News   Apr 03, 2020
Pastel Morning
 4.8K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 6.7K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Soon to be Gone
 3.9K     0 

Calgary & Alberta Economy

How many environmental assessments in 10 years are necessary? Looks like TCPL is on it's own with little or no help from the State Department or our federal government. The 'grand Trump signing' of almost 2 years has not pushed this project any further ahead. Of course, he approved it mainly because Obama had killed it.

I am sure it is the same group of environmentalists (funded by people like Tom Steyer) who are lobbying against TMX .... to keep Alberta oil land-locked. Again ... where is the leadership from our federal government????
 
There isn't really a role to play in the USA for the Canadian federal government in the courts, and the problems are all in the courts these days.

And it isn't lobbying only, lobbying the feds can and do play a role. That they don't do it loudly at a volume where we hear it back in Canada doesn't mean that there aren't constantly many meetings at state and federal levels between diplomats and USA officials elected and not.

The federal government has for years been playing a role countering the lobbying effort.

The regulatory system in the USA sucks way more than the Canadian one (at least in Canada it is mostly one regulator, one court case), especially when the infrastructure is in more than one state or crosses an international border.
 
You are right in that there is no direct role in they can play in the U.S. There may be lobbying behind the scenes but my guess is it is more by TCPL than the feds.
The type of leadership I am referring to is genuine support made publicly for advancing the pipeline agenda in Canada.
Instead, we have Trudeau telling Blaine Higgs, the new premier of New Brunswick that if he (Higgs) made any headway with the new premier of Quebec on reviving Energy East, 'come to talk to me then'. That is not being a leader or a unifier. That is showing a complete lack of interest or support. Higgs has a new approach to Energy East that he thinks will benefit all concerned. He was hoping to get Trudeau on side
This pipeline issue will boil to a head if there is not some movement west or south in 2019.
 
1546979120466.png


It isn't a regulatory thing. It is an economics thing (not cost competitive with rail). And a thermodynamics thing (long lines are worse). And the natural gas mainline is being used now at an economic rate of return so can't be converted without being replaced type thing.
 
Unless you have inside information that everyone else does not, TCPL were deliberately vague about their reasons for cancelling Energy East. This was all that was said in the press release:
"After careful review of changed circumstances, we will be informing the National Energy Board that we will no longer be proceeding with our Energy East and Eastern Mainline applications."
There is no mention that it was no longer economically viable. I'm not saying that it was viable but there is no statement of fact that it was not. Changed circumstances could also mean:
'we have just gone through years of delay and significant cost with Keystone XL, and we still don't have shovels in the ground. We decided that we don't want to repeat that all over again with Energy East.
'with the Liberal government, there is no national pipeline agenda or at the very least, the political will to see pipelines built across provinces to tidewater. Without the political will, TCPL can't accomplish this on our own'
'Lately, environmentalist groups, both foreign and domestic, have a disproportionate share of voice in this country. For an infrastructure that has a proven history of performance, safety and minimal disruption to the environment, there is not sufficient voice for the real economic benefits and prosperity that pipeline expansion would be bring to this country; or the economic losses incurred by continually having our resources landlocked.

If I was the president of TCPL, this is what I would really be thinking when I said 'review of changed circumstances'.
 
As soon as Keystone became possible again, EE went from on the bubble (barely cost competitive with rail) to dead. Its costs were projected to be so high that it would have locked in Alberta oil at a permanent $15+ discount.

There is nothing any federal government can do to bring back energy east, short of offering to fund a large chunk of it.
 
Interesting. The solid form may get the B.C. government on side and allay their concerns about shipping bitumen through their province. I doubt this would satisfy hardcore environmentalists. They are against the oilsands in any form.
I wonder about the processing cost both at the front and back end. How much does that add the cost of a barrel of Canadian oil, and can it still be profitable? Also, a plant with 50,000 barrel capacity is a fraction of how much bitumen is processed and transported every day.
 
Yeah, the cost of the processing is the part I'm wondering about. Outside of that, it has some advantages. Would certainly ease worries about pipeline spills and tanker spills.
 
Providing surge capacity and being able to use coal infrastructure is a good thing. However, to make it viable it has to be a used every day type of thing, unless it is pretty cheap to do! I doubt it will be better signing a 100,000 bpd contract to build all the infrastructure to move product to Japan in terms of price recieved in Alberta, than signing a similar contract to ship in conventional rail cars to the Gulf Coast the same amount.

It also creates a strategic problem for customers as building a plant that could use these things ties a big asset to a single supplier. One reason crude is traded way more than product is it is strategically advantageous for a country to build a refinery, then source crude from anywhere they want.
 
Big short to medium term opportunity for Canada :) ... replace U.S imports of Venezuelan heavy oil !!!
Can we take advantage? Of course not ... we don't have the pipeline capacity to get it to market. :( Keystone XL would have helped. Pretty soon we are not going to have the U.S as a customer at all unless we keep selling them heavy oil at a discount, forever. Why would they be anxious to see Keystone XL built?
Have no fear ... I am sure our federal government will have it all figured out by election time. No ... you say?
 
PwC released their Q4 report on venture capital financing in Canada https://www.pwc.com/ca/en/industries/technology/money-tree/money-tree-q4-2018.html . For the second time Calgary was a top 5 markets for VC funding in Canada with $126 million in funding-- up %22 over 2017 and up a whopping %630 since 2014. The largest deal was Greengate Power which received $78 million in Q2. The numbers give us insight into economic diversification as the majority are tech related startups. Calgary is still well behind the major tech markets of Montreal, GTA, Vancouver but that is nothing to hang our head over.
 
The TMX debacle just keeps getting 'better & better' (heavy dose of sarcasm). The Parliament Budget Officer is saying that the existing pipeline is really worth $1 billion less than the purchase price that Canadians paid. He is saying that the delay in the expansion project has reduced the overall value. The cost for the expansion will now be $9.3 billion if completed by the end of 2021 as targeted. It was not clear in the report whether the $9.3 B includes the cost of the existing line .... I sure hope so.
He anticipates construction costs to go up as the delays lengthen (no surprise there). Is anyone in Ottawa 'steering this ship'? We are talking some big $$$ here and at least 3 more years of pipeline capacity issues which will continue to put constraints on industry revenues & profits and as a result .... job growth.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top