Posts Tagged ‘Canada’

The Great Oil Shuffle: study says LCFS actually raises emissions

Monday, August 16th, 2010

A study shows that LCFS implementation in the United States would create more carbon emissions.  The study— conducted by the Barr Engineering Company for NPRA— directly contradicts the argument of LCFS advocates, who claim LCFS fuels are “cleaner” and emit lower quantities of greenhouse gases than Canadian crude oil.

So how many more tons of carbon emissions could be thrown into the atmosphere at the behest of LCFS advocates?  The answer:  up to 19.1 metric tons per year!

LCFS would stop American refiners from importing Canadian oil— and the U.S. would be forced to purchase petroleum from the Middle East and other crisis-ridden areas.  Our friends to the north—the Canadians— would switch and sell oil to China.  Tankers— instead of pipelines—would then be used as the primary conveyance mechanism for petroleum.

In the ensuing “great oil shuffle”— the heavy usage of tankers would create a higher amount of greenhouse gas emissions than conventional pipeline usage. Good Canadian oil formerly consumed in U.S. markets would be shipped to non-LCFS nations.  In the process, we fall on the losing end of a strategic North American energy partnership.

It’s a game of “bait and switch” and LCFS advocates need to understand one thing:  let’s keep petroleum flowing into America from our Canadian friends.  The last thing America needs is more oil from some of the world’s most unstable regions.

Forecast for the Canadian Oil Sands: America’s Top Source of Imported Oil

Friday, May 21st, 2010

This week, IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) released a report highlighting the what-should-be-welcome reality that Canadian oil sands are expected to become America’s top source of imported oil this year, surpassing conventional Canadian oil imports and almost equaling the volume of crude received each day from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait combined.

The United States currently produces about five million barrels of oil a day and imports 10 million more—Canada accounts for about 1.9 million barrels of the daily imports and about half of it is from the oil sands. However, IHS CERA projects oil sands production growing from 1.34 million barrels a day to between 3.1 million and 5.7 million barrels a day by 2030 – which could make up as much as 36 percent of United States oil imports by 2030.

The New York Times highlights this remarkable report in a story entitled “Reliance on Oil Sands Grows Despite Environmental Risks:”

In a new report, it projects that “The uncertainty and the slowdown in drilling permits in the gulf really underscores the growing importance of Canadian oil sands, which over the last decade have gone from being a fringe energy source to being one of strategic importance,” said Daniel Yergin, an oil historian and chairman of IHS CERA. “Looking ahead, its importance is only going to get bigger.”

In a world in which so many oil-producing nations are far away, unstable or hostile to the United States, Canadian oil sands hold great political appeal.

Echoing The New York Times, Consumer Energy Alliance’s (CEA) Michael Whatley recently characterized the situation this way at the North American Energy Security Summit hosted at the Canadian Embassy in Washington, D.C.:

“Canada is our closest trading partner in the world and our most important strategic ally in the hemisphere. Energy isn’t merely incidental to that relationship; it’s fundamental to it. No nation in the world sends more energy to the United States each day than Canada. And if we expect to have even a fighting chance at reducing our nation’s dangerous dependence on far-away, unstable energy in the future, Canadian energy will have to play an even more active role in helping us get there.”

Interestingly, The New York Times reported on this same event, stating “a phalanx of Canadian diplomats took advantage of a previously planned trip to Washington to promote oil sands” and an opportunity for Alberta’s premier, Ed Stelmach to highlight “what we have to offer, which is security of supply” and “a safe stable government.”

Reporting on the CERA predictions under the headline “Tar sands will become top source of U.S. imported oil this year,” Nathanial Gronewold with E&E News adds:

While future output will depend on the investment climate and government policies, but analysts see the tar sands’ development continuing to grow as the region becomes the United States’ most important foreign source. In their high-growth scenario, researchers say oil sands could constitute 47 percent of total U.S. crude imports and become the source of fully 26 percent of all crude oil and refined products.

Gronewold continues with an overview of how innovation is improving the environmental footprint of the oil sands: 

“Innovation in oil sands has been a constant theme,” the report says. “Since its inception, the industry has made and continues to make major technological strides in optimizing resources, innovating new processes, reducing costs, increasing efficiency, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and reducing its environmental impact.” Technological progress should further lighten the burden of water pollution and other environmental concerns, the report adds.

However, despite the fact that newer and more efficient technologies have been deployed to develop the oil sands in an environmentally sensitive way, it seems that environmental groups bent on the sands’ destruction have agreed upon a strategy of releasing report after report filled with the same old tired criticisms of the oil sands. Fortunately, this broken record won’t change the truth – namely, that innovations in technology have helped reduce the sands’ carbon emissions per barrel by more than 30 percent since 1990.

Irrespective of this progress, these same groups would like to see a dangerous Low-Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) scheme passed in the United States – a policy that would severely restrict American access to secure and affordable sources of energy, and through that, result in higher prices at the pump for U.S. consumers, and a deeper, more dangerous dependence on some of the most unstable and unfriendly regions of the world to keep our economy running.

Given that more than 20 states across the country are currently considering LCFS policies, the Canadians don’t appear all that interested in waiting around to see what happens next. In fact, plans are already under way for pipelines to be built from Alberta to Canada’s west coast for shipments to Asia and Ed Stelmach, Alberta’s premier, recently flew to China with a trade mission to Shanghai, Beijing and Harbin.

According to the Montreal Gazette’s recent story on Stelmach’s visit, titled “Alberta welcomes more Chinese investment in oilsands”:

When Premier Ed Stelmach said in Shanghai this week, “our doors are open,” it was a clear invitation for more Chinese investment in Alberta’s oilsands. In an interview Tuesday, the premier said that the world financial crisis means Alberta oil companies are looking for new investors and China is clearly on their radar.

Like many American consumers, CEA is concerned that China’s and India’s insatiable appetite for stable energy resources to continue to aggressively grow their economies, coupled with the consideration of job-killing LCFS proposals in the U.S., could send a troubling message to our strongest and most important trading partner to the north.

So as China continues to secure steady streams of affordable energy, like those produced from Canada’s sands, state and federal policymakers should reject dangerous LCFS schemes and remember America’s top source of imported oil this year and the unique role that Canada plays both as America’s largest fuel supplier and its closest friend.

Conspiracy Theory, Minus Mel Gibson (For Now)

Thursday, March 25th, 2010

Alberta’s Energy Minister Says EU Is Playing Trade Games with the Oil Sands

Does it seem to anyone else like opponents of secure, affordable energy resources from Canada are coming out of the woodwork these days? Protests in Canada during the Olympics, anti-sands LCFS legislation advancing in Washington and about 20 other states – even “shareholders” of an energy firm in Norway demanding information on holdings in Alberta. Where is all this enmity coming from?

Ron Liepert has an idea. This week, the energy minister of Alberta suggested the European Union may be riding herd on a campaign to block the responsible production of Canada’s oil sands — “behind the camouflage of environmental correctness,” and for the purpose of “re-establish[ing] trade barriers.”

We don’t know whether the suggestion has merit or not – but here’s what we do know: About 12 seconds after (or was it before?) Mr. Liepert broached the idea with the media, the EU announced its intentions to remove any possible trade barriers related to the oil sands. Quite a coincidence, huh?

For those interested in understanding the specific details of this transatlantic waltz, read the recent letter that Canadian ambassador Ross Hornby sent to the European Commission on the oil sands. Addressed to Karl Falkenberg, head of the European Commission’s environment department, Hornby cites recent research that indicates the carbon footprint of the oil sands is only marginally higher than most crudes consumed in the US.  “A separate category for oil sands, therefore, is not science-based and would amount to unjustifiable discrimination against the oil sands,” he wrote.  Also stated in the letter:

“In the original consultation document, oilsands-derived fuels (erroneously labelled as ‘tar sand’) are treated as a distinct fuel source, separate from all other crude pathways for petrol and diesel fuels.”

“Such a system would be extremely difficult to implement and monitor, and would in itself create barriers to trade.”

Canadian officials drafted a similar letter to California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last year — when the state was outlining its since-implemented low-carbon fuel standard legislation.  Unfortunately for us, it went unanswered. What the Governator didn’t see then, and the EU is barely seeing now, is that bullying Canadian crude exports will not only turn significant importers like the US away from safe, secure, and abundant sources of energy, but it will do so without significant benefit to the environment we all share. 

DOCUMENT CENTER

INTERACTIVE MAP

Find out the fuel profile of your state – and what a one-size-fits-all national fuel mandate might mean for jobs, gas prices, and security.

image