Showing posts with label TransCanada Energy East line. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TransCanada Energy East line. Show all posts

Saturday, November 07, 2015

Keystone XL farce and rail freighters' smiles

The Obama administration’s long anticipated rejection of the Keystone XL project – an extension [from Hardisty, Alberta to Port Arthur, Texas] to the already existing transnational pipeline between Canada and the US – on 5 November hardly came as a surprise to the oil and gas industry. But is it finally the end of the saga? Not quite, only for the Obama White House staff. 

Once a new US president is in, the project sponsors can, should they choose to do so (and is quite likely they will), launch a fresh application with amendments and new proposals. Quite frankly, the development might be new but the talking points aren’t.

The saga has dragged on and on for seven years and descended into a farce that even provided material for comedian Jon Stewart on more than one occasion (click here). However jokes apart whatever side of the argument you are, that the whole thing got dragged into the quagmire of US politics in the way that it did, is no laughing matter.

This blogger has always maintained that the project's rejection is not some sort of a fatal blow to Canada’s oil and gas industry, but rather an inconvenience and one that has arrived at a time of wider difficulties in the market. Several analysts in Canadian financial circles concur and rail freight companies probably cheered the rejection, despite their own problems with safety related issues and incidents when it comes to moving crude oil.

Of course, moving crude by rail to the Gulf Coast costs almost double per barrel in the region of $7.00 to $11, but for some it won't be a choice. Moving crude by rail is also probably twice as much environmentally unfriendly, something few of the pipeline extension's naysayers appear to be touching on.

There will need to be some medium term adjustments. As the Oilholic noted in 2013, TransCanada is already forging ahead with a West to East pipeline corridor aimed at bringing domestic crude in meaningful volumes from Alberta to Quebec and New Brunswick by 2017 and 2018 respectively. Additionally, considerable amount of lobbying is afoot in terms of looking towards Eastern markets, especially China (despite the recent oil price decline), via British Columbia’s coastline

As for the near term, Moody’s expects currently available pipeline and rail transportation to meet anticipated production growth through to the fourth quarter of 2017.

“Post 2017, we expect that as oil egress from Canada becomes constrained, additional rail capacity will fill the void until one of the three proposed major domestic pipelines – Trans Canada's Energy East, Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain expansion or Enbridge's Northern Gateway – is approved and built,” said Moody’s analyst Terry Marshall. 

There already exists about 550,000 barrels per day (bpd) of unused rail capacity in Western Canada at present, according to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers' (CAPP) data. That’s over and above the approximate 200,000 bpd of capacity that will be used to ship oil in 2015, and few, including Moody’s analysts, are in any doubt that moving crude by rail will rise in all likelihood.

Rail freighters' joy is also likely to be further prolonged by the current political climate in Canada. With the oil and gas industry friendly Stephen Harper administration having been voted out after nine years in office, it is all but guaranteed the new Liberal Party Government's pre-election promise to “rework the domestic pipeline approval process” will go ahead.

Not quite clear on the minutiae and what this would entail until details are published and then put to the Canadian parliament later down the year. However, having seen plenty of such overtures in numerous jurisdictions, the Oilholic feels an increase in cost and timescale of the regulatory process is highly likely, alongside the escalating cost of environmental compliance in Canada. 

All of this comes at a time when Canadian oil exploration and production companies could well have done without it. A tough few years are on the horizon. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’! 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email:

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo: Railway oil tankers outside of Calgary, Alberta, Canada © Gaurav Sharma, March 2011.

Friday, August 09, 2013

That other Canadian pipeline project

As its Keystone XL pipeline project continues to remain stuck in the quagmire of US politics, TransCanada gave details about plans to build a pipeline from Western Canada to Eastern Canada.
The so-called TransCanada Energy East line would have the capacity to bring 1.1 million barrels per day (bpd) of the crude stuff from the resource rich western provinces to refiners in the east. The idea is to replace foreign imports for the refineries in Quebec (as much as 92% in the state) and Atlantic Canada.
The pipeline, which would cost CAD$12 billion, shall run from Hardisty, Alberta, to a new receptor terminal in St John, New Brunswick. Upon completion, not only will the project reduce reliance on Middle Eastern and East African imports (thought to be in the region of 750,000 bpd for Atlantic Canada), but St John could actually become an exporting terminal for unused surplus. For all intents and purposes, this would be a colossal endeavour. Surely, the approval process won’t be as slow as Keystone XL, as the project enjoys support in the Canadian corridors of power and finds flavour with the public at large. Furthermore, the TransCanada Energy East pipeline would link about 3,000km of an already-built natural gas pipeline with roughly 1,400km of newly constructed pipeline.
A spokesperson for TransCanada said the company was confident of supplying oil to Quebec refineries by late 2017 and further on to New Brunswick by 2018. At a press conference detailing the plans, TransCanada's Chief Executive Russ Girling said, "This is a historic opportunity to connect the oil resources of western Canada to the consumers of eastern Canada, creating jobs, tax revenue and energy security for all Canadians for decades to come."
Indeed Sir! Reversing the east coast oil deficit into an export surplus would be one hell of 'crude' story. Canadian oil production is tipped to more than double by 2025 from its current level of 1.5 million bpd. Everyone from Saudi Arabia to the Venezuela is casting a nervous eye on Canada’s rise while domestic realisation is spurring projects such as the East to West pipeline. However, the Obama administration remains oblivious, or shall we say exceedingly slow, in letting the USA respond to this seismic shift by approving Keystone XL!
A summer approval was expected but has not materialised so far. Instead we are told that the US State Department will issue a final report on the project before the end of the year. On a related note, a report published by Moody’s late last month noted that most Canadian E&P companies are protected from volatile price differentials for heavy oil.
To provide context, the heavy oil differential is the difference in price between WTI, and the price at which heavy oil is sold, most commonly referenced to the Western Canadian Select (WCS) benchmark. These discounts have been volatile and sometimes pretty wide, especially since Q2 2012.
"We expect the differential to remain highly volatile. Even so, most producers of Canadian heavy oil draw some protection from their diverse products, low cost structures, or integration," said Moody's Senior Vice President Terry Marshall.
"The possible lack of significant new pipeline capacity to reach export markets and eastern Canadian refineries will have an impact on the growth of Canadian oil producers and will likely widen our $20 assumption for the differential," Marshall added. "This uncertainty will be a key consideration in upward rating movements for Canadian producers until the addition of incremental takeaway capacity is apparent."
According to the ratings agency, the pure bitumen producers such as MEG Energy and Connacher Oil and Gas will remain the hardest hit by wide differentials, because highly dense bitumen requires about 35% dilution and condensate generally sells at prices above WTI. The diluted bitumen then sells at the price of heavy oil.
Mining oil sands operations that upgrade their bitumen, such as those held by Canadian Oil Sands Limited (COSL), Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL) and Suncor Energy, have no exposure to the heavy oil differential. That's because these operations produce synthetic crude oil (SCO), a light oil product that trades around WTI prices.
According to Moody’s, companies that produce a high component of heavy oil, such as Baytex Energy, lie between these two extremes, with full exposure to the differential, but minimal need to buy costly diluent in order to ship their product.
The largest companies, including CNRL, Suncor Energy, Husky Energy and Cenovus Energy, sell a diverse mix of products, limiting their exposure to the differential, the agency noted. Furthermore, Suncor, Cenovus and Husky all draw an additional advantage from mid-continent downstream refinery operations, which benefit from wide differentials.
The discount on the heavy crude reflects a supply and demand relationship based on the available heavy oil refinery capacity, and infrastructure constraints and bottlenecks, Moody's noted.
As heavy, light oil and SCO all utilise the same finite pipeline space, a back-up in the system affects all products to varying degrees. For what it’s worth, this underscores the importance of TransCanada’s latest pipeline foray.
Away from Canada, the US EIA says the country’s crude oil output could exceed imports as early as October; the first such instance since February1995. In its monthly Short-term Energy Outlook, the EIA also said US crude oil production increased to an average of 7.5 million bpd in July 2013; the highest monthly level since 1991.
The report also raised its forecast for Brent, and noted that spot prices will average US$104 a barrel over the second half of 2013, marginally above the $102 forecast last month. The forecast for 2014 was left unchanged at $99.75 per barrel. WTI will average $96.96 a barrel this year, the EIA said, up from the July projection of $94.65. The US benchmark grade will average $92.96 in 2014, up from the previous month’s estimate of $91.96. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!
To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo: Oil Refinery, Quebec, Canada © Michael Melford / National Geographic.