Official (Alberta) Oil Discussion Thread

[stampsx2]

Originally Posted by GGG

Quit being so jaded. This isn't about reelection, it's unlikely this is flowing before the next election. It creates years of protests and negative press he has to deal with. This was a decision made in the long term best interests of Canada that likely cost him votes.

Why can't you accept that he looked at the advice the economists, engineers and scientists gave and did what was in the best interest of Canada.

Trust the government to do what's in the nations best interest, not thier parties and their re-election? Where in the world does that happen?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Trust the government to do what's in the nations best interest, not thier parties and their re-election? Where in the world does that happen?

Today, in Canada

[4X4]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Trust the government to do what's in the nations best interest, not thier parties and their re-election? Where in the world does that happen?

Well, you might be right. What he did today gained him votes in Alberta.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Trust the government to do what's in the nations best interest, not thier parties and their re-election? Where in the world does that happen?

Can't believe I'm actually about to agree with you on something. Whether anyone likes their policies or not, the Liberals have delivered an absolute masterpiece in playing politics over the past year and a half.

[nik-]

To be fair, they did have it easy mode last election. You know, running against literally Hitler.

[woob]

Literally, eh?

[Tinordi]

Can someone check on CaptainCrunch and Resolute to see that they're okay? They're being exposed to dangerous levels of cognitive dissonance.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Peanut

Northern Gateway was also approved once. With 209 conditions.

Put me in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp.

Right but NG was fraught with issues. There are first nations groups who are lying in wait for a project like that specifically so they can run it to the SCOC. The approval was there, and from a regulatory perspective it was approved, but there is no way that it is getting built. I guess you can consider that a political decision, but the reality is that if you want to see pipelines built you should at least start with the no-brainers here rather than hoping not to set precedent and embolden the opponents from day one.

[Fuzz]

That graph by economist Trevor Tombe shows the base case for oil production growth out to 2040. You can see that Energy East isn't needed, if the other projects are built.
That would probably be OK with TransCanada, according to Robert Mark, a portfolio manager with Raymond James.
"Energy East would not be on the table if Keystone XL was not approved. Energy East is a more expensive, clunkier way to move crude west and south, but without Keystone, it's a pretty good option," he said.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cabi...872931?cmp=rss
Interesting, so TC isn't all that interested in EE if KXL gets the go ahead. Which seams like a bit of a loss for Canada as a whole as I would imagine we could get more value selling it ourselves. Buuuut Quebec is gonna Quebec.

[Slava]

In other news, oil is climbing this morning on word that OPEC is very close to a deal.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cabi...872931?cmp=rss
Interesting, so TC isn't all that interested in EE if KXL gets the go ahead. Which seams like a bit of a loss for Canada as a whole as I would imagine we could get more value selling it ourselves. Buuuut Quebec is gonna Quebec.

That's presuming the refiners in Canada find value in upgrading their refineries

[secol]

Originally Posted by Slava

In other news, oil is climbing this morning on word that OPEC is very close to a deal.

deal done? triple meat for all. +8%

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/29/oil-m...er-in-day.html

[burn_this_city]

OPEC clinched a deal to reduce supply by 1.2MBPD. This is huge for Alberta and the oilpatch.

[GaiJin]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

OPEC clinched a deal to reduce supply by 1.2MBPD. This is huge for Alberta and the oilpatch.

A deal, and sticking to it is two different paths. The question is will non OPEC just pick up and start to fill that void. Deep down all in OPEC know its about market share, who's going to really want to take the haircut. Inventories still up in a few months and it'll decline again.

[burn_this_city]

There are quotas and monitoring aspects to the deal.

[Fuzz]

Lets see if the stick to their word on that...But in the short term it gives a nice boost to prices. Long term? Not sure if it will solve the glut if they don't actually cut production. It may make it worse, as non-OPEC countries see the higher prices as a good reason to restart marginal production. My depressing prediction? Oil at $30 by October next year and a bigger glut if OPEC doesn't stick to their word.

[Tinordi]

The biggest issue for long term oil prices are both the emerging reality of the swing producers in the US shale formations and much lower growth in global oil demand. It's really difficult to craft a believable story that oil prices have significant upward potential.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Can someone check on CaptainCrunch and Resolute to see that they're okay? They're being exposed to dangerous levels of cognitive dissonance.

No chill, no chill whatsoever.

[OMG!WTF!]

The 3x ETN's for oil (UWTI/DWTI) are being delisted by Credit Suisse on December 8. So if you own them sell now because there is no redemption after that date. That's going to take a lot of trades out of the oil market for sure.

Inventories were just out at 830. Not sure what the numbers were but it didn't move the needle much.

[burn_this_city]

Inventories down 0.9M last week.