|
| Author |
Message |
Oldtimer
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 13415
Location: Northeast Montana
|
 Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 9:51 am Post subject: More on the Transcanada oil pipeline |
 |
|
Heres another article on the Canadian oil line built to the Gulf Coast...Sounds like it will come right thru my county...Probably following closely to the Northern Border gas pipeline- that already exists....
It also looks like this is going right thru/or very close to much of the oil/gas producing areas of the state.....It also cross's both the Missouri and the Yellowstone Rivers that could easily provide the amount of water needed if someone decided to build a couple of new refineries...
| Quote: |
Planned oil pipeline to cut across Montana
750K barrels of crude could be shipped daily to Gulf Coast refineries
By JAN FALSTAD
Of The Gazette Staff
TransCanada Corp. is planning to build a 36-inch underground pipeline through Eastern Montana and five other states to carry Canadian crude to U.S. refineries along the Gulf Coast of Texas.
The 1,940-mile pipeline project must first obtain land easements as well as approval from the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
No formal announcement has been made, but Gov. Brian Schweitzer told The Gazette on Wednesday that TransCanada wants to finish the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline by the end of next year.
"This is a big dog. It's a $7 billion pipeline. It will haul a lot of crude oil," Schweitzer said. The pipeline would originate at Hardisty, Alberta, run southeast through Saskatchewan and enter Montana north of Malta. The pipeline would be built through six Montana counties: Phillips, Valley, McCone, Dawson, Prairie and Fallon. Then it would cut into South Dakota and go through Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas.
TransCanada is a publicly traded energy company that employs about 3,500 people and earns half its revenues from pipelines and half from energy production. Canada is the eighth-largest oil supplier in the world, with about 2.5 million barrels of production daily. Several pipeline projects are being proposed to haul the oil south to U.S. refineries.
Spokeswoman Shela Shapiro in Calgary, Alberta, said the Keystone XL project is in its early stages and is driven, in part, by the instability in world crude production and pricing.
"Interest in this process by the Alberta producers and Gulf Coast refiners is reflected in the demand for stable, secure supplies of crude oil," Shapiro said.
Exact routes and the terms and conditions of the pipeline will be decided in the coming months, she said. The pipeline would be capable of shipping 750,000 barrels of crude per day from the massive Canadian tar sands fields.
Evan Barrett, the governor's economic-development director, said TransCanada officials already are out surveying Montana land and talking to landowners.
"The odds are extraordinarily high that this will come to fruition," Barrett said. "We don't see any speed bumps."
However, first TransCanada has to navigate FERC's complicated permitting process.
Under FERC rules, Barrett said TransCanada cannot promise any companies access to the pipeline. It can only solicit bids from interested suppliers in the north and refiners to the south.
"When they get enough interest to make it an economically viable project, they can apply to FERC," he said. "So, it's kind of like an auction."
The application to FERC for what is called an "open season" permit should occur in the next few months, Schweitzer said.
About 250 to 300 miles of the pipeline would run through Montana.
In Kansas, the Keystone XL pipeline would tie into a portion of another pipeline planned from Kansas to Cushing, Okla. Then the TransCanada's pipeline would continue through Oklahoma and end up near crude terminals in Nederland, Texas. These terminals serve refineries in Port Arthur, Texas.
Montana refineries already have their supplies contracted, Barrett said, but there is nothing preventing them from bidding on access to crude from the Keystone XL pipeline.
Other key details, such as the costs of building the Montana leg of the pipeline, the number of construction jobs and the value of tax benefits to the state and local governments, aren't known yet. TransCanada is controlling the release of information, Schweitzer said. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Liberty Belle
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 1659
Location: northwestern South Dakota
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Do you have a link for this story OT? This pipeline will be coming right through our county and we haven't been able to find a whole lot of information on it yet. Their lobbyist told me it would be carrying 800, 000 barrels of oil a day! It would be great to be able to build a refinery somewhere around here, wouldn't it?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Oldtimer
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 13415
Location: Northeast Montana
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Liberty Belle wrote: |
| Do you have a link for this story OT? This pipeline will be coming right through our county and we haven't been able to find a whole lot of information on it yet. Their lobbyist told me it would be carrying 800, 000 barrels of oil a day! It would be great to be able to build a refinery somewhere around here, wouldn't it? |
Heres the link:
http://billingsgazette.net/articles/2008/05/08/news/state/18-oilpipeline.txt
There was a small refinery on the Missouri east of Wolf Point Mt. until a few years ago when it burned down and was never rebuilt...I think Tesoro owned it at one time....
There is definitely miles and miles of country to put one in- and available water, that I understand is needed...
I talked to a neighbor the other day- who's pasture they are apparently looking at coming thru- because he said they are already up there doing the archealogical search's (TeePee rings )......
Definitely doesn't hurt my feelings to see it come...Where they put the Northern Border gas pipeline (a 48" pipe)- unless you saw the little stakes they have up every mile or so showing where it goes- you wouldn't even know its there.....
And I think between them and Burlington Northern Santa Fe, they are the top taxpayers in the county- with both also being some of the highest wage payers.....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Silver
Rancher
Joined: 23 Mar 2005
Posts: 1352
Location: BC
|
| Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| At the risk of sounding protectionist, I sure get peeved every time I hear of another line hauling raw crude out of this country. I have a hard time believing that our illustrious politicians in Ottawa wont stand up and tell folks that that stuff doesn't leave the country 'til it's refined all the way down to it's base components. Those pipelines are carrying jobs right out of the country.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
MN Farm Girl
Member
Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Posts: 342
Location: Southwest MN
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yup, the Northern Boarder runs right through our farm and really haven't had any problems with it. Dad remembers when it was put in. In the fields where the pipe is, the plants are always greener, taller, and the corn tassels first. And the rumor around here is that some company wants to build a refinery at Elk Point, SD. But that is merely a rumor so I don't know..............
MN Farm Girl
|
|
| Back to top |
|
DaleK
Member
Joined: 02 Apr 2005
Posts: 118
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:45 pm Post subject: Reply |
|
|
| Silver wrote: |
| At the risk of sounding protectionist, I sure get peeved every time I hear of another line hauling raw crude out of this country. I have a hard time believing that our illustrious politicians in Ottawa wont stand up and tell folks that that stuff doesn't leave the country 'til it's refined all the way down to it's base components. Those pipelines are carrying jobs right out of the country. |
Silver, if you REALLY want to get peeved, look up the section of NAFTA that says Canada can't charge the Americans one penny more for Canadian oil than Canadians pay.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
QUESTION
Member
Joined: 22 Jun 2007
Posts: 616
Location: EARTH
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Oldtimer
Rancher
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 13415
Location: Northeast Montana
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
$1B pipeline will snake across Eastern Montana
Project by Canadian energy firm slated for 2010 launch
By MIKE DENNISON
Gazette State Bureau
HELENA - A Canadian energy giant announced Wednesday that it will build a nearly 300-mile stretch of oil pipeline across Eastern Montana, as part of a system to ship crude oil from Canada and other points to the Midwest and Texas.
TransCanada, based in Calgary, Alberta, said construction of the underground pipeline is scheduled to begin in 2010 and that investment in the Montana segment will top $1 billion.
Gov. Brian Schweitzer hailed the announcement as "great news," saying the pipeline will mean jobs, tax revenue, shipping access for Montana oil producers - and, ultimately, less U.S. dependence on oil from overseas.
"We are happy to participate in providing the infrastructure to bring more oil from our best trading partner to the north, to domestic refineries," he said. Schweitzer said the completed pipeline will mean $57.6 million a year in property taxes in Montana, including $13 million to $14 million each in Valley, McCone and Fallon counties.
The project is an expansion of the Keystone Pipeline system, which is owned and operated by subsidiaries of TransCanada and Conoco-Phillips.
The new pipeline will originate near Hardisty, Alberta, which is southeast of Edmonton, and head south through Saskatchewan, Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska, where it will link up with an existing pipeline system near the Kansas-Nebraska border south of Lincoln, Neb.
The project also includes a new pipeline from Cushing, Okla., to Houston and Port Arthur, Texas.
The Montana segment is proposed to begin just east of the Port of Morgan on the Saskatchewan-Montana border and run southeast near Glasgow, Circle, Fallon and Baker, before continuing into South Dakota.
The final route will be based on discussions with landowners and other "stakeholders," as well as engineering design, said TransCanada spokeswoman Cecily Dobson.
The company expects to file for the necessary permits this year and next, she said.
TransCanada said the full $7 billion project will expand capacity of the pipeline system by 500,000 barrels of oil a day. Crude oil will be shipped from Canada and other points to refineries and markets in the Midwest and Texas.
Some shippers already have committed to providing 300,000 barrels a day, and the company is holding an "open season" bidding period through Sept. 4, when oil producers in Montana and elsewhere can bid for shipping space in the pipeline.
Schweitzer's office also said there will be "a substantial number of high-quality construction jobs created for a period of time, adding an additional boost to the local and state economy."
The governor also noted that Montana is one of only a few states that have increased their oil production in recent years.
Oil production in Montana declined in 2007, from about 36 million barrels to 34.8 million barrels, but has increased from 24.7 million barrels in 2004.
TransCanada owns more than 36,000 miles of oil and gas pipelines and a dozen power plants in the United States and Canada.
http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2008/07/17/news/state/27-energy.txt |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
i would like to know how you can differenciate. Is any oil green 
No but these idioitic poloiticians would rather get oil with Iraqi blood on the barrel, you know they are concerned about the environment and since in their world it is close from iraq to the US than Canada they will save money on the fuel used to transport it. The reality is that the trans gas line will add to the US reliance on canadian oil. That won't come bhack to bite you in the butt. 