ROCKMAN wrote:Jaw - All true...if it gets built. I'll explain again how big pipeline projects typically get built. The construction time and payout period tend to be too long for companies to gamble. So they first solicit "subscribers": companies that commit to shipping a fixed amount of oil thru the pipeline for X amount of years at $Y/bbl. This protects the pipeline builder from market volatility. There will be a fixed period of time for subscriptions to be taken. If not enough subscriptions are made in that time period any subscription commitments are voided.
Last time I checked there was a bit of excess pipeline capacity to import Canadian oil. This leaves the new pipeline builders two problems. First, it will have to charge a competitive transport fee. IOW a smaller profit margin the other pipelines that may have already recovered 100% of their costs. Second, even if a lower fee is offered an oil owner might still be bound by its original subscription commitment. Also any existing subscription commitments for the new line are not enforceable until every required permit is in place. Also any lawsuit that halts construction can cause the clock to run out on existing subscriptions. TransCanada kept extending the original subscription period years ago as delays kept extending the border crossing permit. Eventually it cancelled the subscription period.
ROCKMAN wrote:Jaw - Very good: I had not seen news of the 500,000 bopd commitment. But agan the ovewhelming majority of US oil producers would not like to see this line built. Just as they wish the other import lines didn't exist.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Judge blocks Keystone XL pipeline (again)
A federal judge blocked the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline Thursday, saying the Trump administration’s justification for approving it last year was incomplete.
In a major victory for environmentalists and indigenous rights groups, Judge Brian Morris of the District Court for the District of Montana overturned President Trump’s permit for the Canada-to-Texas pipeline, which the president signed shortly after taking office last year.
Morris’s ruling repeatedly faulted the Trump administration for reversing former President Obama’s 2015 denial of the pipeline permit without proper explanation. He said the State Department “simply discarded” climate change concerns related to the project.
The decision once again throws into doubt the future of the 1,179-mile Keystone XL, which for much of the decade since its proposal by TransCanada Corp. has been a lightning rod in national energy policy.
The Trump administration had tried to argue that federal courts didn’t even have the right to review Trump’s approval, saying that it extended from his constitutional authority over border crossings. The court rejected that argument. .......
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-envir ... l-pipeline
Cog wrote:Trump should ignore the ruling and proceed. Let this one judge try to enforce the ban.
I'm not the least bit surprised this judge is a climate change fanatic appointed by President Obama.
Cog wrote:Judges are supposed to make rulings according to the law not their preferences or desired social outcomes. This judge is just a tool for climate change fanatics. The executive deals with borders and the judge is out of his lane. I would ignore the ruling and let the judge try to enforce it. There is no constitutional issue at play here. Just another liberal judge trying to interfere with the executive branch.
Cog wrote:Ghung
What environment law is in play here? I've never heard of a climate change law. Citation please. If there is some climate change law in place, that the president must obey, then you should have no problem providing me the Congressional bill number or statute number.
Show me in "environmental law" where climate change theory interferes with a president's executive authority over borders. Cite the appropriate statute or law that is in play here. While you are at it cite the law or statute where by the president is acting outside the Constitution or his authority contained within. I will wait patiently.
I know you believe that judges should rule based on feelings or some social justice construct, but that isn't really what their constitutional role is in America.
In late March 2018, In a court declaration Jill Reilly, the Acting NEPA Coordinator of the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, wrote that the Department is “reviewing the MAR in light of TransCanada’s announcement” that TransCanada is seeking MAR construction easements. The Department will hire a contractor to conduct the new environmental review.
On August 15, 2018, the US District Court for the District of Montana ruled that the supplemental EIS from 2014 needed to consider the pipeline’s approved route through Nebraska and the State Department is required to complete that analysis.
On September 10, 2018, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe and the Fort Belknap Indian Community filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana challenging the State Department’s decision to issue a cross-border permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. The filing alleges various violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, National Environmental Policy Act and National Historic Preservation Act during the permitting process.
On September 24, 2018, the State Department released the draft review of the new route for the pipeline approved last year by the Nebraska Public Service Commission. In the draft supplemental environmental impact statement, the department wrote that “there is potential for environmental impacts from the Proposed Action, should an accidental or otherwise unexpected release of crude oil from the Keystone XL pipeline or facilities occur,” but concluded that impacts would not be significant because a release is unlikely.
On November 8, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana ordered the State Department to revisit key aspects of its NEPA analysis before pipeline construction can begin, including reassessing and further explaining its analysis of cumulative greenhouse gas emissions from both Keystone XL and the Alberta Clipper pipeline expansion. The judge also ordered the State Department to reassess the potential for oil spills, impacts to cultural resources and implications of current oil prices.
http://environment.law.harvard.edu/2018 ... -pipeline/
Cog wrote:So there is no climate change law? Maybe you should call up the judge and tell him that. LOL
Since you and the judge apparently believe such a law exists and the president is bound by it.
What the attack on Saudi oil facilities could mean for Canada's oilpatch and Keystone XL
The secure supply of Canadian oil to the United States could recapture the attention of American decision-makers following the recent attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities, experts say.
Industry and government leaders around the world are still assessing the impact of Saturday's drone strikes on the state-owned Saudi Aramco facilities.
The attack disrupted about five per cent of global crude supplies, sending oil prices soaring.
The news also saw Canadian energy stocks surge by double digits during Monday's trading amid concerns the impact on oil markets could last months.
Canadian crude — overshadowed by soaring U.S. shale oil production in recent years — could receive greater focus with renewed discussion about secure energy supplies, said Rory Johnston, a commodity economist at Scotiabank.
"Historically, we've seen more of the sentiment toward the Canadian oil sector as being couched in terms of oil security, which as a concept has kind of fallen by the wayside," Johnston said.
"This will likely raise that energy security narrative back to the forefront of public discussion, which all else equal, should benefit the Canadian oilpatch as a source of secure supply — politically secure and right next door to the United States."
While Canadian pipeline constraints make it difficult for oil companies to get more Alberta oil to market currently, Johnston said, a shift in the conversation could fuel further political pressure to build projects like Keystone XL, which has struggled in the face of legal, environmental and political challenges in the U.S.
"It wouldn't necessarily accelerate the timeline of these types of projects being built," he said.
"I think what this does is just lessens the risk that we're going to see further delays."
Alberta 'the most secure major source of energy': Kenney
Aberta Premier Jason Kenney, who was in New York on Monday to meet with institutional investors, also emphasized the message that Alberta is "the most secure major source of energy" in the world.
"The strike on Saudi refineries should be a wake-up call," he posted to social media.
Kenney was also reported Monday to be looking at easing mandatory oil production cuts in Alberta following those attacks.
American interest in secure supplies of oil from Canada was particularly strong after the terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, said Christopher Sands, an expert on energy policy at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, D.C.
That changed during the Obama administration, he said, with greater emphasis on the environment.
Sands said the situation with Saudi Arabia may have Americans looking at Alberta, but it could underscore for some lawmakers how important it is Canada build on its own pipeline capacity and ensure security of its oil.
"You don't have enough capacity, and this makes us think you need redundant capacity because what if something goes wrong?" said Sands, adding that ensuring the security of existing energy infrastructure is key.
Tim McMillan, president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, said the current situation in Saudi Arabia may provide more incentive to expedite projects like Keystone XL and Enbridge's Line 3, which would carry more oil from Alberta to the U.S.
But he added that even with President Donald Trump "pushing these projects, it has been a challenge with the U.S. court system and some of the other delay tactics that opponents are using."
Though McMillan said he's confident those projects will be built, he added he was "less confident" that the U.S. legal system will move any faster.
"But why on earth is Canada so beholden to the United States when we have the world's second-largest coastlines, where we have a close connection to the growing markets in Asia?" he added.
While Canadian producers still face challenges in getting oil to market, whether by pipeline or by rail, Ian Nieboer, managing director at RS Energy Group, said they should benefit from higher oil prices.
The question everyone is trying to answer, he said, is how long will the situation last.
"The outage itself and its duration is probably the first and most pronounced fundamental impact," he said.
"The longer term and more structural piece is, is there some sort of risk premium [on oil prices] that maybe enters the market as you think about the politics of the Middle East and now really the circumstances that led to this weekend's attack," Nieboer said.
As for gasoline prices, Roger McKnight, chief petroleum analyst at En-Pro International, says it likely means higher gasoline prices in Canada as early as Wednesday. He said it's unclear how long it's going to last.
"We have no idea … where this thing is going to go because it's completely out of anyone's control," McKnight said.
"And the Saudis are going to keep things kind of close to the vest because they don't want to really upset the market completely. But the facts are facts. Five per cent of crude supply goes off the market, and prices have to go up."
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests