Latest news with #TransMountainPipeline
Vancouver Sun
5 days ago
- Business
- Vancouver Sun
NDP on TMX: We didn't want it. They built it. So let's use its full potential
VICTORIA — The B.C. NDP government responded with mostly discouraging words this week to growing national speculation about a new pipeline to transport the country's oil to the West Coast. Prime Minister Mark Carney explored the idea of 'an oil pipeline to tidewater' with industry executives in Calgary on Sunday and with provincial and territorial leaders in Saskatoon on Monday. Ontario Premier Doug Ford described the pipeline as 'absolutely critical' to weaning Canada off excessive dependence on the U.S. market. Stay on top of the latest real estate news and home design trends. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Westcoast Homes will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith spoke of a 'grand bargain' to deliver a 'million-barrel-a-day pipeline to the northwest B.C. coast' and '$20 billion a year in revenues' to government coffers. Then there were the comments of B.C. deputy premier Niki Sharma, who represented Premier David Eby at the Saskatchewan meeting. Asked point blank if the New Democrats would be 'OK with fast-tracking' a pipeline to transport Alberta bitumen to Prince Rupert or Kitimat, Sharma replied: 'Well, you know what, at this stage, you've heard the premier say — we have a difference of opinion about whether or not a bitumen pipeline should go in … the northern part of the province.' Besides, said Sharma: 'There's no (pipeline) proponent at this time, there's no project that is really there to look at. Let's focus on those projects that are ready, with strong investment and alignment.' She's right that there is no current proposal for such a pipeline. One may be forthcoming after Carney's meeting with industry executives and Smith's lobbying on carbon capture projects in Alberta. In a followup statement, Sharma added: 'We are focusing on these shovel-ready projects, not theoretical projects with no proponents. There is also an existing, underused pipeline that Canadian taxpayers paid $34 billion for, with capacity to spare. She meant the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion or TMX, which the New Democrats vowed to fight 'with every tool in the tool box' and failed to stop. Eby also made a disparaging reference to TMX at the recent conference of Western premiers. 'That pipeline is not at full capacity right now,' said Eby. 'Why wouldn't we ensure that that public infrastructure was fully used first before dividing ourselves on a project where there is no proponent.' Eby and Sharma exaggerate the degree to which the TMX is 'underused … with capacity to spare' after one year of operation. The Canadian Energy Regulator reports that the line has operated at about 80 per cent of its 890,000 barrel-per-day capacity since coming online in May 2024. Moreover, the performance improved in the first quarter of this year. 'The pipeline ran at about 85 per cent capacity during the three-month period ending in March,' Chris Varcoe reported in the Calgary Herald this week. The Globe and Mail's Emma Garney further reported that the line 'hit a high of 90 per cent' in March. The demand is such that Trans Mountain has already begun test work to boost capacity by up to 10 per cent by the end of 2026. A longer-term project would add pumping stations to boost it to 1.14 million barrels a day, later in the decade. So much for the B.C. NDP notion that the $34 billion pipeline is languishing through insufficient use. But rather than consult the country's energy regulator or the national newspapers, perhaps Eby and Sharma were taking their lead from Steven Guilbeault. Guilbeault served as environment minister in the Justin Trudeau Liberal government, where he flourished as a fan of carbon taxation and an opponent of fossil fuel expansion. Carney reassigned him to the Canadian Heritage Department at about the same time as the PM reduced the carbon tax to zero and began talking up the need to expand resource production. It didn't stop the new heritage minister from wandering outside his lane last month to announce that Canada has no need of more pipelines because TMX was operating at '40 per cent capacity' and the world was approaching 'peak oil production.' In the first instance, Guilbeault clearly didn't know what he was talking about and in the second, there's much room to debate about when peak oil will be reached. Still, there is a capacity issue regarding the TMX terminal in Burnaby, though not one that involves the pipeline. The terminal is already busy with tankers, having loaded some 741 in the first quarter of the year at a rate that fell just short of one a day in March. But tankers are unable to load fully because of the risk of grounding in Burrard Inlet. The New Democrats have recognized the limitation and come out in support of a federal proposal to dredge Burrard Inlet to a depth that full tankers can traverse. Leading the call is Energy Minister Adrian Dix. As NDP leader, Dix's snap decision to oppose TMX in the midst of the 2013 election campaign contributed to his loss to Christy Clark. Now that the line is running, Dix supports maximizing its use. 'We built it. We paid for it. We should use it,' he says, taking a realistic view of a project that cost him much. vpalmer@
CBC
16-05-2025
- Business
- CBC
China emerging as top customer for Canadian oil shipped via Trans Mountain Pipeline
China has emerged as the top customer for Canadian oil shipped on the expanded Trans Mountain Pipeline, ship tracking data shows, as a U.S. trade war has shifted crude flows in the year since the pipeline started operating. China's new interest in Canadian oil comes as U.S. President Donald Trump's trade war has strained relations between longtime allies Washington and Ottawa. It also reflects the impact of U.S. sanctions on crude from countries like Russia and Venezuela. Canada is the world's fourth-largest oil producer, but its main oil-producing province of Alberta is landlocked with limited access to tidewater ports. That means the bulk of Canadian oil — about four million barrels per day or 90 per cent — is exported to the U.S. via pipelines that run north-south. The $34-billion Trans Mountain Pipeline carries oil to the Pacific Coast where it can be loaded onto tankers for export. The expansion, which began operations on May 1, 2024, tripled the pipeline's capacity to 890,000 barrels per day and opened opportunities for Canadian oil along the U.S. West Coast and in Asian markets. Canada seeks to diversify exports While oil is currently exempt from U.S. tariffs, Canada has sought to diversify its exports due to brief U.S. duties on its crude and Trump's threats to annex the country. Canada shipped about 207,000 barrels per day (bpd) on average to China since the Trans Mountain expansion ramped up to full operations in June last year, ship tracking data on Kpler showed. That was a huge increase from an average of about 7,000 bpd in the decade to 2023. The U.S. took about 173,000 bpd from the pipeline in the same period. China's top spot as the TMX buyer defies some early expectations that the U.S. would be the biggest buyer of crude shipped via the pipeline, which is owned by the Canadian government. Many expected its barrels to land on the West Coast versus Asia, which has access to cheaper Russian oil. However, Trump's protectionist policies have in recent months made Canada more attractive to Chinese buyers, said Philippe Rheault, director of the China Institute at the University of Alberta. China has also been reluctant to be over-reliant on Russian energy supplies, Rheault said. "A lot of China's refineries are also mindful of U.S. sanctions, and so have been trying to diversify away from oil from Venezuela and other places," he said. Shifting flows In the year since the pipeline's expansion, Canadian exports of crude to countries other than the U.S. rose nearly 60 per cent to an annual record of about 183,000 bpd in 2024, according to Statistics Canada. Other nations taking Canadian crude include South Korea, Japan, India, Brunei and Taiwan, ship tracking data showed. In recent months, several Canadian politicians have called for new pipelines to coastal export terminals to reduce dependency on the U.S. But regulatory, financial and political hurdles continue to stifle that development. TMX was about 77 per cent full on average in 2024, according to documents it filed with the Canada Energy Regulator, below the 83 per cent the company forecast, in part due to the high tolls the operator has been charging to make up for cost overruns during construction. The pipeline is expected to be 84 per cent full this year, and ramp up to 92 per cent in 2027. Its operator, Trans Mountain Corp, has said it is looking at expansion projects that could add between 200,000 and 300,000 bpd of capacity to the system. Given China's increased desire to find new, stable supplies of crude, the bulk of any additional capacity on TMX is likely to go to Asia rather than the U.S. West Coast, said Skip York, chief energy strategist with Turner, Mason & Company.
CTV News
16-05-2025
- Business
- CTV News
With U.S. trade war, China now top buyer for Canadian crude on Trans Mountain pipeline
The Westridge Marine Terminal at the end point of the Trans Mountain Pipeline System in Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada, on Sunday, Jan. 26, 2025. A project to triple the capacity of the Trans Mountain Pipeline still has a high value after massive cost overruns to build it, Canada's government spending watchdog concluded.
CBC
25-04-2025
- Business
- CBC
Pipelines have become an election issue. What exactly is Ottawa's role to play?
Through a fluke of timing, the federal election coincides almost perfectly with the one-year anniversary of the government-owned Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion coming online — at a time when public sentiment around pipelines is relatively positive. The two campaign front-runners are both emphasizing energy infrastructure, driven by U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs and threats of annexing Canada. Both leaders are pitching some version of an energy corridor, though Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has more directly emphasized pipelines, specifically, while Liberal Leader Mark Carney has more broadly pitched Canada as a " superpower" in both clean and conventional energy. Both of the parties leading in the polls want to kick-start the economy, reduce Canada's reliance on U.S. oil and drastically speed up the regulatory process for major projects like pipelines. If the next government wants to put more pipelines in the ground, experts say that could include different strategies such as taking an ownership stake in one, or reducing red tape for private companies. Whichever party forms government next week will also have to make a decision on the Trans Mountain project, including whether to continue owning the pipeline or put the Crown corporation up for sale. Hands-on approach For now, the parallels between the Liberal and Conservative platforms speaks to a broader acknowledgement that Canada needs to be more involved in building energy infrastructure, said economist Kent Fellows. In some ways, he said, this shift represents a return to the way things used to be. Before the 1970s, most large, linear infrastructure in Canada was built with direct government involvement, from the Trans Canada Pipeline to the Canadian Pacific Main Line to the Trans Canada Highway. After that, he said, there was a roughly 50-year period in which the private sector stepped up and built major projects without much direct government involvement, he said. But as evidenced by the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion project, which Ottawa purchased to get it over the finish line, that period seems to be over. Its original owner suspended construction in the face of regulatory delays and court challenges from First Nations and the province of B.C. Fellows, an assistant economics professor at the University of Calgary School of Public Policy, said it's not clear yet if the shift in government direction is a "good thing or a bad thing." "But that's sort of where we are now with Canada's inability to attract private investment for these pieces of transportation infrastructure." In the end, the Trans Mountain expansion project took 12 years and about $34 billion to develop and build. The expansion added 590,000 barrels per day of shipping capacity to the pipeline, which carries crude oil from Alberta to the B.C. coast. February polling data from the Angus Reid Institute suggests about half of 2,012 Canadian respondents think the federal government isn't doing enough to build pipeline capacity, and two-thirds said they would support the renewal of the Energy East pipeline, which was terminated in 2017. Of course, that doesn't mean everyone in the country is on board. Writing in the Globe and Mail, for example, Simon Fraser University professor Thomas Gunton said a renewed pipeline push would be a " costly blunder," citing concerns about the cost of new construction and projections of declining oil demand in the years ahead. He also noted that it would likely take at least four or five years to build a pipeline, at which point Trump would be out of office. Uncertainty the biggest investment obstacle For companies looking to build pipelines, however, their main investment hurdle is uncertainty, said Andrew Leach, an economics and law professor at the University of Alberta. Companies need to make upfront investments in projects that hinge on regulatory decisions that may not come until years down the road, he said, pointing to the Northern Gateway Pipeline, which was first proposed in 2004 and was ultimately scuttled in 2016. "It's a big bet," said Leach. One solution, he said, would be to do more broad-stroke assessments upfront to decide what kind of infrastructure the country needs, before getting too far into the details. Leach likened it to a household decision to buy a new car, where a family would typically agree that they need the car first before securing a loan and deciding on a paint colour. "If you can get through that, then you're partway down the field, so to speak … and you've taken away some of that red-black risk that's there for companies," said Leach. Still, both economists cautioned that at a certain point, trying to rush through project approvals could lead to diminishing returns, and open the door to challenges from First Nations groups and landowners. "If you give the impression that you're short-circuiting the checks and balances, then you'll have people who become opposed to it," said Leach. Pipeline for sale? Of course, the most direct way for the federal government to be involved in energy infrastructure is by taking ownership of a project — as was the case with the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion, which came online May 1, 2024. Some experts say the pipeline likely won't fetch its full sticker price of $34 billion, but could be worth about half that. That would be an important infusion of cash considering the country's growing deficit. While the plan has always been for Ottawa to sell off the pipeline, Trans Mountain CEO Mark Maki told CBC News in March that perhaps it could remain under government ownership longer as a "national company." Ottawa could not only collect annual profits, but use the Crown corporation to build other major pipelines or other energy infrastructure. "There's no reason that you have to sell, and if, in fact, there's development that needs to take place for the good of the nation, it may well serve the country to keep it longer," said Maki, in a March interview on the sidelines of the CERAWeek energy conference in Houston. "That's something I would expect the political folks will be looking at as they think about corridors for infrastructure." While public support for pipelines is growing right now, the next government would also need to corral differing opinions about whether building new ones is a good idea at all. Kevin Birn, an analyst at S&P Global, said Canada could need new pipeline capacity by 2026 if oil production continues to grow at its current pace, though he noted some capacity can also be added by enhancing existing infrastructure. Leach, with the University of Alberta, said one additional pipeline could be useful as an energy security move to ship oil east without crossing into the U.S. With one pipeline already under government ownership, the next prime minister will have no shortage of decisions to make about how to build energy infrastructure in the best interests of Canada — all while grappling with the most difficult part of governing: what events are sure to come next.
Yahoo
18-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
China Pivots From US to Canada for More Oil as Trade War Worsens
(Bloomberg) -- Chinese refiners are importing record amounts of Canadian crude after slashing purchases of US oil by roughly 90% amid escalating trade tensions. Trump Signs Executive Orders on Federal Purchasing, Office Space How Did This Suburb Figure Out Mass Transit? Why the Best Bike Lanes Always Get Blamed LA County Floats Leaner Budget Burdened by Fire and Legal Costs DOGE Places Entire Staff of Federal Homelessness Agency on Leave A pipeline expansion in Western Canada that opened less than a year ago has presented China and other East Asian oil importers with expanded access to the vast crude reserves in Alberta's oilsands region. Chinese crude imports from the port at the pipeline terminus near Vancouver soared to an unprecedented 7.3 million barrels in March and are on pace to exceed that figure this month, according to data from Vortexa Ltd., which tracks waterborne oil and natural-gas shipments. Meanwhile, Chinese imports of US oil have collapsed to 3 million barrels a month from a peak of 29 million in June. The shift in North American crude flows to China — the world's biggest crude importer — is yet another example of the economic and strategic disruptions engendered by US President Donald Trump's moves to reshape global trade relations. To be clear, China's appetite for Canadian crude began to grow when the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion known as TMX began funneling Albertan oil to British Columbia's Pacific coast in May. The trend only accelerated after Trump took office with a declared intent to impose tariffs on China and others. 'Given the trade war, its unlikely for China to import more US oil,' Wenran Jiang, president of the Canada-China Energy & Environment Forum, said in a telephone interview. 'They are not going to bank on Russian alone or Middle Eastern alone. Anything from Canada will be welcome news.' Although Chinese oil imports from North America are dwarfed by those the Middle East and Russia, Canada's oil sands provide one of the few sources of relatively cheap, dense, high-sulfur grades of crude that many of China's most-advanced refineries are equipped to process. For Asian refiners, Middle East crude with similar characteristics — such as Iraq's Basrah Heavy — are expensive relative to Alberta oil given the strength in the region's Dubai benchmark. GM's Mary Barra Has to Make a $35 Billion EV Bet Work in Trump's America Trade Tensions With China Clear Path for Salt-Powered Batteries How Mar-a-Lago Memberships Explain Trump's Tariff Obsession Trump Is Firing the Wrong People, on Purpose The Beauty Salon Recession Indicator ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Sign in to access your portfolio
