Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
I don’t know if energy east was more cost effective than TMX and shipping. It’s certainly close. The only reason energy east could have been economical is the scarcity of pipelines. If the argument is make pipelines easier to build so capital is the only barrier no one builds energy east.
The regulatory environment is what made Energy east viable and why you had a high level trans Canada person volunteering on JTs campaign.
If we want energy security as a value the government would need to subsidize it. The market will not get you there.
|
The market case will change if exports to the US gets shut down / hampered significantly and reality sets in.
Energy East isn't in serious reconsideration because Bill-C69 exists and Quebec opposition is fierce. Both of these make it a non starter for any company and there is no capital available.
So yes, you are correct that most likely the government would need to subsidize it at this point and pretty much lead the project (much as it had to do with TMX after pissing off Kinder Morgan to the point they bailed on the project). That is the cost of alienating infrastructure investment but you still need that infrastructure.