Tag: oil sands

Joint Review hearings on Enbridge Northern Gateway set for Kitimat in mid-January: sources

The full Joint Review Panel hearings on the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline are tentatively set to open in Kitimat in mid-January, 2012.

Knowledgable energy industry insider sources confirmed the likely dates and that the bulk of the hearings will take place in Kitimat to Northwest Coast Energy News Friday after a number of the participants in this week’s  National Energy Board hearings on the KM LNG pipeline made inquiries locally about booking meeting rooms and hotel accommodation for several weeks in a stretch,  beginning in early January, 2012.

The Joint Review website says:  “The Panel will start meeting with participants on 10 January 2012 at locations to be determined.”   During last winter’s  National Energy Board pre-briefing  on this week’s  LNG hearings, NEB staff said the location  to  be determined was always chosen to provide the best opportunity for those involved to speak before the board.  While there were fears in Kitimat that the LNG hearings would be held Alberta, those fears proved to be unfounded.

The Joint Review panel is now traveling across BC offering information sessions to the public.
Updated schedule here. It is highly likely that hearings, like the information sessions, will be held in as many locales as possible, but those will likely be mostly about local issues, with the bulk of the concerns before the Joint Review Panel hearings in Kitimat.
 
A NEB source cautioned that dates are always tentative due to other hearings, staff commitments (some of the KM LNG NEB staff are also assigned to the Northern Gateway hearings) and, as sometimes happens, the lawyers agreeing on postponements.
 

According to the official website:

The Joint Review Panel for the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project is an independent body, mandated by the Minister of the Environment and the National Energy Board. The Panel will assess the environmental effects of the proposed project and review the application under both the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and the National Energy Board Act.

The Joint Review panel has much wider powers to hear issues than the NEB did this week in the KM LNG hearings, where the only issue on the table was the partnership’s application for a natural gas export licence.

Enhanced by Zemanta

U.S. ambassador to Canada: Reduce oilsands’ environmental impact: Calgary Herald

Calgary Herald


U.S. ambassador to Canada: Reduce oilsands’ environmental impact

Alberta will continue to feed America’s energy needs but must work to clean up resource extraction operations, David Jacobson, the U.S. Ambassador to Canada, said Tuesday…..

However, additional improvements in the environmental performance of oilsands extraction operations are “necessary,” he said.

“We’re aware of the progress that has been made to address some of the environmental impacts in the Alberta oilsands. . . . But as I’ve said on many occasions in the past, additional improvements are necessary.”

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers took a more positive spin on Jacobson’s speech in this tweet.

@OilGasCanada US ambassador sees Canada as a pillar “safest and most secure foreign supplier” http://goo.gl/HgB24 #KeystoneXL #tarsands #oilsands

Environmentalists pin hope on Obama opposition to pipeline project: Globe and Mail

Globe and Mail  

TransCanada Corp.’s proposed Keystone XL pipeline has become a litmus test in the U.S. battle over energy policy, as the environmental movement looks for reassurance that President Barack Obama is committed to combatting climate change.

 Prodded by congressional Republicans for a quick decision, the U.S. State Department concludes a comment period on Monday for its draft environmental impact statement on the XL project. 

 The final version – to be issued this summer – will likely conclude that the environmental concerns should not derail the project, despite troublesome leaks from the existing Keystone pipeline, which was shut last week after a small leak in Kansas.

US allows restart of Keystone pipeline: Reports

There are media reports that the United States Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration is permitting the restart of the Keystone pipeline after earlier saying it could not be restarted following a spill on May 29.

 

The Wall Street Journal reports

The U.S. Department of Transportation on Saturday approved TransCanada Corp.’s plan to restart its Keystone pipeline…. TransCanada on Saturday provided results of its testing along the Keystone and can restart it as soon as the morning of July 5, the PHMSA said in a letter to the company.

“Based on a review of the information submitted, the restart plan is approved,” PHMSA Central Region Director David Barrett said in the letter.

Reuters reports that pipeline could start as early as Sunday:

 

TransCanada Corp (TRP.TO) can restart its Keystone oil pipeline on Sunday, after the company satisfied a series of safety conditions following leaks that idled the key export line twice in less than a month, the U.S. pipeline safety regulator said on Saturday. 

 The U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration said it approved resumption of crude flows from Canada on the pipeline after the agency evaluated the company’s restart plan and was satisfied safety requirements were met.

As of this posting there is no confirming information on the PHMSA or TransCanada websites.

Keystone XL pipeline would accelerate U.S. addiction to Canadian oil: report: PostMedia News

PostMedia News

A controversial $13-billion pipeline project originating in Hardisty, Alta., will accelerate U.S. addiction to Canadian oil, says a newly-released report from Natural Resources Canada.

 “The Keystone XL project is seen as both furthering U.S. dependence on oil, and enabling more oilsands crude to enter the U.S. market,” said the document, released through access to information legislation… 

 “Although the Keystone XL pipeline was certificated in Canada in late April 2010, the company continues to wait for approvals in the U.S. before it can begin construction,” said the report, obtained by Ottawa researcher Ken Rubin. “This . . . has been caused by U.S. opposition to imports of ‘dirty’ Canadian crude oil from the ‘tar sands….'” 

 The Natural Resources Canada report, entitled “Current Pipeline Issues,” was finalized on Oct. 22, 2010, and listed senior bureaucrats… from the oil and gas policy and regulatory division of the department as its key contacts.

Kinder Morgan proposes second Kitimat bitumen pipeline

In a story broken early Thursday, June 2, by the Vancouver website Tyee and confirmed by Northwest Coast Energy news,  another major energy player, Kinder  Morgan is proposing a second pipeline to carry bitumen from the Alberta oil sands to the port of Kitimat.

The proposal was part of a presentation to industry analysts  during a conference on March 24, 2011, with a PDF of the Power Point presentation posted on the Kinder Morgan Website.

The  likely controversial proposal was not picked up by the media until Tyee broke the story.

The presentation says the proposed pipeline is one of several alternatives proposed for the expansion of the existing Kinder Morgan Transmountain Pipeline.  In this scenario the pipeline to Kitimat would branch off from the Transmountain Pipeline go through Prince George and then apparently follow existing pipeline routes to Kitimat and not follow the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway route.

379-kitimatmap.jpg

The Kinder Morgan presentation says the Transmountain pipeline branch to Kitimat would cost $4 billion, compared to the $5,5 billion that Enbridge has budgeted for the Northern Gateway project.  The Transmountain pipeline would have a capacity of  450 million  barrels a day compared  to the Northern Gateway capacity  of 550 million barrels a day.

Tyee says:

A power point presentation
for investors by Ian Anderson, president of Kinder Morgan Canada Group,
provides a wealth of information that has not been widely shared with
the general public or local governments:

Tyee says Kinder Morgan is also asking the National Energy Board for a immediate jump in the bitumen going through the port of Vancouver

They are also requesting to divert more Alberta crude and bitumen capacity to the Westbridge tanker terminal in Burrard Inlet and away from existing land-based refineries in B.C. and Washington. If approved, this would immediately expand crude capacity through Vancouver from 52,000 bpd to 79,000 bpd — an increase of more than 50 per cent

.

According to the documents seen by Tyee, the Vancouver end of the project would require the dredging of Second Narrows to allow large supertankers to visit the port. Tanker traffic in Vancouver would increase, Tyee says

Tanker transits through Vancouver will increase to 216 per year in 2016, up from 71 in 2010 and 22 in 2005.

All this is being propelled by increasing energy demand from China. It also appears that Kinder Morgan wants to increase the Vancouver capacity because of the delays in the Enbridge Northern Gateway project, which means that Alberta oil patch is seeking new ways to get the raw bitumen to China.

Links
Kinder Morgan Canada presentation on the Kitimat pipeline and the Vancouver port expansion (PDF)

Kinder Morgan application to the National Energy Board (PDF))

Enhanced by Zemanta

Canada firms may miss Chinese market   Enbridge VP warns energy sector must act: Calgary Herald

Calgary Herald


Canada firms may miss Chinese market  Enbridge VP warns energy sector must act

If Canada’s energy firms don’t start exporting to China now, others might beat them to it, according to an Enbridge Inc. vice-president. 

 The warning by Byron Neiles, who heads up major projects for the Calgary-based company, was one of several made by industry voices to delegates at a national forum in Calgary on doing business with Hong Kong, hosted by the Hong Kong Canada Business Association. 

They argued the window of opportunity to sell to China won’t always be open largely due to competition and the chance the world’s second largest economy may cease growing at its current staggering pace – reducing the money its investors can spend.

Tar Sands Express – Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline or the Railway? Watershed Sentinel

Watershed Sentinel

As billionaires invest in the railways and oil tanker traffic skyrockets along the BC coast, it looks as though the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline may have been a ruse all along  – a classic “bait and switch” – with a number of PR payoff ….

 By autumn 2008, CN Rail approached the Alberta government with its plan to move tar sands oil.  Alberta’s Energy Minister at the time, Mel Knight, told Dow Jones Newswire that CN and his government have had “very good meetings,” with CN believing that it could eventually transport 400,000 barrels per day from eastern Alberta to the West Coast of Canada. 

Just six months later, CN was estimating that it could transport 2.6 million barrels per day to the West Coast if 20,000 railcars were added to its fleet.
On April 15, 2009, the Financial Post’s Diane Francis reported that CN “will deliver the oil sands production through the use of insulated and heatable railcars or by reducing its viscosity by mixing it with condensates or diluents. The ‘scalability’ of the concept – up to millions of barrels per day – means that the railway can ramp up production cheaply and quickly to provide immediate cash flow to producers which otherwise will have to wait years for completion of upgraders and/or pipelines.

National Post editorial board: Ottawa isn’t the oil sands’ enemy, Edmonton is

National Post

Editorial

National Post editorial board: Ottawa isn’t the oil sands’ enemy, Edmonton is

There’s an old adage in Alberta politics that when all else fails, bash Ottawa. Well, Alberta’s Tory government must feel itself at risk of failure, because it has begun making far-fetched claims about how its federal cousins ­­– Stephen Harper’s new Tory majority — have suddenly turned into anti-oil sands hypocrites bent on hobbling the project’s development with new environmental regulations just to win favour with central Canadian voters.