Keystone XL Pipeline: How Long Will Customers Wait?

Pipeline

First Posted: 01/19/12 11:27 AM ET Updated: 01/19/12 04:05 PM ET

CALGARY - Ongoing uncertainty around the contentious Keystone XL oil pipeline hasn't scared away companies that would use it to ship crude between Alberta and the U.S. Gulf Coast, the company's CEO told investors Thursday.

"Despite the delays in permitting, I guess what I'd tell you is that the interest in this project continues to grow," Russ Girling said at a CIBC conference in Whistler, B.C.

"The marketplace is saying that it needs it."

On Wednesday, the Obama administration rejected a permit for the US$7.6-billion project, but left the door open for TransCanada (TSX:TRP) to apply for a new one.

A State Department decision had been expected by the end of last year, but it was delayed — ostensibly to allow time for TransCanada to work out a new route that avoids ecologically sensitive areas of Nebraska.

However, the delay was widely seen as a way for the Obama administration to avoid offending environmentalists — an important segment of its supporters — ahead of the presidential election in November.

The Republicans responded by attaching a condition to a bill on payroll tax cuts, forcing the president to make a move by Feb. 21.

Obama said Wednesday that the deadline didn't allow enough time to adequately study a new route, so he had no choice but to reject the project. He said the decision had less to do with the pipeline's merits than with the arbitrary deadline the Republicans had set.

On Thursday, U.S. Ambassador David Jacobson reiterated that view in an interview with The Globe and Mail.

"I know it should not be perceived as a rejection of the pipeline, but instead as a rejection of this 60-day time line that was imposed with the extension of the payroll tax deduction," he said.

While admitting he's "extremely disappointed" by the decision, Girling said TransCanada will file a new application and expects the pipeline could start up by the end of 2014.

So much information has already been amassed over three years of study that Girling expects a new process can proceed relatively quickly.

"I don't think that regulators have any desire to duplicate work that's already been done," Girling said.

The only outstanding issues are in Nebraska, where TransCanada and regulators are close to picking the best route to avoid the Ogallala aquifer and the Sandhills region. After that would come public consultation and environmental study.

Girling also repeated the company's view that it may be possible to start building the southern leg of Keystone XL — the most urgently needed portion — between Oklahoma and Texas ahead of the rest.

Analysts meanwhile, are wondering whether TransCanada customers will flee to competing projects if Keystone XL takes too long.

Most customers that have signed up to together ship some 830,000 barrels per day on Keystone XL could live with an early 2013 State Department decision, said UBS Investment Research analsyt Chad Friess in a note to clients.

"But we do expect some migration of commitments towards Enbridge's Gulf Coast alternative, though not enough to condemn the (Keystone XL) project," he wrote in a note to clients.

FirstEnergy Capital analyst Steven Paget wrote: "We were surprised that TransCanada did not publicly condemn the political gamesmanship surrounding the imposition of this 60-day deadline as it was obviously counterproductive."

Reapplying for a new permit will likely push an approval "well beyond" 2013, with an in-service date possible in 2016, he said.

"TransCanada can certainly reapply for a permit for a modified pipeline, but we foresee several possible problems with this: for instance, shippers may walk away from their contracts with TransCanada," he wrote.

"If this happens, another pipeline company could lure away these shippers if it could convince them that it could deliver a functioning pipeline sooner than TransCanada has done."

The rejection means a financial hit for TransCanada, Paget said. Keystone XL would have added $1 billion in earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization by 2015, but now that's not expected to arrive until at least a year later.

TransCanada rival Enbridge Inc. (TSX:ENB) and its partner Enterprise Products Partners are planning to reverse the Seaway pipeline that currently brings oil from the Gulf Coast to a storage hub at Cushing, Okla.

That option is much easier than building a new line from scratch, Enbridge CEO Pat Daniel told the investor conference.

"Any time you can buy existing infrastructure and reverse it relative to greenfield construction, you're going to get it done a lot faster," he said.

A supply glut at Cushing, caused by ever-increasing production in the oilsands and in U.S. fields, has been eroding the value of landlocked North American crude. So draining the crude to refineries along the coast would boost the bottom line of producers.

While the Keystone XL rejection may have some short-term benefits, Daniel said he's not celebrating.

"To have that project turned down for the reasons being indicated is horrible for our industry and it's a horrible precedent."

He said it "emboldens" critics of Northern Gateway, a controversial pipeline Enbridge wants to build between Alberta and British Columbia that is in the midst of what is sure to be a long regulatory process.

Girling said he doesn't expect Keystone alternatives to necessarily have an easier ride.

"At the current time, all of our shippers are indicating: 'This is still very important. It's the furthest thing along. Get back in there get the permitting done."

Keystone XL has been repeatedly called a "political football." Environmental concerns range from how a leak from the pipeline could affect drinking water in the Great Plains to the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the oilsands crude that would flow through the line.

Proponents, meanwhile, say the project will create sorely needed jobs for the ailing U.S. economy and reduce America's reliance on crude imports from the likes of Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.

TransCanada shares dropped 25 cents to $41.64 in late-morning trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange, while Enbridge stock rose three cents to $36.53.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA POLITICS

CALGARY - Ongoing uncertainty around the contentious Keystone XL oil pipeline hasn't scared away companies that would use it to ship crude between Alberta and the U.S. Gulf Coast, the company's CEO to...
CALGARY - Ongoing uncertainty around the contentious Keystone XL oil pipeline hasn't scared away companies that would use it to ship crude between Alberta and the U.S. Gulf Coast, the company's CEO to...
Filed by Ron Nurwisah  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 13
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
05:30 PM on 01/19/2012
Yawn...the old tactics of old industry won't work this time around boys. "Just waiting for permitting"...um you'll be waiting a lot longer and it won't be because of permitting, it will be because BC citizens simply won't allow the pipeline to pass through to the coast PERIOD!

The whole "Its basically a done deal" only worked when the population relied on the 6 o'clock news. No one is going to put up with dirty oil being shipped through 100's of miles of sensitive ecosystem, to be transported to Supertankers on the West Coast. We all know how that will turn out don't we.

If anything, (and the majority would much rather see it shut down but...) Alberta should set up a refinery in-province for their toxic tarsand project. But then again, that's just throwing more gasoline on the fire.

There are massive opportunities in renewable and green energy technologies which would help us avoid poisoning our own backyard AND turn a profit. The Harper government is not only extremely short sighted but it is dangerous, in the pocket of corporations and completely out of control.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
north of 60
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
06:40 PM on 01/19/2012
The "more Canadian refineries" question has already been answered below.

Renewable and green technologies will only work if you can convince Canadians to drastically cut their energy consumption. How is that working out so far, eh?

Those who have been paying attention realize that the green technologies like solar and wind are not producing anywhere near the amount of energy the 'experts' told us they would. Wind farms all over the world are lucky to produce 10% of the installed capacity on an annual basis. Solar is only producing close to it's installed capacity in the US sunbelt, certainty not in Canada. Do your homework.

Small scale nuclear is the only viable alternative technology available at this time, and the good news is that Canada is a world leader in small scale safe nuclear power. Of course the nukophobes have prevented it from realizing it's potential.... Yawn...
07:18 PM on 01/19/2012
That's actually a very old way of looking at green tech and advancements which have been made in recent years (and a bit of a strawman argument). Besides groundbreaking output and manufacturing improvements, you're missing a whole gambit of advancements.

The truth is that Canadians can, right now, realistically seek home generated power supplies supplemented by centralized green power infrastructures. Its not simply about one or two green technologies but an extremely diverse group of potential power alternatives. There are examples globally of this technology meeting modern day power demands but it is a cross disciplinary merging of systems to make it all work and it can't happen without a government that is fully behind it.

And that is at the core of the issue here, green power has moved into a realm which makes it 100% viable to meet modern power needs but there is a very old infrastructure in place which refuses to get out of the way of that advancement. The government should be doing everything it can to make these alternatives viable for all Canadians but it doesn't.

Nuclear; sure, lets keep researching and perhaps we'll one day find a truly safe process. In the mean time, there are dozens of alternatives which work TODAY. Point being, oil and coal are quite literally dinosaur
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Glass Cannon
Let every eye negotiate for itself.
05:07 PM on 01/19/2012
Who is in this marketplace, those poor customers? Canada is not energy self-sufficient and has no business shipping raw bitumen out of the country until it is. And even then it can ship refined product out. More jobs for Canadians, period. I'm sure that skilled Americans can migrate for work relatively easily.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
north of 60
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
06:13 PM on 01/19/2012
Already answered below
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
north of 60
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
02:19 PM on 01/19/2012
Share this video far and wide, especially to your middle-of-the-road and left leaning friends, relatives, and acquaintances.
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/keystone-calamity/1400506675001
This is the best evidence so far of the extent of Obama's lies, duplicity and broken campaign promises. More people need to become aware of this to kill his chance of re-election.

A smart president would have approved start up of the pipeline in all but the most enviro sensitive areas while an alternate route through those areas was worked out. While his stupid decision might be bad for America in the short term, if it kills the liar's chances of re-election then it's the best thing he could have done for America.

Compared with the oil sands, the environmental track record of oil production in other countries is horrible, especially Venezuela, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia.

What really 'gets me' is how those people in Canada who are most dependent on taxpayer assistance for their very existence are the ones who are trying to block the pipelines. Where do they think the tax revenue to support their comfy existence comes from, unicorn farts?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Glass Cannon
Let every eye negotiate for itself.
05:05 PM on 01/19/2012
I guess it won't be dinosaur farts either, now. Although this way maybe we can refine it ourselves and make more money to support that comfy lifestyle we all crave.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
north of 60
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
05:41 PM on 01/19/2012
We don't have the refinery capacity in Canada, and they'd still have to build more pipelines for refined products. There is an excess refinery capacity in Texas, and they have a population almost as big as Canada with existing distribution pipelines for products.

Don't forget that it's oil companies that build refineries not governments. If it was profitable to build more refineries in Canada they would be building them.

For them the bottom line is that the return on investment for crude oil pipelines is orders of magnitude better than the return on investment for more Canuk refineries and more product pipelines.

Eastern Canadian refineries could be using Western Canadian crude but they choose not to.
06:17 PM on 01/19/2012
Sun News is in bed with the Tories, as Ezra Levant was the one who coined the falsified phrase "ethical oil." So to say Sun News is a credible source to comment on this issue is the fox watching the henhouse. You may as well now post a link to Fox News.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
north of 60
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
11:41 PM on 01/19/2012
Ad Hominem "shoot the messenger" arguments are logically invalid. It makes no difference who states that Obama's promises in his election speeches are opposite to what he said about the pipeline. Obama lied, the person who brings the message is irrelevant.

Ad Hominem arguments are what uninformed people use when they can't intelligently discuss the issues they don't understand. It's a tacit agreement with the point made, because they can't come up with a valid counter argument.
photo
muddywood
First the truth, then opinion.
12:53 PM on 01/19/2012
I like how the Huffpo is burying these stories all of a sudden