Canadian Oil Punished While Tanker Loads Of Saudi Crude Arrive At Canadian Ports Daily

[Anonymous]

This is just fucking sick!! Why aren't True Dope's goons applying the same regulatory reviews to Nigerian and Saudi oil as they do to our oil. My company announced more layoffs today. Let's get that fucking pipeline up and running and send out lay off notices to the Sierra Club.

As federal and provincial politicians pat themselves on the back for their climate change 'leadership,' and pipeline opponents gloat about stalling construction of new Canadian pipelines, tanker-loads of foreign oil are delivered regularly to Eastern Canadian refineries, including increasing volumes from Saudi Arabia.



That's right. Saudia Arabia, the oil-rich kingdom that is waging a brutal price war to shore up its market share and devastating Canada's oil and gas sector in the process, dumped an average of 84,017 barrels a day of its cheap oil in New Brunswick's Irving Oil Ltd. refinery in 2015, according to data compiled by the National Energy Board (NEB). That's up from 63,046 b/d on average in 2012.



Overall, refiners in Quebec, Ontario, Newfoundland and New Brunswick imported about 650,000 barrels a day from foreign producers in 2015. In addition to Saudi Arabia, the oil came from the United States, Algeria, Angola, Nigeria, because there is insufficient pipeline capacity to import it from Western Canada, which produces far more oil than it needs.



The reversal of Enbridge Inc.'s Line 9, which is finally up and running after much opposition and moves up to 240,000 b/d of Western Canadian oil to Montreal, means oil imports will drop this year — but not likely from Saudi Arabia.



The Irving refinery, Canada's largest, says on its website it has a long-term supplier partnership with the Saudis. The company is a big supporter of TransCanada Corp.'s proposed Energy East pipeline from Alberta to New Brunswick, but until it's done, it has a 350,000 b/d refinery to keep in business.



"We source crude oil from all over the world for our refinery in Saint

John, N.B.," said a spokesman for Irving. "Our crude imports come from oil producing regions such as Saudi Arabia, Norway, the USA, and Canada — including Newfoundland and Labrador, Alberta and Saskatchewan. Canadian crude is processed at our refinery, from some of the same producers who would be shipping product via the Energy East pipeline."



The Saudi imports alone are equivalent to the daily production of a mid-sized producer such as Calgary-based Penn West Exploration Ltd., one of scores of Canadian companies that are struggling to remain solvent after slashing jobs and budgets to survive the Saudi-instigated oil price collapse.



Where is the political outrage over oil imports from rogue nations with inferior environmental records and deplorable behaviours toward women, dissidents and minorities? Where are the beefed up regulatory reviews of Saudi Arabia's climate change impacts, or their dumping practices? Why is Canada so consumed with scrubbing its oil clean while oil from foreign sources flows into the gasoline tanks of Eastern Canadians free of scrutiny?



"If we choose to import oil from Saudi Arabia ... shouldn't we estimate the total GHG (greenhouse gas emission) impact of Saudi Arabian oil, which must include the military footprint of safeguarding that oil in the midst of a perpetual war zone?" asks Terry Etam in a column for the BOE Report, an industry online trade publication.



Meanwhile, refineries in Quebec — where mayors led by Montreal's Denis Coderre are fighting Energy East — are relying heavily on imports from the United States, a lot coming on oil trains, even as President Barack Obama killed the Keystone XL pipeline to frustrate imports of "dirty" Canadian oil.



"If recent history is any indication, like 2015, we will potentially be losing over 500,000 b/d of product from Western Canada due to shut-ins given the price levels," said Tim Pickering, president of Calgary-based commodities trading firm Auspice Capital Advisors. "This will likely be exacerbated to at least 600,000 b/d by capital expenditure cut-backs. Wouldn't it be nice if refineries in our own country took this oil rather than foreign oil? It would potentially tighten up the entire North American supply/demand picture."



Yet the main preoccupation of political leaders like Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is to tighten the screws of  regulatory reviews of Canadian pipeline projects, by looking at their climate change impacts and expanding consultations, even if it means keeping Canada's already highly regulated oil in the ground and buying foreign oil to meet demand.



"We are going to say no, we don't like our oil, we are going to buy oil instead from these countries and we are going to fund these kinds of international behaviors ... and that's OK because we feel better in our conscience," said Gaetan Caron, a former National Energy Board chairman who is now an executive fellow at the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary and questions the priority.



It's come to this because of pressure of groups such as the Sierra Club, which in a recent statement took credit for rallying Quebec mayors against Energy East. "When the Montreal Urban Community ... announced its opposition to TransCanada Corporation's controversial Energy East pipeline yesterday, nearly two dozen hard-working volunteers with Sierra Club Canada's Quebec Chapter took a victory lap," the group said.



Or because it's an expedient way to build political capital or to show Canada is making progress on its new climate commitments to the international community or because reducing greenhouse gas emissions fairly is a lot harder than picking on pipelines. Less hypocrisy and more respect for the needs of ordinary Canadians would be nice once in a while.

http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=business.financialpost.com/news/energy/as-politicians-gloat-about-climate-leadership-saudi-arabias-oil-is-dumped-in-canada&__lsa=d7f7-f4fc">http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/blog. ... =d7f7-f4fc">http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=business.financialpost.com/news/energy/as-politicians-gloat-about-climate-leadership-saudi-arabias-oil-is-dumped-in-canada&__lsa=d7f7-f4fc

[Anonymous]

If the issue was really C02 emissions(which it isn't) then Energy East would be a no-brainer over tankers from competitors.

http://wpmedia.business.financialpost.com/2016/02/fp0210_nb_oil_imports_c_jr.png?w=290&h=715">

[Anonymous]

We already have a pipeline thread on the first page.

[Anonymous]

We already have a pipeline thread on the first page.

I think it's bullshit Saskatchewan and Alberta oil is being undercut by foreign stuff because we can't get it to tidewater. But you are right, do this could have been in another thread.

[Anonymous]

We would not need massive budget deficits and give our economy a big shot in the arm if we could get Western Canadian oil to those refineries. Not to mention the fact it could eliminate or at the least drastically reduce the heavy discounting our land locked product is subject to.

[Romero]

Northern Gateway not a sure thing, Harper says



January 6 2014



Prime Minister Stephen Harper says his government's drive to diversify Canada's energy markets doesn't make cabinet approval of the controversial Northern Gateway pipeline project a foregone conclusion.



During a 30-minute Q&A session hosted by the Vancouver Board of Trade, Mr. Harper said on Monday that his cabinet will balance economic and environmental interests as it makes a final decision on whether to approve the $6-billion project to link the Alberta oil sands with Kitimat, B.C. Oil would then be shipped to foreign markets by tanker.



"We will not approve projects unless they are not only in our economic interests, but also meet the highest standards of environmental protection." Mr. Harper told Iain Black, the president of the Vancouver Board of Trade, who was the lone questioner during the session before a sold-out audience of 530 people in a downtown hotel.



"We want to make sure that these kinds of projects are not just viable and give us lots of economic prosperity, but we want to make sure they are environmentally safe and every measure is taken to prevent any kind of serious environmental threat or other kind of disaster and, in the rare case that anything might happen, there are adequate responses."



A National Energy Board panel has given conditional approval to Gateway, leaving it to the federal Tory cabinet to make a final decision on whether the project advanced by Calgary-based Enbridge Inc. should proceed. The panel laid down 209 conditions in a report released on Dec. 19. The cabinet has 180 days to make a decision.



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/northern-gateway-not-a-sure-thing-harper-says/article16223614/">//http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/northern-gateway-not-a-sure-thing-harper-says/article16223614/

[Anonymous]

Northern Gateway pipeline 'vital' to Canada's interests, Stephen Harper says

http://www.windsorstar.com/business/Northern+Gateway+pipeline+vital+Canada+interests+Stephen/7053312/story.html">http://www.windsorstar.com/business/Nor ... story.html">http://www.windsorstar.com/business/Northern+Gateway+pipeline+vital+Canada+interests+Stephen/7053312/story.html



But more importantly

Harper endorses west-east pipeline; says it will improve energy sales, job market



Mr. Harper said it is important for Canadians to benefit from the country's energy products and that projects such as TransCanada Corp.'s Energy East venture are good in principle.



"There are approval processes to look at environmental effects, the economic issues, to look at all those things and to come to independent evaluations," Mr. Harper told a news conference in Quebec City, where he announced the redevelopment of an historic path in the city.



"But obviously we think it's a good idea in principle in terms of selling our energy products. We need to sell our energy products. It is, I think, a good idea that we find pan-Canadian solutions so that all of this country benefits from our energy products and that we enhance our own energy security."



"I think the reality of anybody who looks at the business is that the absolute safest way to transport energy products is through pipelines," Mr. Harper said. "That's the safest way you can go."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-says-west-east-pipeline-will-improve-energy-sales-job-market/article13575047/">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... e13575047/">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-says-west-east-pipeline-will-improve-energy-sales-job-market/article13575047/

[RW]

Then let's get on them meeting the standards and getting it built.

[Anonymous]

Then let's get on them meeting the standards and getting it built.

[size=200]BULLSEYE!![/size]

[Anonymous]

The mayors of greater Montreal may have dug their heels in too soon. Quebeckers are aware it's better the environment and the jobs/economy that oil come from Alberta and Saskatchewan than from the likes of SA. What was a surprise is that Quebeckers would like to see that province develop it's own oil resources. Imagine Quebec being a have province??

Anyone would be forgiven for thinking that Quebecers are all opposed to Western Canadian crude, and to the infrastructure required to carry it to Quebec and the Atlantic. After all, our duly elected representatives, both at the provincial level and at the municipal level, seem to be falling over each other lately to speak out against oil and pipelines.

e truth of the matter, though, according to a Leger poll commissioned by my organization, is that 59% of Quebecers think it is preferable for the oil imported from outside the province to come from Western Canada, versus a total of just 13% who think it preferable that we import it from other countries (and another 28% who either had no opinion or refused to answer).

at's pretty much a slam dunk. Indeed, Quebec doesn't produce any oil to speak of at the moment, but since we use plenty of it — and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future — it has to come from somewhere. Most Quebecers who have an opinion on the matter think it makes a lot of sense to get it from Western Canada.

As for how we should get it here, again, Quebecers' opinions diverge from those expressed by many prominent politicians. Fully, 41% consider pipelines to be the safest means to transport oil, far ahead of those who think that trucks (14%), ships (10%), or trains (9%) are the safest.

Quebecers are also much more positive than one might imagine about developing our own oil resources. Over twice as many (54%) think the province of Quebec should exploit the oil resources that exist here, versus those (23%) who think we should continue importing all of the oil we use from outside our borders.

Of particular interest is the fact that those who identify with the province's Liberal Party, which is currently in power, are even more favourable to oil and pipelines than the average Quebecer: 75% think it's better for the oil imported from outside Quebec to come from Western Canada rather than from someplace else in the world, and 56% consider pipelines the safest means of getting it here. As for developing Quebec's own resources, those who identify with the Liberal Party are about as favourable as the average at 57%.

Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard may worry publicly about the "savaging" of the natural environment of Anticosti Island, where signicant deposits of recoverable oil are likely to be found. Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre may get into a nasty war of words while joining some of his counterparts in opposing the Energy East Pipeline, to the point of insulting Albertans by suggesting, as he did, that they think e Flintstones is a documentary.



But Quebecers, by and large, are not on board with these negative messages. We want our oil to be developed, and we want Western Canadian oil to ow here, preferably by pipeline. I do hope that, going forward, Quebecers' actual opinions regarding public policy choices on these matters (as opposed to those of the loudest pressure groups) will be taken into account.

[reel]

Pipeline or no, can you undersell the Saudis? Because I guarantee the Irvings won't buy it unless it's cheaper.

[Anonymous]

Pipeline or no, can you undersell the Saudis? Because I guarantee the Irvings won't buy it unless it's cheaper.

It's funny you mention them because they are among the biggest backers of Energy East.

"We believe the Energy East project will be beneficial for the economy of Canada, for consumers throughout Eastern Canada and for refiners in Quebec and New Brunswick", says Jeff Matthews, Chief Business Development Officer for Irving Oil. "We're pleased that TransCanada has taken this critical next step in the development of the Energy East project."

https://irvingoil.com/newsroom/news_releases/irving_oil_welcomes_next_phase_in_energy_east_project/">https://irvingoil.com/newsroom/news_rel ... t_project/">https://irvingoil.com/newsroom/news_releases/irving_oil_welcomes_next_phase_in_energy_east_project/

[reel]

I'm sure they are.  Canadians are much easier to bend over the barrel and lube up than Saudis are.  If it's built, it will have to be used to pay back the financing costs and that is a great opportunity to leverage for the Irvings.  They are masters at screwing Canadian taxpayers, suppliers, employees, you name it.  It's pretty much their whole business model.  I wouldn't bet against them.  So the question stands.  Can you undersell the Saudis?  Because if you can't, you're going to have a really expensive pipeline to pay for, but you won't be seeing the benefit.

[Anonymous]

I'm sure they are.  Canadians are much easier to bend over the barrel and lube up than Saudis are.  If it's built, it will have to be used to pay back the financing costs and that is a great opportunity to leverage for the Irvings.  They are masters at screwing Canadian taxpayers, suppliers, employees, you name it.  It's pretty much their whole business model.  I wouldn't bet against them.  So the question stands.  Can you undersell the Saudis?  Because if you can't, you're going to have a really expensive pipeline to pay for, but you won't be seeing the benefit.

Are you suggesting that producers in Western Canada would be better off using CN as they do now because you seem to be all over the place without making a cogent statement? Irvings are not paying for Energy East.

[Anonymous]

I'm sure they are.  Canadians are much easier to bend over the barrel and lube up than Saudis are.  If it's built, it will have to be used to pay back the financing costs and that is a great opportunity to leverage for the Irvings.  They are masters at screwing Canadian taxpayers, suppliers, employees, you name it.  It's pretty much their whole business model.  I wouldn't bet against them.  So the question stands.  Can you undersell the Saudis?  Because if you can't, you're going to have a really expensive pipeline to pay for, but you won't be seeing the benefit.

Are you suggesting that producers in Western Canada would be better off using CN as they do now because you seem to be all over the place without making a cogent statement? Irvings are not paying for Energy East.

I am not following him either. The refineries are third parties in this.