Quote:
Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner
I'm not understanding the repeated "...at the expense of Alberta..." comments. Crude is crude, and is sold at the market rate regardless of where the refinery is. Why would a BC refinery make this more of an issue? Or am I misunderstanding the remark?
|
In order of best to worst for Alberta:
1. The refinery, the pipeline, and a dilbit export terminal get built... in this scenario the refinery must compete with the shipping terminal, refinery pays produces the Brent (higher) price.
2. Just the pipeline and the dilbit terminal get built. AB gets the Brent price.
3. The pipeline and refinery get built, but no dilbit terminal. AB gets the WTI price.
4. The pipeline doesn't get built.
The refinery would be "at the expense of Alberta" if you assume that case 1 and case 4 are out of the picture. Case 1 can probably be eliminated on the basis that it would make the refinery unviable, so we're really only assuming that the pipeline gets built.