Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Alberta Tar Sands Pt. 2

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: Statoil exits oil sands projects in Canada

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 23 Dec 2016, 13:44:25

"...in a move hailed by environmental activists." And a simple question: why does transferring a commercially viable oil sands project from one corporate owner to another make them happy? AOC didn't pay $626 million to STOP developing those reserves. Apparently the stock market expects great results from the acquisition: AOC stock rose 30% in just 5 days after the purchase was announced.

I suppose those "activists" are so desperate for good news they ignore the obvious details.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11220
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Statoil exits oil sands projects in Canada

Unread postby dolanbaker » Fri 23 Dec 2016, 13:53:28

Perhaps it's to do with the fact that AOC may not develop new projects and will just work this one out.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.:Anonymous
Our whole economy is based on planned obsolescence.
Planned obsolescence, one of the largest contributors to the man made element of climate change, but the one least discussed: dolanbaker
User avatar
dolanbaker
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3660
Joined: Wed 14 Apr 2010, 09:38:47
Location: Éire

Re: Statoil exits oil sands projects in Canada

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Fri 23 Dec 2016, 15:05:48

Perhaps it's to do with the fact that AOC may not develop new projects and will just work this one out.


I can guaranty you that is not the case. I know the CEO very well...it isn't in his DNA to not expand.

The market will like this given the asset is a better fit for AOC than any of the majors.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7222
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Statoil exits oil sands projects in Canada

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 23 Dec 2016, 23:48:05

Donlan - And to add to Doc's insider view: "...and will just work this one out." So in the best case scenario AOC keeps producing 8.8 MILLION BBLS PER YEAR of the "dirtiest oil on the planet". And will do so for many years given they paid $626 MILLION for maybe just the net cash flow? A net cash flow with WCS currently selling for $37/bbl. That's a lot of f*cking bbls, eh?

So that's the best possible future those environmental activists are hailing? So tell me: what does bad news look like to them? LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11220
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Statoil exits oil sands projects in Canada

Unread postby Zarquon » Sat 24 Dec 2016, 01:43:04

Statoil accepted $110 million of the payment in AOC shares, so they probably don't think it'll all fall apart new Tuesday. And they'll use the rest of the cash to drill new holes somewhere else; holes that would not have been drilled without the money.
Zarquon
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri 06 May 2016, 19:53:46

Re: Statoil exits oil sands projects in Canada

Unread postby GoghGoner » Sat 24 Dec 2016, 06:53:40

Canada is showing a near-term peak. The temporary reprieve in natural gas prices has probably made this stuff look more profitable than it really will be. Good time to get out?

Image
GoghGoner
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1785
Joined: Thu 10 Apr 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Stilłwater subdivision

Re: Alberta Tar Sands Pt. 2

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 25 Jan 2017, 07:40:46

Trudeau says he ‘misspoke’ about phasing out oil sands

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he misspoke earlier this month when he told an audience in Peterborough, Ont., that Alberta’s oil sands must be phased out.

Speaking in Calgary on Tuesday as he wrapped up a two-day cabinet retreat, Mr. Trudeau addressed comments that have triggered significant controversy in Alberta.

“I misspoke. I said something the way I shouldn’t have said it,” he explained.

The Prime Minister has been under fire from critics for saying “we need to phase them out,” in reference to Alberta’s oil sands.

Mr. Trudeau did not provide a timeline then, but said Tuesday that in about 100 years, fossil fuels will no longer be needed for fuel or energy. He then attacked his critics in the federal Conservative Party, arguing that his Liberal government is doing more for Albertans than they did when in government.

“I am proud of the fact that I’ve been able to do a few things that the previous government was unable to do, including approving two significant pipelines and possibly having Keystone XL move forward as well in the coming years,” he said, speaking on the same day that U.S. President Donald Trump announced his government’s support for the Keystone pipeline proposal.

Calgary Nose Hill Conservative MP Michelle Rempel said Mr. Trudeau’s latest comments on the oil sands are unlikely to win over voters in Alberta, where many are struggling with prolonged unemployment.

“People who are out of work don’t need platitudes,” she said, adding that the Prime Minister’s initial comments struck a chord because it suggested an ideological opposition to Alberta’s way of life.

“In Alberta, this is what we do,” she said.

The federal government is expected to call two by-elections in Calgary to fill seats vacated by former prime minister Stephen Harper and former Conservative cabinet minister Jason Kenney, who is running for leader of the Alberta Progressive Conservatives.

As Mr. Trudeau tried to contain the controversy over his oil sands remarks, he revealed new information related to another issue that has dogged him in recent weeks. In response to a direct question, Mr. Trudeau confirmed that he and his family vacationed on the Aga Khan’s private Caribbean island over Christmas in 2014.

Mr. Trudeau is already facing questions from the federal Ethics Commissioner over a similar trip during the most recent holidays.

“The first time I went on vacation with the Aga Khan, I was 12 years old. It was a family trip with my father and my brothers and we had a wonderful time in Greece with him there. I have seen him many times since then for dinners, at his place, in various places around the world, and yes, in Christmas, 2014, I spent some time with him on Bell Island as well,” Mr. Trudeau said Tuesday.

The Prime Minister’s Office declined to provide further information about the trip and whether it was disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner. A PMO spokesperson said Mr. Trudeau will answer any questions the commissioner may have about either of the visits to Bell Island.

Another issue that came up during the wide-ranging news conference was Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi’s request that Ottawa establish its proposed Canada Infrastructure Bank in Calgary.

“I can assure you that wherever the infrastructure bank is placed, it will have a strong impact right across the country,” Mr. Trudeau said when asked to respond to the mayor’s suggestion. “There are a number of cities that are eager to house the infrastructure bank, but we have not made any decisions at this point.”


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... e33748712/
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15537
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Alberta Tar Sands Pt. 2

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Wed 25 Jan 2017, 08:05:52

Speaking of the Alberta oil sands NOT FADING AWAY here's an updated chart showing that with it's development Canadian oil production has almost doubled since 1990.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrole ... uction.png

One should notice that oil sands production increased more then 500 MILLION BBLS PER YEAR during the period when oil prices ranged between $20 and $35 per bbl. Compared that FACT to the assertion that the oil sands are economical to produce at oil prices less then $50/bbl.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11220
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Alberta Tar Sands Pt. 2

Unread postby Tanada » Fri 03 Feb 2017, 09:42:41

ROCKMAN wrote:Speaking of the Alberta oil sands NOT FADING AWAY here's an updated chart showing that with it's development Canadian oil production has almost doubled since 1990.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrole ... uction.png

One should notice that oil sands production increased more then 500 MILLION BBLS PER YEAR during the period when oil prices ranged between $20 and $35 per bbl. Compared that FACT to the assertion that the oil sands are economical to produce at oil prices less then $50/bbl.


Excellent point. I first heard about the Alberta Tar Sands back in 1982 when a couple of the big USA oil companies were trying to develop methods for producing Green River Formation Shale by cooking the kerogen out of it and turning it into synthetic crude they could ship off to the refiners. At the time they were complaining because Canada was heavily subsidizing Alberta Tar Sands to produce synthetic crude aka Dilbit, and they were screaming about unfair competition mostly in an attempt to get USA government subsidies for their projects.

Now if Canada was producing something like 500,000 bbl/d of Dilbit in early 1982 and producing a lot more in 1995-2000 when world oil prices were remarkably low compared to today then claims the industry is dying at $50/bbl are clearly nothing but hype.

ROCKMAN I looked this thread up to ask you questions about Dilbit.

Would it be accurate to say Dilbit is manufactured by putting a quantity of dilutent into an empty tank, starting the stirring process and then gradually adding the heavy bitumen to the tank until the combined Dilbit has the correct viscosity to be shipped via pipeline?

Second, do the types of dilutent change over the year so that a thinner Dilbit is made in January and a thicker one is made in June because weather effects also impact viscosity?

Thirdly, If you have to make a lot of Dilbit is it more economic to just use more of whatever dilutent is cheapest, or carefully formulate the ratio so that you get a better sale price when it gets sold in Cushing?

Lastly, when you make Dilbit and then store it in one of those big tanks somewhere do you have to keep stirring it every once in a while to keep it from separating into heavy and light layers like a water/oil emulsion, or will it stay homogenized in perpetuity because all the components are hydrocarbons?

TIA!
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15537
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Alberta Tar Sands Pt. 2

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 03 Feb 2017, 11:34:35

T - All good questions...wish I knew the f*cking answers. LOL.

But I can offer some generalities. The production comes out of the wells heated somewhat...otherwise it wouldn't flow up. I'm guessing the most efficient way to make dilbit is to pump condensate into the stock tanks while the bitumin is still hot. Obvious the bitumin couldn't be pump into tankers or pipelines without being dilbitized. But you find much info directly from the companies...kinda like trade secrerts.

As far as final blending I doubt that is done in Canada. Dilbit is still rather heavy with an API in the low 20's. The final blenders use what's available to them at the right price. Some of the refineries didn't care for some of those final blends...other aspects as important as gravity. So some started buying directly from producers and did their own custom blends.

And found this: "Some websites offer information about the chemicals found in dilbit: CrudeMonitor.ca and Environment Canada's oil properties database. But those websites only list the kinds of chemicals found in diluents, not the exact chemical composition. For instance, CrudeMonitor.ca lists the volume of octanes found in specific dilbit blends. Octanes are a class of chemicals, and there are at least 18 different octane compounds, each with its own chemical properties."
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11220
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Alberta sinking billions into pipeline plan to send oil

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Wed 26 Apr 2017, 16:16:13

And now an update on moving oil westward. Or, more specifically, the plan to ship US oil (that happens to be sitting under Alberta) to China and points west:

Kinder Morgan Canada Files for IPO to Raise Trans Mountain Funds

Reuters - Kinder Morgan Inc said its Canadian unit filed a prospectus for an initial public offering of restricted voting shares, to help finance its $5.48 billion Trans Mountain expansion project. The Trans Mountain expansion will nearly triple the size of Kinder Morgan's existing pipeline and ship 890,000 barrels a day of crude from Alberta to the British Columbia coast. It was approved by the Canadian government last year despite opposition from environmental and aboriginal groups."
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11220
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Alberta sinking billions into pipeline plan to send oil

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 26 Apr 2017, 16:18:39

I love these moldy oldy threads.

Everything that was old is new again

And its mostly just as wrong now as it was then.

Cheers!
hall of shame
People who buy new cars and then cry crocodile tears over climate change. The manufacture of a typical new car emits ca. 16 tons of CO2 and a new EV is actually much worse since the battery also has to be manufactured, resulting in a total carbon footprint of ca. 30 tons of CO2
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22785
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Alberta sinking billions into pipeline plan to send oil

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sun 14 May 2017, 13:26:30

P - Yep, like the old oil sand push is once again becoming the new oil ands push. Similar to what happened in the US shale play. During high oil price periods the less efficient skimmed by. Drop prices and the run like scalded dogs. But that makes room for the better skilled to move in, buy on the cheap and apply the better approaches they have developed. Which takes us back to the silly idea a play, any play, is economic above a specific oil price and not below it. That completely ignores the reality that profitability is as much determined (and sometimes more) by the company then the price of oil:

Reuters - Even as the world's largest energy companies exit Canada's high-cost oil sands the country's top producer Suncor Energy is lining up its next phase of growth in the world's third largest crude reserves. The preliminary plans for new projects in remote northern Alberta follow a stream of multi-billion dollar deals in which international oil majors sold off oil sands assets to Canadian producers, who are betting technology and economies of scale will make the region competitive with other plays globally. Suncor will file a regulatory application for its 160,000 barrel-per-day Lewis project later this year, and in March received approval for the 80,000 bpd Meadow Creek East plant. It also plans to file an application for the 40,000 bpd Meadow Creek West project later this year.

The company has not yet taken a final investment decision on any of the projects but if sanctioned they would boost the company's current output of 680,000-720,000 bpd by more than a third. In total, Canada produces around 4 million bpd. Its strategy for future growth relies on building identical smaller thermal plants to help cut costs. This is how future development across the industry is expected to look, as the exit of the majors has drawn a line for now under the megaprojects that drove the industry's rapid expansion over the past 15 years. Suncor will add new plants able to produce between 30,000-40,000 barrels per day every 12-18 months

Of course those fools at Suncor Energy are just as ignorant of thermodynamics as the soon-to-be-dead US shale players that have planned for an $84 BILLION expansion.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11220
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Alberta sinking billions into pipeline plan to send oil

Unread postby Midnight Oil » Tue 16 May 2017, 07:46:16

A bestselling investigative journalist takes a tour of the Alberta oil and gas industry, revealing how Canada’s richest province is squandering our chance for a sustainable future.

In its desperate search for oil and gas riches, Alberta is destroying itself. As the world teeters on the edge of catastrophic climate change, Alberta plunges ahead with uncontrolled development of its fossil fuels, levelling its northern Boreal forest to get at the oil sands, and carpet-bombing its southern half with tens of thousands of gas wells. In so doing, it is running out of water, destroying its range land, wiping out its forests and wildlife and spewing huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, adding to global warming at a rate that is unrivalled in Canada or almost anywhere else in the world. It’s digging, drilling and blasting its way to oblivion, becoming the ultimate symbol of Canada’s – and the world’s – pathological will to self-destruct.

Nowhere has the world seen such colossal environmental destruction as is being wreaked on Alberta. At one point the province even went so far as to consider a scientist’s idea of nuking its underbelly to get at the tar sands. Stupid to the Last Drop looks at the increasingly violent geopolitical forces that are gathering as the world’s gas and oil dwindle and the Age of Oil begins its inevitable slide towards oblivion. As Canadians deplete their energy reserves, selling them off to Americans at bargain-basement prices, no thought is given to conservation or the long-term needs of the nation.

In this powerful polemic, William Marsden journeys across the heart of a province seized by the destructive forces of greed, power and the energy business, and envisions a very bleak future

http://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books ... 676979145/

Seems there is a lot of stupid in the world today.
Midnight Oil
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu 16 Mar 2017, 15:48:37

Re: Alberta sinking billions into pipeline plan to send oil

Unread postby Cog » Tue 16 May 2017, 08:30:47

Turning unproductive land into money is how us capitalists roll. Get on board or get left behind.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12784
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Alberta sinking billions into pipeline plan to send oil

Unread postby Midnight Oil » Tue 16 May 2017, 09:28:27

Is that how you define "productive"? Yes, you are going to be the one rolled in the end by predatory " Capitalism". Right now the locals, Native American people, and the the degraded landscape, along with the climate disputation is getting hit.
What goes around, comes around.
Now go ahead a count that 15 cents you been fixated on so much.
Midnight Oil
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu 16 Mar 2017, 15:48:37

Re: Alberta sinking billions into pipeline plan to send oil

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 16 May 2017, 10:08:56

Midnight Oil wrote:In its desperate search for oil and gas riches, Alberta is destroying itself. As the world teeters on the edge of catastrophic climate change, Alberta plunges ahead with uncontrolled development of its fossil fuels, leveling its northern Boreal forest to get at the oil sands, and carpet-bombing its southern half with tens of thousands of gas wells. In so doing, it is running out of water, destroying its range land, wiping out its forests and wildlife and spewing huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, adding to global warming at a rate that is unrivaled in Canada or almost anywhere else in the world. It’s digging, drilling and blasting its way to oblivion, becoming the ultimate symbol of Canada’s – and the world’s – pathological will to self-destruct.


Very poetic image made from words, but the reality is greatly at odds with the word picture drawn. Leveling of the boreal forest is taking place all across Canada to feed the EU demand for wood pellets they burn in place of coal as part of their 'green' biofuel mandates. The amount of CO2 released by Alberta is trivial compared to that released by NYC, or Paris, or London. Funny thing is those ten thousand natural gas wells are the same source of energy being praised by greens all over the USA and EU because they have half the carbon intensity of Coal.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15537
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Alberta sinking billions into pipeline plan to send oil

Unread postby Midnight Oil » Tue 16 May 2017, 11:26:15

What are you saying? Perhaps first you may take Marsden book and give it a complete read.
Here is another source to back up that statement

According to data from Global Forest Watch, an online mapping platform that tracks tree cover loss and gain in near-real time, industrial development and forest fires in Canada’s tar sands region has cleared or degraded 775,500 hectares (almost two million acres) of boreal forest since the year 2000 (Map A). That’s an area more than six times the size of New York City. If the tar sands extraction boom continues, as many predict, we can expect forest loss to increase

http://www.wri.org/blog/2014/07/tar-san ... aten-world’s-largest-boreal-forest

As far as the wood pellet industry, apparently just makes matters even worse.

Natural gas being praised by Greens, not if they read the complete life cycle

Furthermore, all those power plants that burn natural gas will still spew CO2, albeit less than the equivalent coal-fired power plant. In a world aimed at zero emissions, that reduction is not good enough ultimately. In fact, the more than 1,000 gigawatts of natural gas–fired power plants built around the world would spew roughly 300 billion metric tons of CO2 if operated over the next 50 years—or more than half of the world's remaining carbon budget. Exceeding that budget may lock in the worst of climate change, whether fast sea level rise or extreme weather. Cheap natural gas may even slow the shift away from heavy industry in the U.S.: New fertilizer plants and chemical plants have already been built as a result of cheap and abundant natural gas and new steel plants may not be far behind. Finally, natural gas can leak, adding methane to the atmosphere, which also exacerbates global warming.


https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... pollution/

Looks as if we got ourselves in another fine mess, doesn't it
Midnight Oil
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu 16 Mar 2017, 15:48:37

PreviousNext

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests