National Economy

[craner]

^I’ve had the same thought recently.

Not sure why Kinew would want to close the door to something potentially very positive for Manitoba.
For the record I like Kinew.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by craner

^I’ve had the same thought recently.

Not sure why Kinew would want to close the door to something potentially very positive for Manitoba.
For the record I like Kinew.

Maintaining credibility with Manitoba First Nations and positioning Manitoba to benefit from the proposal, probably with a Churchill tie-in.

[casper]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Maintaining credibility with Manitoba First Nations and positioning Manitoba to benefit from the proposal, probably with a Churchill tie-in.

The project is also not that well defined. Its not clear where it is going in Manitoba exactly.

First Nations have a legally mandated voice. Non-first nations also have a say. Just look at the response in Alberta to data centers and coal mining.

Neither Saskatchewan or Manitoba are saying much of anything at this stage. It is probably a bit to early.

----

I think the responsible thing to do is to also ask the question, do we need to go all the way to Sarnia? Before Line 5 was built Great Lake tankers were being used. Perhaps its time to look at that option as well. Run the pipeline as far as North Bay. Then tanker it from there to Sarnia. Sounds like the desire is also to build out a strategic oil reserve. Those could be storage tankers in North Bay that are filled over the winter and then during the summer they are transferred from there to Sarnia where you have additional storage to cover the winter months.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by casper

The project is also not that well defined. Its not clear where it is going in Manitoba exactly.

First Nations have a legally mandated voice. Non-first nations also have a say. Just look at the response in Alberta to data centers and coal mining.

Neither Saskatchewan or Manitoba are saying much of anything at this stage. It is probably a bit to early.

The Province of Saskatchewan don't have to say anything. This was from last February "Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe says any pipeline projects that cross the province will now be considered "pre-approved." The Premier was at the event in Alberta that announced the Sarnia pipeline, and confirmed his support.

Whether there are still potential issues with impacted First Nations is unclear. They already noted that comprehensive, early-stage consultation is necessary, and Moe's statements have raised concern among Indigenous communities regarding treaty and environmental rights. That said, first nations are partners on the revived Keystone XL pipeline that is proposed into the US, so they're not universally opposed to pipelines.

Manitoba is being much more cautious - noting the published 'route' goes right through Winnipeg (which doesn't seem realistic), and that the Manitoba government are pursuing a gas pipeline proposal that hasn't yet got First Nations agreement.

From the CBC today: "Both the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs and the Southern Chiefs' Organization said governments must carry out the duty to consult and accommodate First Nations before they embark on any major projects.

AMC Grand Chief Kyra Wilson noted there have been no consultations with First Nations leaders about either an east-west oil pipeline proposed by Canada's populist premiers or the liquid natural gas pipeline Kinew wishes to see built to Churchill.

"Nobody's going to be coming into First Nations ancestral traditional territories and moving any projects without the decision-making coming from Indigenous leadership," she said in a Zoom interview.

SCO Grand Chief Jerry Daniels said in a statement any major infrastructure proposal that could cross Anishinaabe and Dakota territories in southern Manitoba must begin with rights-holders, "not with political announcements made elsewhere."

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by craner

^I’ve had the same thought recently.

Not sure why Kinew would want to close the door to something potentially very positive for Manitoba.
For the record I like Kinew.

I also really like Kinew, which is why I hope this is just a negotiation tactic to get more for Manitoba, as in a branch line to Churchill, and not a Quebec / BC (prior to the last week) complete dead stop.

Kinew has been really good on wanting to make Canada strong and independent and has actually been a good unifier between non-aboriginals and aboriginals (with a strong sense of Canadian pride), I would hate for him to slip up now. He must see how such a project is key in removing our dependence on American infrastructure.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I also really like Kinew, which is why I hope this is just a negotiation tactic to get more for Manitoba, as in a branch line to Churchill, and not a Quebec / BC (prior to the last week) complete dead stop.

Kinew has been really good on wanting to make Canada strong and independent and has actually been a good unifier between non-aboriginals and aboriginals (with a strong sense of Canadian pride), I would hate for him to slip up now. He must see how such a project is key in removing our dependence on American infrastructure.

He has a delicate balance. You can't forget your base nor abandon the anti development and the climate change activist base nor the Indigenous rights base.

Isn't the plan to use existing pipeline so yes it would go via Winnipeg? The hysteria over leaking pipelines is a bit much but yes the current gas pipeline is less risk.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

He has a delicate balance. You can't forget your base nor abandon the anti development and the climate change activist base nor the Indigenous rights base.

Isn't the plan to use existing pipeline so yes it would go via Winnipeg? The hysteria over leaking pipelines is a bit much but yes the current gas pipeline is less risk.

The oil pipeline proposed to cross Manitoba to Sarnia appears to be for an entirely new line. There is an existing pipeline route that runs from the Enbridge Mainline at Gretna, Man. — near the U.S. border — to Winnipeg, run by Imperial Oil, but the twin lines (25-centimetre built in 1950 and 20-centimetre in 1974) carry refined gasoline, diesel and jet fuel to the Winnipeg market. They had to be closed for a while and replaced in 2024 because of land movement where they run under the Red River.

Manitoba Hydro gas pipelines have had several incidents with leaks, and back in 2014 an explosion that ruptured a gas pipeline, but the numerous oil pipeline leaks in Manitoba where there are 5,000km of mostly small diameter pipelines and flow lines have attracted less attention, although there's a recent increase in awareness after the provincial government tightened regulations a couple of years ago. Previous governments had left it to the industry to self govern oil and gas extraction in the province, with little oversight.

[casper]

I think this completely new pipeline will be way to expensive and miss the mark. They need to focus on a much shorter route.

The Line 5 pipeline is exclusively used to transport product between Canada and Canada. The only think that is keeping it running is a treaty between the US and Canada from the 1970s and the US courts interpretation of the treaty. I don't think we can continue to depend on the US to keep that line open. It is just not in their interests.

Use the existing Enbridge line from Alberta to Sothern Manitoba and build a new pipeline as far North Bay. Then take product by tanker from there to Sarnia or wherever.

You would need to add storage in North Bay and Sarnia to deal with the fact you can't move anything over the winter. That is ok, part of the argument Ontario is advancing is this project would include a strategic reserve. That just builds it into the supply chain.

Ontario demand for oil is not increasing. There is no need for extra capacity, just replace what is already in use.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by casper

I think this completely new pipeline will be way to expensive and miss the mark. They need to focus on a much shorter route.

It may hit the mark politically, which is what Dougie cares most about.

But if/when it's labelled infeasible, that'll give the separatist element some ammunition.

Originally Posted by casper

Use the existing Enbridge line from Alberta to Sothern Manitoba and build a new pipeline as far North Bay. Then take product by tanker from there to Sarnia or wherever.

I think you may have meant Thunder Bay. North Bay isn't on the Great Lakes and there isn't a way to get there by ship.

[casper]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

It may hit the mark politically, which is what Dougie cares most about.

But if/when it's labelled infeasible, that'll give the separatist element some ammunition.




I think you may have meant Thunder Bay. North Bay isn't on the Great Lakes and there isn't a way to get there by ship.

Yes, Thunder Bay. Not certain why I wrote North Bay.

The separatists will be outraged in any case. I don't think any reasonable solid cost estimates are going to be out before the referendum vote.

[Airboy]

If this line gets built it will be purely government money. The industry doesn't like uncertainty so will not jump on it. That said there is a big economic announcement in Calgary today.

As for another million barrels of production. I don't see that either. Wells drilled are already high. McMUrray is running pretty much at capacity and more coming on stream soon. but unless there is another upgrader I don't see it.

All this will do is get us a higher price for our oil. its 10 years at least with the planning, construction and commissioning. the pipe strings will take 4 - 5 years to procure.

TMX+ to the west coast will be done faster. But even then Roberts Bank will need expansion and that will be a few years.

[casper]

The big announcement today out of Alberta is Meta $13B data center in Sturgeon County.

Pembina Pipeline Corp announced phase 1 of a two phase natural gas generating station last week. That is to power the Meta data center. The generating station would be natural gas powered with 4 turbines for a total of 1,800 MW. Phase I only have two turbines.

I don't know if the $13B is for just phase I or also includes phase II. Either way that is a massive amount of money to spend on a data center.

[ssiguy]

I can understand Ford wanting a pipeline to Sarnia. Currently every drop of oil consumed in Ontario comes from Alberta via the US. That said, the logistics of this is going to be harrowing and hence very expensive and take a long time to build. IF any company comes forward, which I highly doubt, it will be at least 15 years before any oil starts flowing.

The boom/bust oil economy is coming to an end because oil is definitely a commodity on it's way out. It won't be sudden but it will be a continual decline much like coal was in the mid-20th century. It will be profitable for many decades but at the same time any new infrastructure will be very hard to justify. Big oil companies know this better than anyone which is why, despite getting the go ahead for a new pipeline to Vancouver, no company has yet to come out with a business case for investing in it. Unless the gov't come out with BIG construction subsidies, businesses know they will get little return on investment.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by casper

The big announcement today out of Alberta is Meta $13B data center in Sturgeon County.

Pembina Pipeline Corp announced phase 1 of a two phase natural gas generating station last week. That is to power the Meta data center. The generating station would be natural gas powered with 4 turbines for a total of 1,800 MW. Phase I only have two turbines.

I don't know if the $13B is for just phase I or also includes phase II. Either way that is a massive amount of money to spend on a data center.

That's absolutely insane. There are a lot of massive civil engineering projects like harbour bridges and metro lines that cost less than that.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Changing City

The oil pipeline proposed to cross Manitoba to Sarnia appears to be for an entirely new line.

Originally Posted by ssiguy

I can understand Ford wanting a pipeline to Sarnia. Currently every drop of oil consumed in Ontario comes from Alberta via the US. That said, the logistics of this is going to be harrowing and hence very expensive and take a long time to build. IF any company comes forward, which I highly doubt, it will be at least 15 years before any oil starts flowing.

That's crazy. I assumed it was mostly recylcing the Energy East to convert the less used Gas mainline to oil and then extend to Sarnia. Buliding an entirely new line as a backup for a fairly small refinery is pretty crazy. We would be better off building a new refinerey. This pipeline would cost a lot more than the Sarnia refinery is worth.

Originally Posted by ssiguy

The boom/bust oil economy is coming to an end because oil is definitely a commodity on it's way out. It won't be sudden but it will be a continual decline much like coal was in the mid-20th century. It will be profitable for many decades but at the same time any new infrastructure will be very hard to justify. Big oil companies know this better than anyone which is why, despite getting the go ahead for a new pipeline to Vancouver, no company has yet to come out with a business case for investing in it. Unless the gov't come out with BIG construction subsidies, businesses know they will get little return on investment.

There are huge investments happening in oil and gas worldwide. People would rather invest in politically unstable jurisdictions because frankly we are just as unstable in our own way. There is absolutely consensus demand remains strong for 30 year+ horizons.

Meanwhile Australia still exports $60 Billion a year in Coal. So even well past peak there is a lot of value to be had.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

There are huge investments happening in oil and gas worldwide. People would rather invest in politically unstable jurisdictions because frankly we are just as unstable in our own way. There is absolutely consensus demand remains strong for 30 year+ horizons.

Meanwhile Australia still exports $60 Billion a year in Coal. So even well past peak there is a lot of value to be had.

'Demand remains strong' may be true but there is no consensus about how strong. While OPEC think we won't see peak oil before 2050, several credible analysts say it's likely to be within the next ten years. After that the decline in demand could be a steeper slope than we saw on the uphill side of the peak, as non-fossil technologies gain momentum from increasing economies of scale, lower costs and convenience for users.

The effects of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and the recent decimation of Russian oil related infrastructure, and the consequent reduction in supply, haven't been what was expected. The price of oil rose, but not to the extent that was predicted. China in particular cut the amount they buy, and didn't increase that when prices fell (when it seemed that the US and Iran might not be fighting for a while).

Today Saudi Arabia slashed the price of its flagship crude for Asian buyers "by the widest margin in more than two decades, signalling a tougher fight for market share as rising supply and softer demand reshape the oil trade." The South China Morning Post reported "China’s oil demand may already have topped out, citing slowing growth in transport fuels as electric vehicles and heavy-duty trucks reshaped consumption patterns. Heavy trucks alone account for about half of the nation’s transport fuel consumption."

We're unlikely to export oil to Europe, where they're getting much more serious about electrification of transportation (and climate change) than North America is. The EU saw peak oil demand in 2006, and it was 20% lower last year, and falling.

It would seem to be unwise to rely on expanded Asian imports of oil in even the medium term, and if Canada gets more serious about electrification, even domestic demand is likely to fall. That leaves us relying on the US to keep buying the 80%+ of our oil production, like they do today.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Changing City

'Demand remains strong' may be true but there is no consensus about how strong. While OPEC think we won't see peak oil before 2050, several credible analysts say it's likely to be within the next ten years. After that the decline in demand could be a steeper slope than we saw on the uphill side of the peak, as non-fossil technologies gain momentum from increasing economies of scale, lower costs and convenience for users.

It would seem to be unwise to rely on expanded Asian imports of oil in even the medium term, and if Canada gets more serious about electrification, even domestic demand is likely to fall. That leaves us relying on the US to keep buying the 80%+ of our oil production, like they do today.

Even if the most pessimistic predictions are correct it doesn't make that much difference. If we get out of the way and let investment flow to oil sands the pipeline will be full as it's front loaded capital expenditure and not expensive to actually produce oil $15-30 a barrel. So if private companies are stupid we get the huge economic boost from the investment the jobs and the less substantial but still significant jobs and revenue even from a cheap oil world.

The truth is the climate change folks don't believe this spin or they wouldn't be trying to keep the oil in the ground artificially.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

That's crazy. I assumed it was mostly recylcing the Energy East to convert the less used Gas mainline to oil and then extend to Sarnia. Buliding an entirely new line as a backup for a fairly small refinery is pretty crazy. We would be better off building a new refinerey. This pipeline would cost a lot more than the Sarnia refinery is worth.

There are three refineries in the Sarnia area: Imperial Oil at 115k BD, Suncor at 85k and Shell at 72k. It is nearly all of Ontario's refining capacity. The same pipeline also feeds Line 9 to Montreal (most of the rest of Central Canada's refining capacity) and Lines 7 and 11 to the 112k Imperial refinery at Nanticoke.

Even if you think EVs will replace ICEs in the near future, the use of oil for aviation, trains, long distance trucking, buses, petrochemicals and shipping will continue much longer than that.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by acottawa

There are three refineries in the Sarnia area: Imperial Oil at 115k BD, Suncor at 85k and Shell at 72k. It is nearly all of Ontario's refining capacity. The same pipeline also feeds Line 9 to Montreal (most of the rest of Central Canada's refining capacity) and Lines 7 and 11 to the 112k Imperial refinery at Nanticoke.

Even if you think EVs will replace ICEs in the near future, the use of oil for aviation, trains, long distance trucking, buses, petrochemicals and shipping will continue much longer than that.

Between 40 and 45 % of oil is for cars, that is a pretty big chunk. All the other oil users will work on finding substitutions and on improving efficiency to need less oil.

There are two types of countries: those which produce oil and those that dont. Those that dont produce oil will do all they can to not need oil as must as possible to reduce their dependency on oil producing countries.

Oil production's future is not that bright.

[Airboy]

the META centre will have a greater impact on Alberta's economy in the near future than the Fantasy pipeline east. The proposed location may have less opposition as well since it will be in the Strathcona area near the Petro chemical plants. PCL/ Clark Builders and Stantec are the leads firms on this. One other local firm that may win big on this is Silent Aire, they specialize in HVAC equipment for data centres.

The construction jobs will be similar to all of the industrial projects.

This will move ahead long before any of Kevin O'Leary's projects get the go ahead.