No. Oil and gas are very hard to ship. Canadian oil is of heavy type which most of the world doesn’t use. Gas needs LNG terminals and we simply haven’t built. EU has been urging Canada to build some in Quebec and Maritimes so they can reduce dependence on Russia. Most of the pipelines go to the US south for refining - in Louisiana and Texas. Canadian producers have no choice but to sell to them, at whatever they want to pay. That’s why Alberta was bitching and moaning about building the pipeline to BC so that they can get a better price for their heavy oil elsewhere and Trudeau spent billions to appease them but that pipeline’s been in limbo.
Tank trucks exist, they’re just more expensive, which is why pipelines have been on the agenda. We also have upgraders that make heavy oil light - I’ve seen some desulfering plants in person (yes, I’m in this picture, if only geographically). It’s a distillation away from being petrol (and heavy/heating oil and asphalt), and the main cost of shipping is petrol, so the economic case is really just driven by the need for it at the other end.
Meanwhile, in Ontario a part crosses the border multiple times on it’s way to being generally saleable as a car, and would rack up 25% every time as the policy is currently proposed. You’re right, Alberta will be in the shitter economically, but we’re not the most vulnerable, let alone the most vulnerable by far.
Two problems with your suggestion: 1)not enough truck drivers, nor trucks to move that kind of volume (this has existed for nearly 2 decades and getting worse - google it). 2) refining CAPACITY isn’t sufficient or they would already be doing what you’re suggesting. Upgraders, refiners are UBER EXPENSIVE to build, and NO CAPITALIST is investing in new refining capacity for the last 10 years. This is why most of the refining is done where it’s already built.
It all depends on upgrader capacity, port/ship capacity and, above all, what the actual profit margins are and how much of a loss our companies can take for how long.
If you want to do that research, please do share. I might just myself.
Roads are basically free to use. It will eventually mean more wear and tear for the government to pay for, though.
The way you phrased that, I’d like to point out that I’m on board with transitioning away from fossil fuels, along with the vast majority of knowledgeable people.
You must live somewhere with toll roads. They’re not a thing in Alberta. There’s not even an extra vehicle tax here. Traffic is a pure externality to someone like Encore.
I can’t say for sure for what the whole route to wherever would look like. Like I told the other person, research on it would be welcome.
No. Oil and gas are very hard to ship. Canadian oil is of heavy type which most of the world doesn’t use. Gas needs LNG terminals and we simply haven’t built. EU has been urging Canada to build some in Quebec and Maritimes so they can reduce dependence on Russia. Most of the pipelines go to the US south for refining - in Louisiana and Texas. Canadian producers have no choice but to sell to them, at whatever they want to pay. That’s why Alberta was bitching and moaning about building the pipeline to BC so that they can get a better price for their heavy oil elsewhere and Trudeau spent billions to appease them but that pipeline’s been in limbo.
Tank trucks exist, they’re just more expensive, which is why pipelines have been on the agenda. We also have upgraders that make heavy oil light - I’ve seen some desulfering plants in person (yes, I’m in this picture, if only geographically). It’s a distillation away from being petrol (and heavy/heating oil and asphalt), and the main cost of shipping is petrol, so the economic case is really just driven by the need for it at the other end.
Meanwhile, in Ontario a part crosses the border multiple times on it’s way to being generally saleable as a car, and would rack up 25% every time as the policy is currently proposed. You’re right, Alberta will be in the shitter economically, but we’re not the most vulnerable, let alone the most vulnerable by far.
Two problems with your suggestion: 1)not enough truck drivers, nor trucks to move that kind of volume (this has existed for nearly 2 decades and getting worse - google it). 2) refining CAPACITY isn’t sufficient or they would already be doing what you’re suggesting. Upgraders, refiners are UBER EXPENSIVE to build, and NO CAPITALIST is investing in new refining capacity for the last 10 years. This is why most of the refining is done where it’s already built.
It all depends on upgrader capacity, port/ship capacity and, above all, what the actual profit margins are and how much of a loss our companies can take for how long.
If you want to do that research, please do share. I might just myself.
How many tanker trucks you want clogging roads?
Roads are basically free to use. It will eventually mean more wear and tear for the government to pay for, though.
The way you phrased that, I’d like to point out that I’m on board with transitioning away from fossil fuels, along with the vast majority of knowledgeable people.
Roads aren’t basically free to use. Where the fuck did you come up with that?
You must live somewhere with toll roads. They’re not a thing in Alberta. There’s not even an extra vehicle tax here. Traffic is a pure externality to someone like Encore.
I can’t say for sure for what the whole route to wherever would look like. Like I told the other person, research on it would be welcome.