Sentences with phrase «oil sands pipelines»

The problem of increased water traffic is not unknown for oil sands pipelines.

«There's a question of whether going along with the approval of the Northern Gateway pipeline will make LNG development in B.C. more challenging by angering First Nations so adamantly opposed to the oil sands pipeline,» said George Hoberg, a professor at the University of British Columbia's school of forestry and founder of UBCC350, a group pressing for action on greenhouse gas emissions.

And both wait to see what, if any actions the federal Liberals take over an oil sands pipeline they've championed and a coast they've vowed to protect, along with electorates in two provinces with profoundly different priorities.

How else could she argue, as she did in 2016, that Alberta would not support the federal government's pan-Canadian carbon price of $ 50 per tonne (in the year 2022) unless the federal government first approved an oil sands pipeline to tidewater, while also arguing that British Columbia's proposed oil spill safety measures contravene the federal government's clear jurisdiction over interprovincial pipelines?

Ben Gemen at The Hill reports that Secretary of State John Kerry wants a decision on the proposed Keystone XL oil sands pipeline in the «near term, but did not define what «near term» means.»

The spill comes at an inopportune time for the industry, as it lobbies hard for approval of the controversial Keystone XL oil sands pipeline that would carry Canadian dilbit from the tar sand region to Texas refineries on the Gulf Coast.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not hesitate to give approval for another oil sands pipeline, known as the Alberta Clipper, in August 2009, which the EPA had also reviewed more favorably.

To the suits sneaking past the first nations» drummers protesting a new oil sands pipeline at Enbridge Inc.'s shareholder meeting in Calgary this week, it was easy to dismiss the demonstration as little more than a sideshow.

WASHINGTON — Advocacy organizations are as disappointed with the U.S. State Department's revamped version of its environmental evaluation of a much - disputed Canada - to - Texas oil sands pipeline as they were with its first iteration.

As we debate our entire national commitment to climate change action through the proxy of an oil sands pipeline project or two, we should remember every one of us has had a hand in getting the bitumen into that pipe.

But the two Republicans have mighty vast differences in their respective approaches to a controversial $ 7 billion oil sands pipeline seemingly destined to slice through the biological heart and lungs of their home state.

In a post for Medium, Clinton called Canadian oil sands North America's «dirtiest fuel» — despite the fact that during her leadership the U.S. State Department approved a cross-border permit for another oil sands pipeline in 2009, with the department determining that the «addition of crude oil pipeline capacity between Canada and the United States will advance a number of strategic interests of the United States.»

EA processes and decisions have been increasingly subject to lawsuits, criticism and protests, with the target of dissent being either the project (say, Kinder Morgan's controversial proposed oil sands pipeline) or the reviewing body (e.g., the National Energy Board).

Since the recent federal election there has been much discussion (and as my colleague Eugene Kung notes, an abundance of open letters) about the Liberal party's election promise to «review Canada's environmental assessment (EA) processes and introduce new, fair processes» for reviewing projects (or re-reviewing them, as in the case of major proposals like the controversial Kinder Morgan and Energy East oil sands pipeline and tankers projects).

Not exact matches

Cenovus, one of the biggest of Canada's oil sands producers, said in March that it was operating at lower capacity due to the maxing out of pipelines and other routes through which it sends heavy oil south to U.S. markets.

CALGARY, Alberta, May 2 - Suncor Energy Inc said on Wednesday that its current growth plan is not constrained by pipeline bottlenecks and it does not expect to make any further major investments in Canada's oil sands until market access improves.

Grantham also has strong views on the oil market, which isn't surprising for a devoted environmentalist who participated in Keystone pipeline protests and has called for the death of the «tar sands.»

-- One pipeline would carry up to 525,000 barrels a day of oil sands products west to Kitimat for export.

Labor unions have pushed for approval of the pipeline, saying it would create thousands of construction jobs, while environmentalists opposed it because it would increase greenhouse gas emissions from Canada's oil sands.

The Panel excluded any discussion of the environmental impacts of oil sands development, although they did allow the consideration of increased oil prices generated by the pipeline on the taxes and royalties associated with forecast future oil sands production.

The Northern Gateway project consists of two pipelines (one to ship oil west, the other to import lighter oil products used to dilute oil sands bitumen) and a marine terminal.

The pipeline would connect Canada's tar sands with refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast that specialize in processing heavy crude oil.

As it is currently planned the twin pipeline will carry 525,000 barrels of bitumen a day from the oil sands west to a terminal in Kitimat on the B.C. coast, where it could be shipped to Asian refineries, as well as refined oil products used to dilute the bitumen flowing east.

The pipeline is critical to Canada, which needs infrastructure in place to export its growing oil sands production.

The Trans Mountain expansion almost triples the capacity of the existing pipeline, which is designed to carry crude from Canada's oil sands to the West Coast.

CALGARY, Alberta, May 2 (Reuters)- Suncor Energy Inc said on Wednesday that its current growth plan is not constrained by pipeline bottlenecks and it does not expect to make any further major investments in Canada's oil sands until market access improves.

March 6, 2002: Calgary - based Enbridge (TSX: ENB) announces preliminary plans for a pipeline linking the Alberta oil sands to the West Coast.

«We have existing pipeline access to accommodate all of our oil sands production.»

Analysts at Canaccord Genuity said Monday the project's $ 5.3 - bilion northern leg «is no longer a necessity» for Canadian oil sands producers, thanks to the sudden rise of crude - carrying unit trains and rival pipeline schemes proposed by Enbridge Inc..

The report also counters warnings from environmentalists that the pipeline's construction would spur a huge increase in production from western Canada's tar sands, believed to be one of the biggest reserves of crude oil outside Saudi Arabia — unleashing torrents of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

The report does envision scenarios in which oil sands development is curbed by a combination of lower oil prices and a lack of pipeline capacity.

On the same day the Obama Administration put the kibosh on the Keystone XL pipeline, two engineering contracts totaling $ 12.2 billion were awarded to two U.S. companies for work in the Alberta oil sands.

Regardless of the pipeline's ultimate fate, the Keystone saga highlights the enormity of the challenge that's ahead of oil sands producers.

Oil sands players, as well as U.S. producers in North Dakota, have been clamouring for pipeline approvals, claiming that all of the political foot dragging around pipeline projects weakened pricing power and critically hampered their operations.

Indeed, just ask the oil industry itself how important new pipeline connections are to not only increasing production, but also the very commercial viability of the oil sands resource.

Ultimately, though, the State Department finds that an increase in the amount of oil moved by rail will allow new oil sands production to come on - stream whether or not new pipelines are built.

This also poses a sort of double jeopardy for Alberta's energy sector, whose industrial and political leaders have long maintained that any oil sands supply bottlenecks created by insufficient pipeline capacity would be offset by higher rail traffic.

But when the B.C. government announced this week plans to bar increases to diluted bitumen (oil sands crude) shipments while it launches a new panel study of spill research, the group Stand.earth advised Kinder Morgan investors to call their brokers because this will delay or permanently thwart the company's federally approved Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.

Add in stolid First Nations resistance to a proposed pipeline from the tar sands to Kitimat, and all these powerful pressures converge on the aptly named Second Narrows, which already has seen its oil tanker traffic rise precipitously in the past decade.

However, it's certainly incorrect to assume that the existence of single pipeline impacts all oil sands supply costs, or that not allowing it would render that oil supply unavailable at any price.

The current owner of the pipeline, American energy giant Kinder Morgan, recently expanded capacity to 300,000 barrels per day»... to transport growing volumes of product from Alberta's oil sands.»

It's possible that the potential routes for pipelines, railways, and barge transport for oil are completely exhausted and that without Keystone XL, Alberta would be left to transport oil sands by Volkswagen brigade, but somehow, despite the photographic evidence below, I find that unlikely.

Stephen Maher: Indignation over pipelines is over the top — B.C.'s concerns are valid and Ottawa has far from failed to back the oil sands.

Meanwhile, Canada has already served notice that it will intensify efforts to find different markets for oil sands crude — notably China, which could be served with a new pipeline from Alberta to the West Coast.

Even as the agreement was being hashed out, however, attention was already turning to a burst pipeline at Nexen's Long Lake oil sands site that spilled 31,000 barrels of bitumen, sand and salty water into the surrounding muskeg.

Prime Minister Harper once remarked it was a no brainer for the Keystone XL pipeline to connect Alberta oil sand product to supply U.S. markets.

A few years ago an economic case could have been made to break ground on a major new pipeline project from the oil sands, but that time has now come and gone.

Kinder Morgan is an oil pipeline, meaning it serves customers who want to transport their products from the tar sands to international markets.

Murphy, who is a right - wing ideologue, also writes a turgid column for the pro-business National Post, where he rails against environmentalists on global warming, champions the oil sands and pipelines, and protests any effort to fight climate change.

The Pembina Institute argues the pipeline would enable oil sands companies to get a better price at U.S. Gulf refineries, sending a market signal to increase production.