Province’s oil curtailments means layoffs

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by The Elkster

No refinery = no oilsands mine. Eventually they'll come around as there is still profits to be made and a limit to the number of opportunities in stable regions globally. I'd be supportive of some gov't loan guarantees to help lube the wheels as they do stand to gain a lot in the long run.

I'm not debating the need for PL's but PL's alone are not going to guarantee max value for ABer's. And no matter what we do and how many buyers we have access to (for crude or refined product) market forces will always ebb and flow so any development is going to look bad a times and a money machine at others. Supply and demand is everchanging. Gluts can turn to shortages in a very short time and vice versa.

Pipelines connected to different markets will in fact lead to maximum value for our products. It's called a market. Whether you get 20$ or 60$ per barrel is dependent on the global market. This is what Alberta is missing out on selling to one country/consumer.

[AndrewM]

I get where the complaint of using foreign workers stems from. My issue was with the temporary foreign workover program. The majority of those people wanted to live here but their entire families couldn't come with them so all the money they made was sent to their families back in their home country. If the whole family could have come, all the money could have stayed here.

[The Elkster]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

The Government paying for/backing projects that make no economic sense is not helping the province.

Good read.

https://business.financialpost.com/c...-glut-solution

Yep now is about the worst time to justify the economics of anything oil. Many have questioned the economics of the PL's as well. The world has plenty of oil and there is no company or country pounding on the door at Canadian ports begging to pay top dollar for our crude. But we know we have to have a longer term plan to keep our options open as things change right. Much could change by the time a large project is completed.

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by The Elkster

Yep now is about the worst time to justify the economics of anything oil. Many have questioned the economics of the PL's as well. The world has plenty of oil and there is no company or country pounding on the door at Canadian ports begging to pay top dollar for our crude. But we know we have to have a longer term plan to keep our options open as things change right. Much could change by the time a large project is completed.

The only people questioning the economics of our pipelines are those who don't care about the future prosperity of this country.

[The Elkster]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

Pipelines connected to different markets will in fact lead to maximum value for our products. It's called a market. Whether you get 20$ or 60$ per barrel is dependent on the global market. This is what Alberta is missing out on selling to one country/consumer.

I totally agree. But getting max value FOR a product is not the same as getting max value OUT of a resource (ie crude). Assuming good access to market for either product. Selling crude only provides jobs and taxes on a fraction of the value chain. Local mining, upgrading, refining and selling refined product at max value is the ultimate in maximizing resource value for ABer's.

[AndrewM]

Originally Posted by The Elkster

I totally agree. But getting max value FOR a product is not the same as getting max value OUT of a resource (ie crude). Assuming good access to market for either product. Selling crude only provides jobs and taxes on a fraction of the value chain. Local mining, upgrading, refining and selling refined product at max value is the ultimate in maximizing resource value for ABer's.

Sounds great unfortunately it isn't very economic for companies to have refineries and we still need pipelines to market.

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by The Elkster

I totally agree. But getting max value FOR a product is not the same as getting max value OUT of a resource (ie crude). Assuming good access to market for either product. Selling crude only provides jobs and taxes on a fraction of the value chain. Local mining, upgrading, refining and selling refined product at max value is the ultimate in maximizing resource value for ABer's.

Read up on the economics of building new refineries. If there was a bunch of money to be made you would see new refineries being built all over the world.

The economics of developing our natural resource is much better than that of building refineries, assuming we could get fair market value for the product. That's Albertas advantage. Not refineries.

[The Elkster]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

The only people questioning the economics of our pipelines are those who don't care about the future prosperity of this country.

That just isn't true and its needlessly divisive. Some just have different beliefs in what constitutes prosperity and long term good. Some people are happy to give up some creature comforts and stay closer to home to reduce their footprint others want to travel and have the big house. Neither is wrong per say. Should we only measure societies success in terms of money? What if we have lots of money and good paid medical and balance budget but the environment is unlivable in future? What if we have lots of money while pumping hard on oil but then the oil runs out and we're left with nothing in the future? What if the PL goes through and there is a major bitumen spill in the LM in the future? I may not always agree with the opposing view but I can understand many of the concerns and I always try to consider them rather than laugh them off. Compromise is a thing. Lets not go down the American political road.

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by The Elkster

That just isn't true and its needlessly divisive. Some just have different beliefs in what constitutes prosperity and long term good. Some people are happy to give up some creature comforts and stay closer to home to reduce their footprint others want to travel and have the big house. Neither is wrong per say. Should we only measure societies success in terms of money? What if we have lots of money and good paid medical and balance budget but the environment is unlivable in future? What if we have lots of money while pumping hard on oil but then the oil runs out and we're left with nothing in the future? What if the PL goes through and there is a major bitumen spill in the LM in the future? I may not always agree with the opposing view but I can understand many of the concerns and I always try to consider them rather than laugh them off. Compromise is a thing. Lets not go down the American political road.

Sounds like you've been listening to David Suzuki!
I'm out of this discussion, thanks for the entertainment.

[AndrewM]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

Sounds like you've been listening to David Suzuki!
I'm out of this discussion, thanks for the entertainment.

I am out too. Too many what ifs and no longer discussing facts.

[ESOXangler]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

The Government paying for/backing projects that make no economic sense is not helping the province.

Good read.

https://business.financialpost.com/c...-glut-solution

Bah there's always a market for quality. Ther refinery I work at ships products to anywhere from Japan to Cincinnati. All profit too.

[AndrewM]

Originally Posted by ESOXangler

Bah there's always a market for quality. Ther refinery I work at ships products to anywhere from Japan to Cincinnati. All profit too.

What do you mean by all profit?

[Scott h]

Originally Posted by The Elkster

Why hurt the very people that are clearly supportive of the oil industry and who's support we need to get a line through??? Would it not make more sense to charge more tax on the refined products going out to BC and actually maybe hit the people who are against the PL? Like an environmental PL maintenance fee... Be better if it could be focus on the lower mainland where most of the opposition is. Maybe add the fee specific to lines feeding the LM. Really drive the point home.

That's the point. It wouldn't make any difference to the guy working which province his income tax goes to. It certainly would make a difference to BC or Quebec if workers from that province paid their income tax to Alberta instead of them. They would lose a bundle of cash. Last number I heard it was something north of 25000 workers come into Alberta, work, collect a pay check and then give up their income tax to provinces that are at odds with Alberta. In fact with all the bad press it amazes me that companies hire out of province workers at all.

[RandyBoBandy]

How is this thing still going??

[Big Grey Wolf]

The solution to Alberta's problem is "Partial Upgrading" to 19 API oil. You do not need any expensive condensate, you get one Free $10 billion pipeline you do not need to build. You can free up a diluent pipeline such a Cochin line, reverse flow and pump oil to Sarnia refineries. Win-Win all the way!

[ESOXangler]

Originally Posted by AndrewM

What do you mean by all profit?

They're not taking a loss to sell. No discount either. Diesel is diesel and gas is gas.

I can understand how my comment could be misconstrued but that wasn't my intent.