natural gas | Northwest Coast Energy News

BC approves Pacific Trails Pipeline amendments

: A couple from Vancouver, who refused to give their names, unfurl an anti-Pacific Trails Pipeline banner at the British Columbia legislature in Victoria, Sunday, April 15, 2012. The man said he against all pipelines and that he was supporting the Wet’suwet’en First Nation. About 1,000 people marched through downtown Victoria to oppose the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and coastal tanker traffic. (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)

The BC Environmental Assessment Office has approved an application to increase the capacity of the proposed 463 kilometre Pacific Trails Pipeline from the Summit Creek natural gas hub near Prince George to Kitimat.

The $1 billion pipeline project is crucial to the success of the KM LNG liquified natural gas export terminal at Kitimat, a partnership of Apache Corp., Ecana and EOG Resources.

The main thrust of the application was to increase the capacity of the pipeline to 1066.8 mm (42 inch) from the originally proposed 914 mm (36 inch). Pacific Trails will change the location of pump stations since the original proposal was for an import pipeline while now it is for export. There are also minor changes.

The proposal was generally considered pro forma since the main environmental review was completed under the original application approval in 2008 and the BC government was only considering the changes proposed by PTP.

The government report says officials were convinced that Pacific Trails would be able to handle problems with increased traffic and any potential risk involved in drilling under watercourses.

The Haisla submitted a number of technical questions about the impact of the larger pipes. While the BC Assessment office noted in its report that the Pacific Trails Pipeline is generally outside Haisla traditional territory, it is clear from the documentation that one of the Haisla concerns are any impacts on the Kitimat River watershed, as the questions concern the Stuart and Endako Rivers, the Morice and Gosnell Creeks and Weedene and Little Wedeene Rivers. The EAO ruled that the Haisla questions were outside the scope of the amendment or should be addressed in the “permitting process.”

Some Wet’suwet’en houses have been vocal in their opposition to the Pacific Trails Pipeline crossing their traditional territory, The Office of the Wet’suwet’en filed a strong objection to certain parts of the plan.

Given that the Minister of Natural Resources Joe Oliver and the federal government are now working to fast tracking all major resource projects, a comment from David de Wit, Wet’suwet’en natural resources manager is significant:

Fast tracking projects may result in overlooking important details [that] can have detrimental consequences. It is important to point out that the diligence required post-certification to ensure that impacts and effects on important resources are prevented or avoided is not satisfactory. This leaves the burden and legacy of any impacts to be borne by the Wet’suwet’en.

The letter goes on

We have invested considerable time and resources in the BC EAO review only to find that the level of detail required pre-certification leaves far too many unanswered questions critical for ensuring environmental effects and identification of potential infringements to our Title and associated rights from the project are avoided or minimized.

The EAO responded by saying the issues were covered by the original assessment and through the Oil and Gas Commission permit process. The letter from the Wet’suwet’en was, however, passed on to the Executive Director for further consideration

The Pacific Trials Pipeline, also known as the the Summit-to Kitimat pipeline will supply the Kitimat LNG project, a venture of the KM LNG partners, Apache Corp., Encana Corp., Apache Canada and EOG Resources. The $4.5-billion LNG terminal and facility will likely be operational by 2015, depending on how long it takes for the partners to line up Asian buyers.

Documents

BC Environmental Assessment office ruling on Pacific Trails Pipeline (pdf)

Wet’suwet’en submission to the BC EAO (pdf)

Alberta Oil magazine describes Kitimat LNG projects as high stakes poker

It looks like the Chinese curse (and journalist’s blessing) “May you live in interesting times,” has come to Kitimat, especially when it comes to selling LNG to Asia.

In the past months the world liquified natural gas market has become more volatile with increased competition across the globe and, in some cases, political factors adding to the molecule mix.

In the past few days, Alberta Oil magazine has published a series of articles on the Kitimat LNG projects, describing the projects as a high stakes poker game.

The point is that the potential Asian buyers for BC (and US) liquified natural gas want a secure supply and they’re not sure what is going on on this side of the Pacific.

That’s apparently why the first project, KM LNG, has put off the final go ahead project from the first quarter of 2012, as originally expected, to the now likely the fourth quarter of 2012.

That has left a lot of uncertainty in town, despite assurances from two of the KM LNG partners, Apache Corporation and EOG Resources that they are optimistic that there will be a deal with Asian gas buyers, even if it means Asian equity in the KM LNG project.

That uncertainty in Kitimat has led to widespread rumours, none substantiated, that the three proposed projects, by KM LNG, by the Houston-Haisla BC LNG partnership and Shell, may be consolidated in one way or another.

At Kitimat council on Monday, April 2, Mayor Joanne Monaghan said “There has been a rumour around recently that Apache is stopping their working for a year and I talked to the CEO, Tim Wall, yesterday and he assured me that that was not true.”

Work is continuing on the KM LNG site at Bish Cove.

This morning, April 5, 2012, Alberta Oil reported that EOG Resources boss still bullish on Kitimat LNG, quoting a company called Bernstein Research that met with EOG’s top executive, CEO Mark Papa, who told Bernstein that EOG considers its 30 per cent holding in KM LNG as a “core holding.”

In a Thursday research note, Bernstein’s Bob Brackett says EOG is willing to sell some of its stake in the Kitimat project to a buyer (likely of the Asian persuasion) looking for equity in the upstream portion of project. “EOG expects to dilute a portion of its stake for that purpose,” Brackett writes.

A day earlier, Alberta Oil reported in Global LNG players jockey for space on a crowded field noting that Australia’s LNG megaprojects are facing competition from North America and cost inflation as the number of projects increase. At the same, US LNG projects are trapped in the current mire of US politics, with many politicians wary of the energy-starved US exporting natural gas.

In Apache Canada makes global push amid fierce competition, the article that uses the poker analogy, the magazine quotes Asish Mohanty, senior research analyst, global LNG, with Wood Mackenzie

Kitimat is due to start pumping out five million tonnes of LNG by 2015, widely viewed as a market “sweet spot” because it beats a number of major Australian projects – among them Shell’s massive Prelude endeavor – into production. “It’s a bit of a race,” Mohanty at Wood Mackenzie says. “The general impression in the industry is that before these Australasian projects start up it’s going to be a sellers’ market.”

Mohanty also looks at the problem of cost inflation and limited resources, a problem Kitimat already faces with not only the three proposed LNG projects but RTA’s Kitimat Modernization Project.

Companies that specialize in engineering, procurement and construction of liquefaction facilities number fewer than 10 internationally, Mohanty says. He expects many of them will be kept busy by construction of several LNG projects underway in northwest Australia, including ongoing work at the massive Gorgon plant at Barrow Island. The Chevron-led venture is due to begin pumping out 15 million tonnes of LNG annually by 2014-15. “All of these are massive projects,” the analyst says. “What that means is order books are pretty full. There is a scarcity of resources in places like Australia right now.”

The shortfall could potentially squeeze Canadian LNG forays. “The fact that most of the B.C. facilities are going to be ‘green-field’ will not make it easy for them to meet a timeline compared to a lot of others.”

Related CBC News Mackenzie Valley pipeline funding reduced

Enbridge calls National Post story on PetroChina building Northern Gateway “speculation”

Updated

Enbridge late Wednesday, March 28, 2012, issued a statement saying that a story in the National Post/Financial Post that PetroChina could bid to build the Northern Gateway pipeline is “speculation.”

In PetroChina bids to help build $5.5-billion Northern Gateway pipeline columnist Claudia Cattaneo reported that:

Chinese investment in Canada’s energy sector could move to a new level if PetroChina wins a bid to build the controversial Northern Gateway oil sands pipeline.

The largest of China’s three state-controlled oil companies has expressed an interest in building the $5.5-billion project across the northern Canadian Rockies and is considering purchasing an equity stake, said Pat Daniel, president and CEO of proponent Enbridge Inc.

“They have made the point to us that they are very qualified in building pipelines, and we will take that into consideration when we are looking for contractors,” Mr. Daniel said in an interview. “It’s an open bid process. They are a very big organization, they build a lot of pipelines, and they would love to be involved from what they have told me.”

Within hours, Enbridge Northern Gateway issued its own statement:

To speculate at this time about who might be contracted to build a project that has yet to receive regulatory approval is premature in the extreme.

Construction of Northern Gateway would be through an open bid process, and to be successful any bid would have to meet Enbridge’s stringent requirements and meet all federal and provincial employment standards. Enbridge is firmly committed to hiring as many local people as possible to build and operate Northern Gateway and is not anticipating bringing in overseas workers to construct or operate the project.

“British Columbians and Albertans deserve to know that providing local employment is a top priority for Enbridge Northern Gateway,” said Janet Holder, Executive Vice-President of Western Access and the senior executive in charge of the pipeline project. “Ensuring a local workforce is skilled and work-ready in order to fully participate in, and benefit from, the economic benefits associated with the project is a priority for Northern Gateway.”

The Financial Post report says the Chinese company stands a good chance of presenting a competitive bid, but it is likely that Chinese construction of a major Canadian energy project would increase anxiety among Canadians already worried about China’s expanding ownership of Canadian resources.

While there is a labour shortage in the energy sector at the moment, the Financial Post says Canada could use could use a hand from an experienced Chinese oil company, but turning over construction to PetroChina could mean fewer construction jobs in B.C., “where Northern Gateway is a hard sell because of perceptions the province would bear all the risk of a spill, while the rewards would go primarily to Alberta’s oil sands sector.”

The Enbridge statement also says:

Northern Gateway will shape its hiring and procurement policies so that contractors and sub-contractors working on the pipeline and the proposed marine terminal maximize local hiring and training opportunities, particularly for Aboriginal people – who are expected to comprise approximately 15% of regional construction employment.

An education and training fund of $1.5 million has recently been developed by Northern Gateway. The fund will support flexible community based training associated with the pipeline construction.

Pacific Trails Pipeline holds community meetings

Pacific Trails Pipeline meeting — Hatha Callis, left, of Progressive Ventures Construction, discusses contracting possibilities with the staff of the Pacific Trails Pipeline at a community meeting in Terrace, BC, March 1, 2012 (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)

Pacific Trails, which has proposed to build a natural gas pipeline from Summit Lake, near Prince George, to Kitimat, held four community meetings in Vanderhoof, Burns Lake, Houston and Terrace, to discuss changes to a plan for the pipeline that was approved the BC Environmental Assessment Office in 2008.

Paul Wyke, a spokesman for Apache Corp., one of the main investors in the Kitimat LNG project as well as the Pacific Trails Pipeline, said the companies considered the meetings successful. About a dozen people showed up in Vanderhoof and Burns Lake and about 25 to 30 in Terrace and Houston, perhaps an indication of the lack of controversy, so far, for the PTP, which will follow roughly the same route as the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline. Apache and Pacific Trails also took part in a job fair on February 10 in Burns Lake, the town hard hit when a huge explosion flattened the Babine Forest Products sawmill on January 20, killing two, injuring 19 and left about 250 workers jobless.

About half the people showing up at the meetings were interested in job or contracting opportunities while the rest were concerned about environmental issues.

Nathan Hagan-Braun, project assessment manager for the BC Environmental Assessment Office, who also attended the community meetings, said that a decision on approval of the amendments to the PTP plans will likely come in May.

PTP says that once the project adjustments are approved, logging and clearing is scheduled for the summer of 2012, pipeline construction in 2013 and 2014, with the pipeline going into operation in 2015.

Three new powerful players said to join the BC West Coast LNG export rush

The race to ship liquified natural gas to Asia is getting hotter with three new powerhouses joining the scramble for west coast export terminals.

The Prince Rupert Port Authority announced Tuesday, Feb. 7, that it is working with an energy powerhouse BG Group, on a feasibiity study for an LNG terminal at Ridley Island.

At the same time The Globe and Mail reports that there are rumours that Exxon Mobile is “examining LNG options” in the northwest. The paper also quotes sources as saying the Japanese firm Itochu is looking to export gas via Kitsault, where there is an abandoned molybdenum mine, town and port.

British Gas was once the retail domestic supplier of natural gas to the UK market. The company split in two in 1997, with BG Group becoming an international exploration and energy production company.

Itochu is a 150-year old Japanese company which began as Chibou Itoh’s one man linen trading company, later adding drapery shops and over more than a century expanding operations to become a major international conglomerate with strong interests in the energy sector. According to the company website, Itochu is also a player in the solar energy and bio-ethanol fields.

“The Prince Rupert Port Authority has engaged with the BG Group to consider Prince Rupert for a potential LNG export facility. The BG Group is number two in the world in LNG, next to Shell and they are number two depending on what measurements you look at, so they are already a big player in that industry” according to Shaun Stevenson, vice-president of Marketing and Business Development for the Prince Rupert Port Authority.

“We have an agreement signed to provide them a site and to secure that site to examine the suitability of it and the feasibility of the facility…We have given them a period of time to conduct the feasibility and suitability study, and if it is determined to be viable from the preliminary work that is done then we will look at further development,” he said.

David Byford, spokesman for the BG Group in Houston, confirmed the deal has been signed but cautioned “Prince Rupert is one of the areas we are looking at, and we are in the very early feasibility study stage.”

“The west coast of Canada is certainly advantageous for LNG export, and there is a lot of natural gas in BC as well.”

Prince Rupert port spokesperson Michael Gurney says it will be 12 to 24 months before there’s a clear commitment on the project.

A spokesman with Itochu declined comment when contacted by The Globe and Mail. Kitsault, near Alice Arm, in the traditional territory of the Nisga’a nation, was the site of a short lived molybedenum venture by the Phelps Dodge company. After the mine was abandoned, the town was bought by Indo-American businessman Krishnan Suthanthiran and is now promoted as a nature and wilderness retreat, called Heaven on Earth.

The Globe and Mail also quotes sources as saying that Exxon Mobil Corp., which has substantial natural gas reserves in northeastern B.C., has also been examining LNG options. Pius Rolheiser, a spokesman with Canada’s Imperial Oil Ltd., which is majority-owned by Exxon, said in a statement to the Globe and Mail: “Imperial continuously reviews a variety of opportunities to increase value to our shareholders. As a matter of practice, and for competitive reasons, we do not discuss specific strategies.”

PetroChina looks to Kitimat as it spends $1 billion for Shell shale gas in northeastern BC

PetroChina has bought a 20 per cent stake in Shell Canada’s Groundbirch shale-gas project in north eastern BC, leading to media reports that PetroChina is also investing in Shell’s planned Kitimat liquified natural gas export terminal in Kitimat.

The Groundbirch “play” in the northeastern BC shale gas fields produces 180 million cubic feet of gas a day form 250 wells.

A Hong Kong website, FinanceAsia, reported that PetroChina is paying $1 billion for the stake in the northeast BC shale gas operation.

China Daily confirmed the story, quoting Mao Zefeng, the Beijing-based spokesman of PetroChina, who declined to give the value of the transaction.

China Daily said Shell and PetroChina’s parent agreed in June to increase cooperation in energy exploration in China, estimated to hold the world’s largest reserves of shale gas. The semi-official newspaper says Petro China is looking to Canada to obtain drilling technology and expertise.

“It’s a continuation of our cooperation in China, and we can learn about shale-gas exploration and production by being a partner in the Canadian shale-gas project,” Mao said. “The project will also bring us good investment returns.”

Barron’s also reported that China is looking to get more experience shale gas, quoting Benchmark analyst Mark Gilman who told Dow Jones Newswires. “They are trying to learn about this business, on the basis of their belief that it will better position them to assess and develop similar resources within China,” he said. In fact, Shell and PetroChina are exploring for shale together in China, so the Canadian deal may be a “quid pro quo” gesture to Shell, he added.

Shell executives said at a meeting in London on Thursday that the company has invested $400 million in shale gas exploration in China, funding 15 wells with more in the future.

Last fall, Shell purchased the old Methanex site and the Methanex marine terminal in Kitimat.

Both The Globe and Mail and Postmedia News are tying the investment directly to Shell’s Kitimat LNG export project.

The Globe and Mail says that PetroChina as well as Japan’s Mitsubishi and Korean Gas are stakeholders in the Shell Kitimat LNG project.

PetroChina’s had agreed with Encana, a partner in the KM LNG project to invest $5.4-billion in the company’s shale gas operations in British Columbia. That deal collapsed last fall after the two companies could not agree on finances.

PetroChina is also a heavy investor in the Alberta bitumen sands.

The deal between PetroChina and Shell came on the same day that National Energy Board approved the BC LNG project, the second one to be proposed for Kitimat. The first, approved in October, is the Kitimat LNG project owned by the KM LNG partnership.

It also comes a few days before Prime Minister Stephen Harper begins an official visit to China.

NEB approves BC LNG, second Kitimat LNG project

The National Energy Board has approved a 20-year-export licence for Kitimat’s second LNG project, known as BC LNG. A NEB news release says:

The export licence authorizes BC LNG to export 36 million tonnes of LNG, which is equivalent to approximately 47.9 billion m³ of natural gas, over a 20 year period.

The maximum annual quantity allowed for export will be 1.8 million tonnes of LNG, which amounts to approximately 2.4 billion m³of natural gas.

A co-operative comprised of natural gas producers, marketers and LNG buyers is a central feature of BC LNG’s export proposal, where members of the co-operative will submit bids to provide natural gas to be liquefied or purchase LNG.

A committee will review the bids and choose those that will yield the greatest margin to the co-operative. Membership in the co-operative is currently comprised of thirteen parties, and additional members may join upon request.

BC LNG’s export model permits smaller natural gas market participants in Canada to play a part in exporting LNG. In approving BC LNG’s application, the Board satisfied itself that the quantity of gas to be exported is in excess of the requirements to meet the foreseeable Canadian demand.

The Board also determined that the volumes of natural gas proposed to be exported are not likely to cause Canadians difficulty in meeting their energy requirements at fair market prices.

The Board acknowledged the potential economic benefits associated with BC LNG’s project. In particular, the Board noted the benefits for the Haisla Nation, including an interest in BC LNG, and employment opportunities resulting from the development and operation of the liquefaction facility.

BC LNG Map — Map showing the BC LNG site in Kitimat harbour (NEB)

The Haisla Nation has a 50 per cent stake in the project through the Hasila Nation Douglas Channel Limited Partnership.
The NEB says the Haisla say the new revenue source would allow the First Nation to support health, education, community development and the many other needs of the First Nation and its members. The Haisla say that business and
employment opportunities associated with the development of the LNG terminal and associated
facilities would be available for Haisla members and businesses.

The NEB also says that the Haisla indicated
that a number of other Aboriginal persons, businesses and nations would see economic spinoff benefits from the development.

The NEB decision says there will be two “liquefaction trains” on barges in Kitimat harbour. The
first train is scheduled to commence in 2013-14 and the second train in 2016-18. Each train will
have a daily volume requirement of 3.5 million cubic metres a day (125 MMcf/d) of natural gas. After completion of both trains, the terminal will have an annual liquefaction capacity of 1.8 million tonnes of LNG.

LNG from the Terminal will be pumped directly into an LNG tanker berthed adjacent to the barge. It will take about 30 days to fill a typical LNG tanker and approximately 25 days to make the roundtrip between Kitimat and markets in Asia.

Talisman Energy Inc. and Tenaska Marketing Canada both have a stake in the project.

The NEB approved the first project, known as Kitimat LNG, operated by the KM LNG partnership on October 13, 2011.

That export licence authorized KM LNG to export 200 million tonnes of LNG (equivalent to

BC LNG pipeline map — Map of pipelines that will feed the BC LNG project (NEB)

approximately 265 million 10³m³ or 9,360 Bcf of natural gas) over a 20 year period. The maximum annual quantity allowed for export will be 10 million tonnes of LNG (equivalent to approximately 13 million 10³m³ or 468 Bcf of natural gas). The supply of gas will come from producers located in the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin. Once the natural gas has reached Kitimat by way of the Pacific Trail Pipeline, the gas would then be liquefied at a terminal to be built in Bish Cove, near the Port of Kitimat.

A third LNG project by Shell Canada, which will use the old Methanex site in Kitimat and the old Methanex marine terminal in Kitimat harbour is currently in the preliminary planning stages.

The NEB hearings on the LNG projects are different from the current Joint Review Panel hearings on the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline. The JRP hearings are a “facility hearing” and cover the entire project, including environmental impacts. Since neither LNG project actually crosses a provincial boundary, the NEB’s jurisdiction is limited to granting the export licence.

Links January 3, 2012

Links January 3, 2012

Northern Gateway

Vancouver Sun series on Northern Gateway

Jan. 3, 2012

Pipelines will fuel plenty of talk Final call on proposal expected at end of 2013, following multitude of hearings and reviews

Environmental groups line up star power against Northern Gateway pipeline

Enbridge is a Canadian success story

First nations fiercely opposed to Northern Gateway

Energy

International Business Times Chinese Court Accepts $78M Oil Spill-Related Lawsuit against ConocoPhillips

Globe and Mail Keystone inspector alleges shoddy work on original pipeline

Globe and Mail U.S. eyes supply side economics of natural gas

Globe and Mail B.C. launches review of oil and gas industry practices

Shell’s LNG terminal plans “substantially larger” than rivals: Globe and Mail

The Globe and Mail reports Shell eyes LNG terminal in B.C. that would overshadow Kitimat

A group of major international energy partners led by Royal Dutch Shell PLC is contemplating an LNG export terminal for the British Columbia coast that is substantially larger than a rival’s project that could soon begin construction.

Shell, which has teamed with Korea Gas Corp., China National Petroleum Co. and Mitsubishi Corp., is looking to load 1.8 billion cubic feet a day of natural gas onto tankers bound for Asian markets, officials with Spectra Energy Corp. ) revealed Tuesday.

The Globe and Mail says Spectra spokesman Peter Murchland said Shell project would generate 1.8 billion cubic feet of natural gas a day, That compares to the 1.4-billion cubic feet a day proposed by Kitimat LNG,

AltaGas takes over Pacific Northern Gas

Energy

Pacific Northern Gas, the main supplier of natural gas to much of northern British Columbia, has agreed to be taken over by the much bigger Calgary-based AltaGas Ltd. in a deal worth $230 million or $36.75 a share.

The deal gives AltaGas a stake in the natural gas export race, since Pacific Northern’s pipelines link Alberta and British Columbia gas fields to Kitimat, where there are at least three projects underway to export liquified natural gas to Asian markets.

Pacific Northern Gas distribution network. (PNG)

In a news release, Pacific Northern Gas said that company executives began considering the future after PNG sold their interest in Pacific Trails Pipeline last February to the partners in the Kitimat LNG project.

Roy Dyce, president and CEO of PNG said in the news release:

This transaction is in the
best interests of our shareholders, customers, employees and other
stakeholders. Among the reasons we recommend the proposed transaction to
our shareholders are the size of the premium, the immediate liquidity
and the certainly of value the cash consideration offers, and the fact
that we believe AltaGas’ offer fairly values the $20 million contingent
payment that PNG will receive if the Kitimat liquefied natural gas
project proceeds.

Pacific Northern already had a small partnership with AltaGas to build a gas pipeline from a Montney gas plant to
British Columbia.

In its news release, AltaGas said “We are pleased to welcome all PNG employees to our team. AltaGas has a
long history of operating natural gas utilities across Canada and we
will continue to deliver safe and reliable service to our customers.”

AltaGas says the transaction will result in a 50 per cent increase in AltaGas’ holdings of regulated natural gas to consumers and businesses, now worth over $500 million and increase customers from 75,000 to more than 110,000.

The company is looking to increased natural gas exploration taking place in areas northeastern BC in the Montney and Horn River gas fields. AltaGas also expects to profit from “increased industrial activity in northern BC are expected to result in rate base and customer growth as areas such as Dawson Creek and Fort St. John.”

The new company would align the PNG system with AltaGas assets such as the Bear Mountain Wind Park and the Younger facility, BC’s only natural gas liquids extraction plant.

AltaGas adds. “Growing North American natural gas supply and continued attractive natural gas prices in Asian markets continue to support growth of an LNG industry in western Canada. PNG’s Western system is well positioned to capitalize on the growing demand for additional pipeline capacity along the Summit Lake to Kitimat/Prince Rupert corridor.”

AltaGas assets include small utilities, a gas business, and power. AltaGas describes itself this way:

AltaGas is an energy infrastructure business with a focus on natural
gas, power and regulated utilities. With the physical and economic links
along the energy value chain together with its efficient, reliable and
profitable assets, market knowledge and financial discipline, AltaGas
has provided strong, stable and predictable returns to its investors.
AltaGas focuses on maximizing the profitability of its assets, providing
services that are complementary to its existing businesses, and
growing through the acquisition and development of energy
infrastructure.

Consumers in northern British Columbia will be wondering, despite any long term spinoffs from liquified natural gas projects, what the deal will mean for their natural gas bills. Despite the statement by Dyce, “We look forward to joining with AltaGas in continuing our mutual history of delivering safe, reliable service to our customers” and Cornhill’s similar statement, “AltaGas has a long history of operating natural gas utilities across Canada and we will continue to deliver safe and reliable service to our customers,” it is highly likely that consumers in BC will be skeptical of the deal because up until now, while the price of natural gas has been falling, Pacific Northern Gas continued to charge very high (some would say extortionate) transportation and other fees to consumers.