter pipe on a weld connecting two segments had been found and the damaged portion removed for further analysis and metallurgic testing.

He said records don’t show any incidents since the oil gathering line was built in 1968 but it wasn’t actually licensed until 2014 by then-owner Enbridge Income Fund Holdings. Licences weren’t previously required for lines shorter than 15 kilometres.

“We have no record of inspecting it since we licensed it retroactively in 2014, so prior to that it was unlicensed and we just don’t have any record as to whether it was inspected,” MacKnight said.

(One might think that an aging line that had never previously been inspected MIGHT just benefit from an assessment of its condition shortly after govt became involved and answerable for its condition? But no- civil service Hogs are far too lazy to bother with such a logical approach to their job!)

“The companies are required to inspect these pipes on an ongoing basis, part of their licensing requirements.”

Tundra is required to file an initial incident report within the next few days and a detailed incident report within 90 days giving its assessment of cause, the province said in a statement.

It said a provincial investigation will examine whether the operator met requirements for inspections, why the leak detection system failed, if the age of the pipeline was a factor and what the root cause of the leak was.

(Seems to me the root cause of the failure was total indifference- over a LONG period of time- by all who ought to have been interested in the condition of the pipe!)

MacKnight said the industry is required to update leak detection systems to meet standards as they change.

(If Tundra is not even sure it was their pipe one has to suspect that NO updated leak detection system was ever installed! More sloppy over sight by lazy Hogs! They can collect their entitlements quickly enough but routine duty eludes them!)

The pipeline forms part of the southeast Saskatchewan crude oil gathering system most recently operated by Calgary-based Enbridge.

It was apparently included in a $1-billion deal by Enbridge late last year to sell pipelines and truck terminals to Tundra, a subsidiary of privately owned James Richardson & Sons of Winnipeg. Officials from Tundra did not return phone calls on Thursday.

(And here is a second view of the pipeline mess):

Human error a growing factor in pipeline leaks.
3/15. Canadian Press. Ian Bickis.

CALGARY - Human error — whether it's burying a pipeline too shallow or not fastening bolts tight enough— is increasingly a factor contributing to pipeline leaks, federal data suggests.

Figures compiled by the National Energy Board show that in the past three years, incorrect operation — which covers everything from failing to follow procedures to using equipment improperly — has caused an average of 20 leaks per year. That's up from an average of four annually in the previous six years.

(IN other words- taking short cuts to save cost is becoming very popular with pipe line owners! And govt is not pressuring them on the issue! Just an example of MORE LAZY Hogs!)

"It's both probably one of the most difficult things for an organization to deal with, but also the most important," said Mark Fleming, a professor of safety culture at Saint Mary's University in Halifax.

Fleming said operators have made improvements in safety practices, but to achieve the higher levels of safety required by other industries such as the airline or nuclear power sectors would require extreme attention to detail.

What may seem inconsequential at first can later contribute to a disaster, Fleming said.

"It's like a ball balancing on the top of a pyramid," he said.

"Safety, particularly very high levels of safety, requires constant attention and effort. And the tendency is for it to degrade."

Pipelines installed in the U.S. in the past five years have the highest rate of failure of any built since the 1920s, and human error is partially to blame, said Carl Weimer, executive director of the Washington-based Pipeline Safety Trust.

(IN other words, as our technology and engineering skill grows- we have MORE failures due to increasingly sloppy work and govt failure to regulate installers!)

"A lot of new pipelines being put in the ground just aren't being installed right, or things don't get tightened up quite enough, so within the first year or two things fail," said Weimer.

The consequences of the improper management of pipelines have come to bear in several spills in recent years, resulting in oil coursing down rivers, gushing onto city streets and contaminating many hectares of Canadian wilderness.

Alberta Energy Regulator investigations into Plains Midstream Canada, for one, found that the company hadn't inspected its pipelines frequently or thoroughly enough, did a poor job of managing the ground around its pipelines and hadn't properly trained control room staff.

A subsequent audit found the company had improved its safety practices, but not before those failures helped contribute to a 4.5-million litre oil spill in 2011 near Peace River, followed by a 463,000-litre oil leak into the Red Deer River a year later.

In 2015, a Nexen Energy pipeline south of Fort McMurray, Alta. burst, spilling about five million litres of emulsion including about 1.65 million litres of oil near its Long Lake oilsands operation. The AER's investigation into the incident continues, but Nexen's preliminary conclusion was that the pipeline design was incompatible with the ground conditions, and wasn't installed properly.

"There's been a lot of learnings in our industry that have resulted from some very unfortunate incidents," said Patrick Smyth, vice-president of safety and engineering at the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association.

Smyth said CEPA, which represents pipeline companies like TransCanada and Plains Midstream, have improved their safety practices in recent years.

He points to the fact that CEPA members spilled only about 2,500 litres of oil in 2015, with companies implementing stricter safety practices and using better inspection tools to prevent leaks.

(That`s nice- bad press and embarrassed govt have gotten an TEMPORARY improvement in safety standards!)

© Provided by thecanadianpress.com

But even as companies make improvements on safety, Fleming said getting pipelines towards the higher safety standards of industries like airlines will likely require significant financial sacrifice.

"To be able to do that, you need to have a very cautious approach to doing work, and that's something that's hard financially," said Fleming. "It does have some cost implications that we are often very uncomfortable talking about."

(Will LIE-beral govt pressure these companies to work to a higher standard when they know that much of the company stock is held by civil service Hogs who will not appreciate LIE-berals cutting into their dividends? An angry Hog does not vote LIE-beral and large scale Hog support is critical for LIE-berals who wish to cling to power at any price!)
 

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
My understanding was that Irving was already or in the process of adapting their refinery over to accept the heavy crude partially because of the Venezuelan tar sands that it was already accepting. Also Energy East was approved before it hit the Montreal cartel and Whale road block.

WOW- that Twin Moose has a confused vision of Irving oil and Energy East! Montreal ALREADY gets its oil from east coast refineries- and has done for decades- Energy East has NOTHING to do with oil from Venezuela!

And....tar sands in Venezuela? I never heard of that.....but maybe......frankly it sounds like a mistake- no Venezuelan tar sands- its why the country was a charter member of OPEC- Venezuelan oil was EASY to get at!

WE DO KNOW there are tar sands in California- the La Brea tar pits- so why is it that Yankees and environmentalists are whining about Alberta and ignoring La Brea? And apparently ignoring Venezuela tar sands according to Twin Moose? How is it that ONLY ALBERTA tar sands must be shut down and all others can run freely?

Oh yes- the LIE-beral political "FIX" is in!!!

Our idiot Boy Justin currently enjoys support in Alberta that is slightly below what his father Pierre enjoyed 6 months after implementing his National Energy Policy which saw- among other things- a DOUBLING of Alberta unemployment rates in 6 months!

Trudope family and LIE-beral party policy on oil is so destructive that LIE-berals will tear Canada apart rather than do ANYTHING for Alberta!

Cdn senators have exposed the amount of foreign and mostly Yankee influence on Cdn environmental groups. The David Suzuki Foundation admits to having taken MILLIONS of dollars from Yankee "super pac" political groups to pressure Ottawa into closing down Alberta oil fields!

And what happens if Alberta is shut down? Its all supply and demand economics! Cut off Alberta oil and California La Brea tar sands become MORE VALUABLE!

Same thing with Cdn softwood lumber- get tariffs on it and Yankee lumber producers benefit!

NONE of this is about the environment- its all about market manipulation and greedy LIE-berals desperately clinging to power at any price!