Stronger Canada-U.S. oil ties are a win-win

[Azure]

It might surprise many to learn that America’s largest oil supplier is not in the Middle East. It’s actually Canada, which supplies the U.S. with more than two million barrels of oil a day. Besides strong cultural ties to Canada and a 1,500-mile border, the two neighbours do more than $1.5-billion worth of trade every day.

Critical decisions about North American energy security are before us right now, and every extra day of indecision weakens us. Instability in the Middle East has demonstrated how America’s reliance on oil from unstable regions is a threat to its economic and national security.

A major spike in oil prices is now ######ing America’s economic recovery. A tide of populist frustration across the Middle East could put groups implacably hostile to the West in control of immense supplies of oil. That’s why the vast, stable supplies of oil in Canada are more important to the future of U.S. energy security than ever before.

Canada already provides America with more than 20 per cent of the 11 million barrels it imports each day, but for the U.S. to fully take advantage of Canada’s resources, a better supply network needs to be in place. The proposed Keystone XL pipeline project would move oil from the U.S. and Alberta to Texas with connections to a network of U.S. pipelines and refineries. This pipeline has the potential to supply America with an additional 1.1 million barrels of oil every day.

<snip>

Canada has already made remarkable progress in reducing the environmental footprint from oil sands development. In the oil sands, more than 80 per cent of water used by industry is recycled. The first tailing ponds are being reclaimed as green land and replanted with hundreds of thousands of shrubs and trees.

From an environmental standpoint, pipelines are the safest way to carry crude oil and petroleum products. The Keystone XL pipeline will employ state-of-the-art monitoring systems using satellite technology and 16,000 data points to ensure the utmost safety in transporting oil from Canada to the U.S. By partnering with Canada, the U.S. can ensure that strict environmental standards are being met from start to finish.

We also shouldn’t ignore the economic implications of the Keystone XL pipeline. Building the pipeline will create more than 20,000 new American jobs in construction and manufacturing in the short term, adding more than $6-billion in personal income to those workers. In addition, more than 250,000 jobs will be created in the long term. The pipeline would also generate needed revenue for states and local communities, including $585-million in taxes and more than $5-billion in property taxes over the pipeline’s operating life.

The Keystone XL pipeline is a win-win for the U.S. and Canada. Canada will gain a stable market with steady demand, and the U.S. will improve its energy and economic security. It’s part of a broader strategy that’s in both of our nations’ interests. The time has come to reduce dependence on oil from hostile regimes, and put people to work.

http://www.ctv.ca/generic/generated/...le1984354.html

The bolded part to me stands out. Oil is oil, and the US is going to need it for at least the next few decades. So, here you have a stable source of oil, with no ties to terrorists, and not only that, but you have huge economic implications, and yet with all of that, the Whitehouse wants to play politics and not push this through?

250,000 long term jobs is pretty big.

[T@T]

In case anyone is wondering where the work is to be.

[Fire]

But wait! It's dirty oil! I rather have the United States get their oil from the middle east where money gets funneled to terrorists.

[transplant99]

Looking at that map, you would think that they would stop sending oil to refineries that are directly in the hurricane cone. Why cant it be refined elesewhere?

[SeeBass]

pipeline? is it kinda like that underground railroad thing?

[THE SCUD]

Originally Posted by Fire

But wait! It's dirty oil! I rather have the United States get their oil from the middle east where money gets funneled to terrorists.

Hardisty does not, currently, process much oilsands derived oil. Its generally hardisty-stream mid-to-heavy grade oil from the entrenched, low-decline producing SE AB oil fields. These fields have some insane reserves in the Cummings field.

new horizontal multi-fracs are coming on with virgin pressure still in this field. God bless dead dinosaurs who were too bored to die in Sask.

[Thor]

Do it.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Looking at that map, you would think that they would stop sending oil to refineries that are directly in the hurricane cone. Why cant it be refined elesewhere?

You have to take it to where the refineries are. A quick search on the web suggests a new oil refinery has not been built in North America since 1984, so there aren't other places to refine it. Domestically.

One down side of increased Canada-US oil ties is that it doesn't give Canada much incentive to develop international markets, which could cause a drag on prices. North Sea Brent is already trading at a premium to West Texas Intermediate by about $14-15 boe right now, or about 12.8%.

[mikey_the_redneck]

.
As long as Alberta/Canada is getting a nice cut ($) of the action I support this 100%.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

You have to take it to where the refineries are. A quick search on the web suggests a new oil refinery has not been built in North America since 1984, so there aren't other places to refine it. Domestically.

One down side of increased Canada-US oil ties is that it doesn't give Canada much incentive to develop international markets, which could cause a drag on prices. North Sea Brent is already trading at a premium to West Texas Intermediate by about $14-15 boe right now, or about 12.8%.

Thats why it would be prudent to build a pipeline to the BC coast so we are open to Asian markets.

[THE SCUD]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

You have to take it to where the refineries are. A quick search on the web suggests a new oil refinery has not been built in North America since 1984, so there aren't other places to refine it. Domestically.

One down side of increased Canada-US oil ties is that it doesn't give Canada much incentive to develop international markets, which could cause a drag on prices. North Sea Brent is already trading at a premium to West Texas Intermediate by about $14-15 boe right now, or about 12.8%.

Using BOE to refer to oil is a pet peeve fo mine with O&G noobs . it's bbl to abbreviate oil. use bbl when you are converting NGL or NG to an oil equiv, hence boe, which means 'barrel of oil equivalent'. You cant refer to oil as a barrel of oil equivalent when it IS oil.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Didn't mean anything by it. But duly noted for future reference.

[THE SCUD]

NP, it just GMG

[Reggie Dunlop]

Thing is.... same companies operating in "ethical" Alberta also operate in unethical world pariah troublespots, and those who don't currently would jump at the chance if there was a significant play at hand.

There's absolutely nothing "ethical" about the oil business. Its history is one of ruthlessness.

Ezra Levant could call what oozes out of the cancersands "Mothers Milk" and it doesn't change the fact that the product is labor-intensive and has an environmental cost.

It's dirty oil.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

You have to take it to where the refineries are. A quick search on the web suggests a new oil refinery has not been built in North America since 1984, so there aren't other places to refine it. Domestically.

One down side of increased Canada-US oil ties is that it doesn't give Canada much incentive to develop international markets, which could cause a drag on prices. North Sea Brent is already trading at a premium to West Texas Intermediate by about $14-15 boe right now, or about 12.8%.

Cdn crude is currently getting benefit of Brent value.

Btw new large refining capacity coming in 2012.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Thats why it would be prudent to build a pipeline to the BC coast so we are open to Asian markets.

By the time we could build a pipeline threw the Rockys ...we may not need oil!

[Boreal]

No matter where they get their oil, doesn't change the fact that the U.S. is bankrupt and has a living system (suburbia) which is exceptionally poorly suited to adaptable re-use. But of course the solution to complexity is hyper-complexity, who needs simplicity.

Their cities have grown and sprawled like tumors, and now contraction is inevitable.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Thing is.... same companies operating in "ethical" Alberta also operate in unethical world pariah troublespots, and those who don't currently would jump at the chance if there was a significant play at hand.

There's absolutely nothing "ethical" about the oil business. Its history is one of ruthlessness.

Ezra Levant could call what oozes out of the cancersands "Mothers Milk" and it doesn't change the fact that the product is labor-intensive and has an environmental cost.

It's dirty oil.

Yes, of course that's true. Of course, all oil is dirty oil to some extent but the oilsands (at this point in time) happens to be dirtier. That said, most energy is dirty and/or bloody. Coal is a major environmental issue.

In terms of ethics...having had worked in the oil industry overseas and domestically I can, without a doubt, assure you that domestic energy operations are significantly more ethical than anything I've experienced overseas. This isn't because the companies or CEO's or even operators in Canada are angels but because the law of the land in Canada is much stricter and is actually enforced.

Despite working in the industry and having my family supported by the oilsands I often find myself feeling uncomfortable about the ethical nature of the operations up north. I would love to be able to live off sustainable forms of energy. Then I remember that a) at this point in time it is simply not realistic for most people to give up fossil fuels (we still drive, fly, heat our homes, etc.) and b) nobody is getting killed because of the oil we produce in Alberta.

Maybe it's still a handshake with the devil (environmentally speaking) but it's also a case of better the devil you know than the devil you know wants you dead.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by nobles_point

No matter where they get their oil, doesn't change the fact that the U.S. is bankrupt and has a living system (suburbia) which is exceptionally poorly suited to adaptable re-use. But of course the solution to complexity is hyper-complexity, who needs simplicity.

Their cities have grown and sprawled like tumors, and now contraction is inevitable.

Sounds a lot like Calgary.

[Rutuu]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Sounds a lot like Calgary.

Ok I'll make this too the point because I love ranting:

1. Fossil Fuels are a commodity...as long as the price it right it will be accessed. Funny thing is the people in the energy business understand this; even smart fellows on this board (Reggie/Transplant) don't seem too. Ex: I work in Australia after doing time in Canada, here the domestic market is $1/GJ for natural gas...what do we do? Book the reserves as fuel for a Natural Gas fired power plant, so now I get $15/kWatt...that's an extra 10%+ on my reserves and I look like a star. Moral is that we know lots about energy and how it works and how to make money off it.

2. This leads to my second point...Environmentalists seem to not know how economics work...some do...others that don't are just part of a bad debate. Energy companies hedge their bets, who do you think funds all of the quirky "new sources" and alternatives. Not all is lost, environmentalists have two huge tools at their disposal to stop Economics. A) Their wallets, quit buying it...Even at $100/bbl oil is cheap. B) Politicians...don't like the economics go to your local politician yourself or become one and lobby to make it more expensive...reason this doesn't happen...popular opinion doesn't sway that way. Also hidden third point C) Even if it is pricier we'll still make money either drilling for oil/natural gas still with new economics or we'll switch to producing alternatives.

3. People are lazy and good at simple math, so they buy whats available and easy...I mean transplant didn't even look up when the last refinery was built or grasp the concept that a pipeline goes under the ground where it can't be seen. A refinery is what makes Edmonton look like a sh*t hole when the lights come on, no one wants that in their back yard. Just to emphasize my above points politics blocks refineries AND economics do as well! Haha the profit on a refinery is like 2% on certain products.

4. That article is horrible...the only good thing it did was bring out a couple guys that know energy to laugh at some of the less informed posters on the issues. It's a pointless debate, I won't change your minds and you guys can't organize and change the world faster than I can switch teams if things are looking dire for Mr. Rutuu on this side of the fence.

Haha...oh one last twist of the knife; environmentalists your hate of CO2 and "carbon" just makes us more money. The government of Alberta paid for a CO2 pipeline for "reinjection", the company that was "environmentally friendly" now has an asset worth billions, not because of CO2 credits, but because they can sell the CO2 for a profit for anyone in Alberta that wants to perform a CO2 flood and increase their oil recovery factor to 50-60% from 20-30%.

I love money...it never lies...and is the fairest game out there...anyone of you could have looked up Denbury in the USA and seen it was a $2billion company and anyone of you could have organized and gotten your politicians to give you the money for the pipeline, but you didn't and you never will.

Now please quit complaining...we told you how to win, now do it if you really care.