Mulcair expresses misgivings about Keystone XL pipeline during U.S. visit

[Daradon]

I believe the pipeline (s are) is more important to take the bitumen to the refineries that to take the finished product to market.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Daradon

I believe the pipeline (s are) is more important to take the bitumen to the refineries that to take the finished product to market.

That makes sense, as the refinery splits it up into so many products that pipelines are no longer practical. Instead, trucks, trains and ships would be used for most products.

I don't know how much volume is lost in waste but I don't think it is much. The issue of refining it here is that we now need to ship the same volume of product out to the Eastern markets but pipelines are no longer an option so that million barrel a day pipeline needs to be turned into a million barrel a day convoy of trucks and trains heading east full and coming back empty.
A mono-directional pipeline makes so much more sense.

[Daradon]

I have heard discussions of a pipeline to Ont. to bring it to refineries. I think an additional refinery would have to be built. These are ideas being thrown around in case changes come to the current plans.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

That makes sense, as the refinery splits it up into so many products that pipelines are no longer practical. Instead, trucks, trains and ships would be used for most products.

I don't know how much volume is lost in waste but I don't think it is much. The issue of refining it here is that we now need to ship the same volume of product out to the Eastern markets but pipelines are no longer an option so that million barrel a day pipeline needs to be turned into a million barrel a day convoy of trucks and trains heading east full and coming back empty.
A mono-directional pipeline makes so much more sense.

So where exactly are we trying to get it once it is refined? Because that $20 billion dollar refinery project in Kitimat seems to have some legs. And it would require the Northern Gateway Pipeline to be built.

Say we ship our oil to Kitimat, refine it, load it onto ships and get it out of country. Or wherever it needs to go. Would that even be practical. Because David Black is claiming he has the money to get it done.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Daradon

I have heard discussions of a pipeline to Ont. to bring it to refineries. I think an additional refinery would have to be built. These are ideas being thrown around in case changes come to the current plans.

Well they should probably get some other proposals together and figure something out because Canada is losing billions upon billions of dollars by selling our oil at the price we're selling it for.

[Daradon]

I really don't know enough about refining and selling oil to know if it's a good idea or not. I've heard good arguments on both sides. But I have heard that there are groups nationally that are warming up to adding refineries in Canada.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Azure

So where exactly are we trying to get it once it is refined? Because that $20 billion dollar refinery project in Kitimat seems to have some legs. And it would require the Northern Gateway Pipeline to be built.

Say we ship our oil to Kitimat, refine it, load it onto ships and get it out of country. Or wherever it needs to go. Would that even be practical. Because David Black is claiming he has the money to get it done.

The problem with that (from Alberta's perspective) is that unless the refinery would have to compete with straight bitumen exports, then the pipeline would have little effect on the price of the our bitumen. That would certainly be a great arrangement for BC though.

On the other hand, if the refinery is forced to compete with bitumen shipments, then the business case for the refinery pretty much goes out the window.

This whole situation is ridiculous. One province should not be allowed to prevent another from exporting its products. Invade BC!

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by SebC

The problem with that (from Alberta's perspective) is that unless the refinery would have to compete with straight bitumen exports, then the pipeline would have little effect on the price of the our bitumen. That would certainly be a great arrangement for BC though.

On the other hand, if the refinery is forced to compete with bitumen shipments, then the business case for the refinery pretty much goes out the window.

This whole situation is ridiculous. One province should not be allowed to prevent another from exporting its products. Invade BC!

Just put tolls on containers shipped from the Port of Vancouver through Alberta.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Just put tolls on containers shipped from the Port of Vancouver through Alberta.

An interprovincial trade war won't have any winners. Heck, BC not letting Northern Gateway go through is lose-lose.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by SebC

An interprovincial trade war won't have any winners. Heck, BC not letting Northern Gateway go through is lose-lose.

I agree, but it's basically what they want to do with Northern Gateway.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I agree, but it's basically what they want to do with Northern Gateway.

But retaliation would essentially legitimize their behaviour. If Alberta does the same as them, it weakens our argument that what should are doing to do us should not be permissible. One province should not be allowed to veto something that is so obviously in the national interest, and if our legal framework allows that then we need to change the legal framework.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Azure

So where exactly are we trying to get it once it is refined? Because that $20 billion dollar refinery project in Kitimat seems to have some legs. And it would require the Northern Gateway Pipeline to be built.

Say we ship our oil to Kitimat, refine it, load it onto ships and get it out of country. Or wherever it needs to go. Would that even be practical. Because David Black is claiming he has the money to get it done.

I am pretty skeptical about David Black's plan to begin with. For shipping, I don't know exactly as he mentions refining gasoline and diesel but doesn't mention the other products. Perhaps the plan is to put the other products on compartmentalized ships or even in barrels onto cargo ships. I really don't know much about that though.

The problems that I see with the refinery plan is the economics of the plan. He wants to buy the oil at Western Canadian prices, upgrade them and then sell the products at world prices. Once the oil companies get their product to the coast they will expect world prices.
My guess is that he is hoping his idea gains steam and becomes a condition of BCs blessing to Enbridge. That will set him up for favorable terms when buying the oil from the shippers.
If you read the reports, he seems to have buyers and locals on his side but there is never any mention of a shipper who is on board. He also seems to be proposing to finance the entire operation without any oil company. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but seems odd.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by SebC

But retaliation would essentially legitimize their behaviour. If Alberta does the same as them, it weakens our argument that what should are doing to do us should not be permissible. One province should not be allowed to veto something that is so obviously in the national interest, and if our legal framework allows that then we need to change the legal framework.

I agree, if we want to start an inter-provincial trade war there will be no winners. Provinces shouldn't be allowed to block another province from reaching their target market. Especially when BC is happy to build pipelines in the same corridor if they are carrying a local product.

I don't know for sure though, but didn't Quebec block Newfoundland from running their electricity through Quebec to the US market by saying that the only option was for Newfoundland to sell the power to Quebec for transmission to the US?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

didn't Quebec block Newfoundland from running their electricity through Quebec to the US market by saying that the only option was for Newfoundland to sell the power to Quebec for transmission to the US?

No idea, but if BC didn't want a navy base would that fly? Because this is pretty much the same thing.

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

The problems that I see with the refinery plan is the economics of the plan. He wants to buy the oil at Western Canadian prices, upgrade them and then sell the products at world prices. Once the oil companies get their product to the coast they will expect world prices.

If BC allows the pipeline but doesn't allow raw bitumen shipments, then Black's refinery would have a monopsomy (i.e. be a sole buyer, kind of like a monopoly but in the buyer's favour) on all the oil that goes into the pipeline. He'd get the Western Canadian price (or close to it) until the pipeline bottleneck is resolved by other methods.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Skootenbeeten

I don't like Mulcair but keystone is not good for Canada, shipping out more raw bitumen is stupid.

We are totally on board with you.

Signed,

Absolutely nobody with decent industry experience.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by SebC

No idea, but if BC didn't want a navy base would that fly? Because this is pretty much the same thing.

If BC allows the pipeline but doesn't allow raw bitumen shipments, then Black's refinery would have a monopsomy (i.e. be a sole buyer, kind of like a monopoly but in the buyer's favour) on all the oil that goes into the pipeline. He'd get the Western Canadian price (or close to it) until the pipeline bottleneck is resolved by other methods.

That is why I can't imagine his plan flying. Why would Enbridge spend all that money and time to bring oil from a low cost environment to another low cost environment. If they do build it I can't imagine producers commiting to ship oil at minimal profit.

His whole plan seems like politics and possibly extortion.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Maybe Daryl can get it done

lisa dillman @reallisa
Asked Darryl Sutter what he might want to ask President Obama. DS: "I want to ask him about the (Keystone) pipeline." #WhiteHouse #Kings

[Daradon]

I had a nagging feeling the Conservatives did this recently too, and yeah, Harper co-wrote an article in the Wall Street journal in 2003, that Chretien's decision not to enter the Iraq war was a serious mistake. Although that is more of an opinion, different than going on a trip to go against an important economic venture, he also went on a trip in 2005 to stoke fears in Washington about Canada's preparedness and vigilance against terrorism, in a political ploy against the Liberals. Something that could be considered fairly serious.

So yeah, I dislike it when any party or member does it. They really need to cut this crap out.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Daradon

I had a nagging feeling the Conservatives did this recently too, and yeah, Harper co-wrote an article in the Wall Street journal in 2003, that Chretien's decision not to enter the Iraq war was a serious mistake. Although that is more of an opinion, different than going on a trip to go against an important economic venture, he also went on a trip in 2005 to stoke fears in Washington about Canada's preparedness and vigilance against terrorism, in a political ploy against the Liberals. Something that could be considered fairly serious.

So yeah, I dislike it when any party or member does it. They really need to cut this crap out.

If I remember right Harper got seriously raked over the coals rightfully for those instances for it too.

[Daradon]

Oh I agree. Didn't like it then and don't like it now. Not saying there was any difference between the two. In fact, saying the opposite. It's a bad trend in politics that has happened here before.

Leave the bickering and the politics inside the nation. The only reason it's done is because it's a political move aimed at ones opponents.