Canada Approves Reversal of Ontario Oil Pipeline

[KRonn]

http://www.foxbusiness.com/news/2012/07/27/canada-approves-reversal-ontario-oil-pipeline/


Canada Approves Reversal of Ontario Oil Pipeline

Published July 27, 2012
Dow Jones Newswires

CALGARY, Alberta--The Canadian government on Friday approved Enbridge Inc.'s (ENB) proposal to reverse the flow of its Line 9 oil pipeline from Sarnia to Westover in Ontario.
The reversal will allow Enbridge customer Imperial Oil Ltd. (IMO) to feed its Nanticoke refinery with cheaper crude oil stocks from western Canada.

It is also the first stage in Enbridge's plan to reverse the Line 9 pipeline all the way to Montreal, so that refineries there, including one operated by Suncor Energy Inc. (SU), could also replace their current higher-cost imported crude oil feedstocks with western Canadian oil.
Read: List of North American Pipeline Build-Out Projects

"The pipeline flow reversal decision recognizes our government's efforts to expand and diversify Canada's energy markets, and that includes improved pipeline access to Canada's west and east coasts," Canada's federal Labor Minister Lisa Raitt said at a press conference Friday.

Some environmental groups and citizens had opposed the reversal at public hearings in May, saying they didn't want the pipeline's reversal to support the growth of the oil sands industry in Western Canada. Environmentalists are critical of oil sands production in Alberta because of its higher greenhouse gas emissions.

The National Energy Board, Canada's federal energy regulator, added 15 conditions to its approval of the Line 9 reversal, mostly to improve pipeline safety.

Enbridge said in May the full Line 9 reversal to Montreal could ship up to 240,000 barrels a day by early 2014. 

[Jacob]

Enbridge certainly has created a lot of brand awareness recently.

[Neil]

A devastating defeat for enviro-faggots.

[Jacob]

Is it?

Has there been concerns about the reversal of Line 9? Is it related to the Northern Gateway pipeline in any way?

[KRonn]

Hey, you Canucks are making some good choices to lessen the dependence of foreign oil/gas. The US is drilling huge amounts of natural gas, probably exporting to Canada. N gas prices are low here, and more and more electirical plants are converting to cheaper, plentiful gas.

The US is even producing more oil, on private land or on land that companies got leases for years ago, took time to gear up, and are now ramping up production. US was exporitng gasoline, even as prices were going up, though I think that's changed some since some refineries have shut down due to envrio regs. The US is tapping into oil reserves that were too expensive probably a decade or so ago, and now the US has a rather huge amount of reserves of oil and gas.

Brazil has hit huge oil reserves. I don't know the impact but it's one of the larger finds. 

But the thing is, I wonder if and/or when this will affect imports from the big fossil fuel exporters in the Mid East, Africa or elsewhere?

[Neil]

Is it?

Has there been concerns about the reversal of Line 9? Is it related to the Northern Gateway pipeline in any way?

Line 9 goes in the other direction.  Northern Gateway is something else.

Enviro groups are unhappy, so that's a victory for us.

[Razgovory]

Is it?

Has there been concerns about the reversal of Line 9? Is it related to the Northern Gateway pipeline in any way?

Line 9 goes in the other direction.  Northern Gateway is something else.

Enviro groups are unhappy, so that's a victory for us.

The Indians?

[dps]

Is it?

Has there been concerns about the reversal of Line 9? Is it related to the Northern Gateway pipeline in any way?

From the opening post:

Some environmental groups and citizens had opposed the reversal at public hearings in May, saying they didn't want the pipeline's reversal to support the growth of the oil sands industry in Western Canada. Environmentalists are critical of oil sands production in Alberta because of its higher greenhouse gas emissions.

[crazy canuck]

Is it?

Has there been concerns about the reversal of Line 9? Is it related to the Northern Gateway pipeline in any way?

Some enviornmentalists oppose anything that will facilitate the transport of oil out of Alberta regardless of whether such transportation could be done safely on the grounds that anything that facilitates exploitation of the oil sands is bad.

[MadImmortalMan]

If the pipeline is already there and in use, why do they need approval to make the oil flow the other direction?

[crazy canuck]

If the pipeline is already there and in use, why do they need approval to make the oil flow the other direction?

There are a couple of issues going on here.

First Enbridge proposes to increase the amount being transported through the pipeline.  At the moment it is apparently approved for low flow which apparently has less risk.

The other major issue is what can be sent through the pipeline - the real political hot potato.  As already mentioned in this thread there is a considerable enviornmental movement which opposes anything which would allow the shipment of heavy crude from the oil sands in Alberta.  The current approval does allow for heavy crude.  According to news reports if Enbridge wishes to use the pipeline for that purpose they will need to apply for a different permit.