Does Sending Alberta Oil Sands Crude East Make More Sense?

CBC  |  Posted: 05/14/2012 7:24 am Updated: 05/14/2012 8:38 pm

Former Bank of Canada governor David Dodge is not a man for wild ideas. So his recent suggestion that it might make more sense to send the bitumen from the Alberta oilsands to Eastern Canada, rather than piping it to the West Coast for shipment to Asia, was clearly designed for the nation's boardrooms.


Dodge saw the opposition that's been mounting among B.C. mayors, environmentalists and native groups for the proposed westward routes, and told the Edmonton Journal that any increased costs in going east and eventually reaching a tidewater port wouldn't be "wildly different."


This eastward speculation, however, is nothing new. Other policy thinkers, notably Frank McKenna and Derek Burney, both former ambassadors to the U.S., have touted the idea. But now it appears that some of the big players in Canada's oil and gas industry are turning at least some of their attention in that direction as well.

PHOTOS: 10 IMPORTANT FACTS ABOUT CANADA'S OIL INDUSTRY

TransCanada Corp. — which has now applied again for a U.S. presidential permit for its Keystone XL pipeline from the Canadian border to the Gulf Coast — has also indicated it would consider transforming its main natural gas line to oil in order to ship more of Alberta's crude and oilsands bitumen to refineries in Ontario and New Brunswick.


This eastern talk comes at a time of considerable uncertainty in the Canadian oilpatch, some of it due to the fact that Western Canadian crude has been fetching a much lower price for months now because of a glut in its main U.S. market in the middle of the continent.


At the same time, the two main Western pipeline options on the table — which would take Alberta's oil closer to the booming energy markets in Asia — face controversy and opposition, some of it even showing up on Bay Street in Toronto.


Getting more southern access to the refinery-rich U.S. Gulf Coast has also proved problematic, with the delays and opposition in parts of the U.S. to Keystone XL.


"What we need is the access to the markets," says Greg Stringham, vice-president of oilsands and markets for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.


But would going east be the answer?


"Really, we're not in the position of saying it's this or that. We want to make sure they all go through the process and the market is going to speak to that."


Still, Stringham has good things to say about some of the proposals that are looking east.


"Clearly it's on our agenda, and it is something that we see as being quite valuable to be able to make sure that Canadians have access to Canadian oil," says Stringham.


"The market will make a decision as to how much goes and where it goes, but clearly having that access is something we have been looking forward to."


As things stand, Enbridge has a plan before the National Energy Board for a reversal of a section of its Line 9 pipeline in Ontario, which would ultimately clear the way to get more Western oil refined in that province.


The line currently runs from Montreal to Sarnia, mainly to bring in oil from the Middle East and elsewhere. The reversal, actually a re-reversal as the line has gone from west to east in the past, would affect a section of the pipeline running from Sarnia to Westover, near Hamilton. But Enbridge is also considering extending the reversal all the way to Montreal.


The company also sees possibilities of shipping Western Canadian oil to Irving refinery facilities in the Maritimes, the Globe and Mail reported last week.


Potential pluses


Refineries in Eastern Canada take some oil from Newfoundland's offshore wells, but much of their raw material comes — at a higher price — from international sources.


At Imperial Oil, which has refineries in Ontario, spokesman Pius Rolheiser is equally reluctant to overtly favour any one route out of the oilsands over another. But he, too, sees potential pluses in looking east from Alberta.


"Obviously having the transportation in place from Western Canada to Eastern Canada expanded from what it is today would be positive not only for refineries in Eastern Canada but also for oilsands producers in Western Canada," he says.


Imperial ships some diluted bitumen via pipeline, primarily from its operation at Cold Lake, Alta., for refining in Sarnia, Ont.


"Most of the refineries in Ontario and certainly more so in the Midwest, Chicago area, south of the border, are equipped to run heavier crude," he says.


For TransCanada Corp., one eastward option would be converting its natural gas mainline to oil.


It runs 14,000 kilometres from the Alberta-Saskatchewan border to where Quebec meets Vermont and is only operating at about half-capacity at the moment because of all the shale gas discoveries in the central and eastern U.S. But that would involve considerable engineering as well as, probably, rejigging some of TransCanada's existing long-term gas contracts.


TransCanada did not respond to requests for an interview, and CEO Russ Girling has said it is premature to discuss specifics of what the company has in mind.


'Technically feasible'


There are "integrity issues" that come from switching a natural gas pipe to an oil pipe, but that is something TransCanada did in building the first stage of its Keystone system, which delivers Alberta crude to refineries in Illinois and a big storage hub in Cushing, Okla.


"I think it's likely technically feasible that we can make something like that work," Girling told reporters after the company's annual meeting on April 27.


"We are going to actively pursue it and see if we can turn it into an opportunity for both, the oil and gas industry and TransCanada," he said at the time.


Paul Lechem, managing director of equity research at CIBC World Markets in Toronto, doesn't doubt that TransCanada could technologically handle a gas-to-oil pipeline conversion. "I think the key question really is around the commercial support for it at this point in time."


The suggestion here is that investors might be cautious about backing such a project right now given the number of other pipelines that are being proposed either to B.C. or the U.S. Gulf Coast.


"But long term, especially if either Keystone XL … doesn't get built for whatever reason, or the West Coast pipelines get delayed or don’t get built, then certainly the economics and the viablity around shipping it to the East Coast become more attractive," Lechem says.


Jack Mintz, the head of the University of Calgary's School of Public Policy, has also questioned the economics of going eastward.


Writing in the Financial Post, he said that Canada would gain in jobs and growth by building to the west. "Less clear is whether an East Coast pipeline will be economic to meet Canada's objective of oil-market diversification away from the United States."


The disparity between the West Texas Intermediate (WTI) price for Western crude and the international price that governs U.S. Gulf Coast pricing "suggests that perhaps exporting oil via the East Coast can make money," Mintz wrote in December, after U.S. President Barack Obama had delayed construction of Keystone XL.


"However, most forecasts suggest that this pricing advantage will disappear in two or three years as new pipelines are built from Cushing to the Gulf Coast."


How do you predict the future?


Mintz's observation underscores the big economic question that surrounds any infrastructure project: how do you balance what you know and think you need now against what might happen in the future.


"That's always a hard thing to do right and it's always a challenge because of course you want to get the right amount of infrastructure in place ahead of a critical need so that you don’t have pinch points," says Brenda Kenny, president of the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association.


And she sees obvious pinch points in the current pipeline system in North America.


"The ripple effect up into Canada is in the order of billions of dollars every year of lost revenue," money, she says, that would lead to reinvestment and jobs and new technologies.


"So I’m not fussed about the risk that, perhaps, if right now people chose to look more seriously at an East Coast pipeline and then 20 years from now decided it was only used half as much as they had expected.


"I think you can see on the long term those pieces of infrastructure can still add a great deal of value."


Kenny shies away from taking a particular position on any eastward pipeline idea, and considers it important that there be a "good public policy dialogue" on future pipeline development in Canada.


"Any time you have choices in place, you'll find that markets work better and when markets work better, consumers get better prices."



PHOTOS: 10 IMPORTANT FACTS ABOUT CANADA'S OIL INDUSTRY

Also on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow...
  • 10. Oil And Gas Accounts For 4.8 Per Cent Of GDP

    The oil and gas industries accounted for around $65 billion of economic activity in Canada annually in recent years, or slightly less than 5 per cent of GDP. Source: <a href="http://www.ceri.ca/docs/2010-10-05CERIOilandGasReport.pdf" target="_hplink">Canada Energy Research Institute</a>

  • 9. Oil Exports Have Grown Tenfold Since 1980

    Canada exported some 12,000 cubic metres of oil per day in 1980. By 2010, that number had grown to 112,000 cubic metres daily. Source: <a href="http://membernet.capp.ca/SHB/Sheet.asp?SectionID=9&SheetID=224" target="_hplink">Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers</a>

  • 8. Refining Didn't Grow At All As Exports Boomed

    Canada refined 300,000 cubic metres daily in 1980; in 2010, that number was slightly down, to 291,000, even though exports of oil had grown tenfold in that time. Source: <a href="http://membernet.capp.ca/SHB/Sheet.asp?SectionID=7&SheetID=104" target="_hplink">Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers</a>

  • 7. 97 Per Cent Of Oil Exports Go To The U.S.

    Despite talk by the federal government that it wants to open Asian markets to Canadian oil, the vast majority of exports still go to the United States -- 97 per cent as of 2009. Source: <a href="http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/statistics-facts/energy/895" target="_hplink">Natural Resources Canada</a>

  • 6. Canada Has World's 2nd-Largest Proven Oil Reserves

    Canada's proven reserves of 175 billion barrels of oil -- the vast majority of it trapped in the oil sands -- is the second-largest oil stash in the world, after Saudi Arabia's 267 billion. Source: <a href="http://www.ogj.com/index.html" target="_hplink">Oil & Gas Journal</a>

  • 5. Two-Thirds Of Oil Sands Bitumen Goes To U.S.

    One-third of Canada's oil sands bitumen stays in the country, and is refined into gasoline, heating oil and diesel. Source: <a href="http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/statistics-facts/energy/895" target="_hplink">Natural Resources Canada</a>

  • 4. Alberta Is Two-Thirds Of The Industry

    Despite its reputation as the undisputed centre of Canada's oil industry, Alberta accounts for only two-thirds of energy production. British Columbia and Saskatchewan are the second and third-largest producers. Source: <a href="http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/statistics-facts/energy/895" target="_hplink">Natural Resources Canada</a>

  • 3. Alberta Will Reap $1.2 Trillion From Oil Sands

    Alberta' government <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/03/27/alberta-oil-sands-royalties-ceri_n_1382640.html" target="_hplink">will reap $1.2 trillion in royalties from the oil sands over the next 35 years</a>, according to the Canadian Energy Research Institute.

  • 2. Canadian Oil Consumption Has Stayed Flat

    Thanks to improvements in energy efficiency, and a weakening of the country's manufacturing base, oil consumption in Canada has had virtually no net change in 30 years. Consumption went from 287,000 cubic metres daily in 1980 to 260,000 cubic metres daily in 2010. Source: Source: <a href="http://membernet.capp.ca/SHB/Sheet.asp?SectionID=6&SheetID=99" target="_hplink">Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers</a>

  • 1. 250,000 Jobs.. Plus Many More?

    The National Energy Board says oil and gas employs 257,000 people in Canada, not including gas station employees. And the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers says the oil sands alone <a href="http://www.capp.ca/aboutUs/mediaCentre/NewsReleases/Pages/OilsandsaCanadianjobcreator.aspx" target="_hplink">will grow from 75,000 jobs to 905,000 jobs by 2035</a> -- assuming, of course, the price of oil holds up.



FOLLOW CANADA BUSINESS

Former Bank of Canada governor David Dodge is not a man for wild ideas. So his recent suggestion that it might make more sense to send the bitumen from the Alberta oilsands to Eastern Cana...
Former Bank of Canada governor David Dodge is not a man for wild ideas. So his recent suggestion that it might make more sense to send the bitumen from the Alberta oilsands to Eastern Cana...
Filed by Daniel Tencer  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 30
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
01:21 PM on 05/15/2012
Well, at least someone finally spoke the truth! It was always meant for ASIA, they just need to cut our country in half to get it there! So much for the republican cries that this will help reduce our need for foreign oil! I didn't know Canada was part of the USA!
Yes, please install pipelines along your country and ship from your ports.
We do not need all the waste by- products that this dirty oil will leave behind.
Oh wait, the Frackers will need it, to pump into our water supplies!
photo
Old Glenridge
in the Great White North
10:04 AM on 05/15/2012
LighteningBolt, that idea about all electric vehicles is nice. But it is not the current reality. It will take 50 years to get to that point and I am all for doing it.

But I have to get to work next year and I will need to purchase gasoline. I would rather it be domestic oil.
05:48 AM on 05/15/2012
Refine it at the source, then ship it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Whistlejackett
Hey stop doing that
01:44 AM on 05/15/2012
Natural gas pipeline operator Spectra Energy will spend $4 billion to $6 billion in British Columbia after 2015 to build projects that could include large pipelines connecting the Canadian province with energy-hungry Asian markets. http://bit.ly/KnZMg9

The idea of going East just isn't on the table for the Conservatives, depending of course on the price of exports. Also, Gregory L. Ebel (born 1964 in Ottawa, Canada) is president and chief executive officer of Spectra Energy Corp. He also worked for the Mulroney Conservatives, and that just may be the key to any future ideas of Harper's plans.
photo
TonyOnly
Truth matters.
12:17 AM on 05/15/2012
"...how do you balance what you know and think you need now against what might happen in the future."

I remember a fanciful conversation I had with an American friend quite a number of years ago.
I told her:
"We'll give you our oil. And you give us New York and California.
She replied:
"We're going take your oil anyway. We won't have to give up New York and California to get it."

Sometimes you'll make more in the long run by accepting a smaller profit margin over a longer period of time.
And wider in house prosperity would lessen the burden on all of us.
03:14 PM on 05/14/2012
The oil in Alberta should stay in the ground, where it belongs.  It's ridiculous to spend more energy extracting a substance which gives you less energy while ruining vast tracts of the landscape.
05:54 AM on 05/15/2012
Your statement may be false. In order to calculate the energy you have to consider the brute force oil gives you in order to be more productive and allow society to function..

An example may be that without oil you wouldn't be able to ship or cultivate food the way we do. That means famine.

Don't forget, the very PC you are using and the signal you generate are all dependent on oil and its byproducts. I am not worried, I see technology moving forward and we will use less of the product as we head into the future. ( a breakthrough in the nuclear industry could unlock its mysteries and give us all the energy we would need )
08:17 AM on 05/15/2012
It takes more energy in natural gas to extract the oil from tar sands.  My statement is true.  I think using oil for making plastics is ok, because we're not burning it up and polluting the atmosphere.  Also, using oil for fuel will deplete the oil we need to make plastics.  We should be saving that oil for plastics, and using clean renewable energy.  That way we won't deplete our finite sources of oil, and we can make plastics.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ansdlmol
02:04 PM on 05/14/2012
No. The Ontario government and the NDP have both come out fiercely against Albertan oil so I would suppose they would be too proud to accept any of this dirty product. The west should continue to sell to the USA but also open markets in Asia with a view to lowering our dependence on the USA as a trading partner.
photo
Old Glenridge
in the Great White North
03:03 PM on 05/14/2012
I don't believe the Ontario government or the NDP have any say in the matter. If you read the article you will see that some of Alberta's oil already comes to Ontario. Just not enough of it for my liking.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ansdlmol
03:12 PM on 05/14/2012
Too much of it for my liking.
photo
Old Glenridge
in the Great White North
12:32 PM on 05/14/2012
Do it!

It is insane to think that the gasoline I am buying here in Southern Ontario origonates in some middle east hellhole.

I would much rather be sending my money to Alberta than some religious dictatorship. Screw that ... bring me some of that western oil please.
03:16 PM on 05/14/2012
Will you be OK with a pipeline in your back yard?  Is it ok if a corporation manages it, knowing they care more about their profits than your health?  We need more clean renewable energy.  We need to ditch oil as a fuel.
photo
Old Glenridge
in the Great White North
03:30 PM on 05/14/2012
The pipe already exists. Did you read the article?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Glass Cannon
Let every eye negotiate for itself.
12:13 PM on 05/14/2012
Of course we should send it east. Why would we not supply our own industry ahead of China? Just because a Dutch or American oil company thinks they can make more profit is no reason to leave any Canadian out in the cold. Caveat: as long as there is a functional fair market.
Donna Meness
www.findmaisyandshannon.com
11:58 AM on 05/14/2012
When JFK came to power, the relationship with the United States deteriorated greatly, since he and Diefenbaker genuinely disliked each other. There was one small deal that Dief did secure "by finaglin'". The U.S. then had a trade embargo against Communist China, where Canada had been shipping wheat. Because Imperial Oil was a subsidy of an American company, they were not allowed, under U.S. trade law, to fuel the tankers delivering the wheat. Kennedy gave him this concession , but after that it was war.

Sources:

1. Kennedy & Diefenbaker:The Feud That Helped Topple a Government, By Knowlton Nash, McClelland & Stewart, 1991, ISBN: 0-7710-6711-9, Pg. 35-36

2. Royal Commission on Energy, By Ed Shaffer, The Canadian Encyclopedia

3. Towards a Just Society: The Trudeau Years, By Thomas S. Axworthy and Pierre Elliot Trudeau, Viking Press, 1990, ISBN: 0-670-83015-1. Pg. 51

4. Canadian foreign policy: defining the national interest, By Steven Kendall Holloway, UTP Higher Education, 2006, ISBN-13: 978-1551118161, Pg. 158

5. Nash, 1991, Pg. 92

http://harpercrusade.blogspot.ca/2010/08/chapter-forty-continued-john.html
Donna Meness
www.findmaisyandshannon.com
11:56 AM on 05/14/2012
This meant that Ontario paid the higher Alberta price and were restricted from shopping for a better deal, while foreign owned companies in Montreal, got to import cheaper product.

So while those who ascribe to old 'Western alienation theories', for 12 years Ontario paid 33-50% more for oil and gas, to ensure that Alberta had a ready market. And this decision was made by an oilman from New York. For our part, it enabled Canada to avoid the Mandatory Oil Import Quota Program, introduced by Eisenhower in 1959.

So Alberta oil also went to the U.S., and the Americans were able to buy Alberta oil cheaper than we could in Ontario.

http://harpercrusade.blogspot.ca/2010/08/chapter-forty-continued-john.html
Donna Meness
www.findmaisyandshannon.com
11:56 AM on 05/14/2012
Soon after the election Diefenbaker commissioned Henry Borden, to help to establish an energy board, primarily to help the Alberta independent oil producers to find a market for their crude oil by building a pipeline from Edmonton to Montreal. Their opponents, the large, international oil companies, found it more profitable to use imported oil in their Montreal refineries.

The most influential individual at the hearings was Walter J. Levy, a New York oil consultant, who proposed that the pipeline not be built and that Alberta oil be exported to the US while Montreal continued to be supplied from abroad. In its reports the commission accepted this recommendation, and called it the National Oil Policy.

Not everyone was happy with the arrangement.

The aim of the National Oil Policy was to promote the Alberta oil industry by securing for it a protected share of the domestic market. Under the policy, Canada was divided into two oil markets. The market east of the Ottawa Valley (the Borden Line) would use imported oil, while west of the Borden Line, consumers would use the more expensive Alberta supplies. For most of the 1961-73 period, consumers to the West paid between $1.00 and $1.50 per barrel above the world price, which, just before the 1973 OPEC oil embargo and price increase, stood at around $3.00. They also paid proportionately higher prices at the pump than Canadians east of the Borden line.
06:03 AM on 05/15/2012
And where did Trudeau fit in with the National Energy Program that got Albertans so furious.
Donna Meness
www.findmaisyandshannon.com
09:58 AM on 05/15/2012
Critics accuse him of arrogance, economic mismanagement, and unduly favouring the federal government relative to the provinces, especially in trying to control the oil wealth of the Prairies.[4]

Legacy with respect to western Canada

Trudeau's posthumous reputation in the Western Provinces is notably less favourable than it is in the rest of English-speaking Canada. He is often regarded as the "father of Western alienation." The reasons for this are various. Some of them are ideological. Some Canadians disapproved of official bilingualism and many other of Trudeau's policies, which they saw as moving the country away from its historic traditions and attachments, and markedly toward the political left. Such feelings were perhaps strongest in the West. Other reasons for western alienation are more plainly regional in nature. To many westerners, Trudeau's policies seemed to favour other parts of the country, especially Ontario and Quebec, at their expense. Outstanding among such policies was the National Energy Program, which was seen as unfairly depriving western provinces of the full economic benefit from their oil and gas resources, in order to pay for nationwide social programs, and make regional transfer payments to poorer parts of the country. Sentiments of this kind were especially strong in oil-rich Alberta where unemployment rose from 4% to 10% following passage of the NEP.[57] Estimates have placed Alberta's losses between $50 billion and $100 billion because of the NEP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Trudeau#Legacy_with_respect_to_western_Canada
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Watson Richardson
10:02 AM on 05/14/2012
NO WAY!. The East supports the NDP, they HATE our Oil. Send our Oil south and let the East suffer until they get their heads out of their arses.