tight oil-bakken oil mixup

As Rick (of Tyee)reminds me--thanks Rick:, you are right as to my sloppy terminology--the dilemma remains for me however---there's huge 'oil production' potential on the horizon, and coming soon, we're led to believe--if I'm to believe the numbers put forward on line--be it shale oil or Bakken reserve or?? --the issue might still be, is the Alberta tar sands oil becoming challenged by these new deposits--a scary thought for some??
As for natural gas picture it's the same concern--no matter where it originates,,yes I read about the fracking concerns but they're still fracking!--as I understand the situation there's a huge abundance of natural gas in the world(yes likely the shale deposits)--and every one that has any is scrambling to find a market--natural gas is a superb energy resource and I wonder why it's so under utilized--how are your Encana shares doing--and why is that??Thus my conspiracy implication..
What to do? sell Syncrude, sell OR buy Encana? move to Saskatchewan---
I know, this is no laughing matter--so any comprehensive dissertation on the big picture would be welcomed--let's ask the BIGGIES in the oil and gas PATCH to paint the BIG PICTURE for us--something you'll believe!!Are you laughing yet?still?

ENBRIDGE might just GO AWAY!

Our squabble with Enbridge might soon become academic –the more I read about the BAKKEN MONSTER the more bewildered I become!

The immense Bakken reserves worldwide we’re told could make the whole Alberta Bitumen site obsolete ,soon! Nonsense you say!

Everybody better start watching this new oil player(the Bakken stories online will frighten you!)—because it’s here-BIG TIME!!

Huge Bakken reserves in central North America( North Dakota,Saskatchewan,Montana,etc.)the Williston Basin, also in Texas,and the Northwest Territories,---even Israel---and of course the Russian fields reported to be orders of magnitude larger than ALL the other fields so far Identified!Just a fairy tale you say---WELL how is it then that Texas Bakken oil producers are planning to rail ship 100,000 barrels per day to Washington State refineries—of course North Dakota are also planning to do something similar—what’s Saskatchewan up to then—will they soon annouce some big scheme— you can read  that our friends Enbridge and Keystone are including the Bakken production in their pipeline plans-NOW.

HOLD IT you say—that’s all speculation –what about the ‘frackin’ debate—not an unsolvable problem some say—an on and on..

There are stories about the US becoming oil exporters ! Russia too can build a pipeline to ASIA whenever they choose-What’s going on here—no one knows and/or is no one is telling.

Will Alison Redford(Alberta Premier) soon be worrying about being a ‘have not’ province and recognize Saskatchewan as the major producer in Canada—sacre bleu!

The Bakken oil is said to be a “light oil’ that’s easy to refine??Another issue that tar sands folks don’t want to hear—the Bakken oil ALREADY is claimed to be cheaper to produce than the tar sands oil.

If you’re not confused yet—think about an obvious answer to many of our energy problems—it’s called NATURAL GAS! I wonder why the big oil folks are keeping such a tight lid on this ideal resource—could it have something to do with money??

You say this is all speculation with no substance--well,maybe you’re correct—but I’d guess that big boys and girls already have plan that makes them lots and lots of money---maybe even OPEC could become extinct—or are they included in the SCHEME—any bets?

Our Northern Gateway Pipeline dilemma might become a non issue –soon. Enbridge could see better opportunities on the horizon and JUST WALK AWAY from the pipeline to Kitimat!!

Whatever—the problem with energy shortage of yestereday just got a lot more difficult with our now ENERGY SURPLUS-world wide..

Lots of ammunition here for the environmentalist folks—what’s their solution?Let’s here it!

Enbridge Board behaviour

 

A recent news article suggests that the (US) NTSB, blames the (Canadian)National Energy BOARD  for the resultant Enbridge Michigan,Kalamazoo oil spill fiasco.

—

Yes a BOARD was at fault—but not the NEB(Board)—but as implied in the original NTSB report, it was Enbridge—ULTIMATELY the Enbridge BOARD--who else? How’s the NEB going to FIX things?

 

Corporate BOARDS, of complex technical facilities, must have a structure that requires a RESPONSIBLE Corporate Technical OFFICER(CTO) to monitor and Counsel a Board about the condition of the physical plant and the schedule for any required action—on an ongoing basis(similar to the Corporate Financial Officer(CFO) who counsels about financial issues).Fiduciary matters are important—but SOCIETAL matters are also a Board’s responsibilities!

With this structure the Board then becomes ACCOUNTABLE for plant integrity and deficiencies;for example,major pipeline LEAKS. Simple as that!

As a minimum the BOARD must be seen to have been diligent in managing their facilities appropriately! Good management doesn’t necessarily eliminate incidents, such as leaks—but a good , well organized management will certainly minimize incidents—and likely improve response to incidents when the need arises!

The article suggests that the NEB or NTSB can somehow MAKE the ENBRIDGES of the world pay more attention to safety—ha ha! Make the Corporate Board ACCOUNTABLE then they’ll do a good job or they’ll bear the CONSEQUENCES of their good or bad management!

Or should we instead hire ‘lots’ of NEB inspectors to snoop around looking for boo boos!

The existing regulations and codes don’t suggest anywhere that ‘neglect’ or ‘delay’ is an ‘OK way’ to manage a pipeline—so,don’t rewrite regulations—rewrite how Boards should be structured for hazardous infrastructure systems!

Can NEB regulations deal with this matter—or are our LAW MAKERS required to make appropriate s changes as to how Boards are structured?

The old cliches about Responsibility,Accountability, and Consequences when applied judiciously will ALWAYS work best..we all need to follow those simple rules—behave or you get a short term TIMEOUT for wee kids—or for bigger ‘BOARD’ boys and girls its TOTAL TIMEOUT !

 

what do BOARDS of DIRECTORS direct?

I’m a retired ‘old’ engineer and have been watching the Enbridge and Kinder Morgan pipeline debates in BC–even sending letters here and there.
No one has answered a basic question for me-yet; that is, how and why Enbridge got caught so off guard –particularly in the Kalamzoo pipeline oil spill fiasco—was the Board somehow doing what Boards of the day DO/DID?---and do you see where todays Board is likely to pay more attention to matters ‘not ONLY related to fiduciary matters'----I have been reading online about changes in the UK and USA that may require Boards to pay more attention to the BROADER ASPECTS  of business-can,should these changes be adopted in Canada?
A Board of Directors(BOD), in a publically held company, has a fiduciary has responsibility to the shareholders...the concept of the Board suggests to me that there will be a consensus when BROADER issues arise -something like that-right? Some suggest that the Board, in reality, is more often like an Old Boys Club(OBC)—where the Chairman or (CEO ?) calls the shots---and matters such as our system 'condition' is left to the operating plebs!
The Corporate  Financial OFFICER(CFO) has great influence when counselling the Board I assume--BUT  where's the Corporate Technical Officer (CTO) who is RESPONSIBLE to counsel the Board about the 'STATE OF OUR PHYSICAL PLANT?'For instance ,the CTO may say "members,we have AREAS OF CONCERN that need attention --here's the list --please advise when we can proceed with the action plan attached"! Ha!Ha! you say. How many complex technical ,physical plant ,organizations ever hear such a request??
This procedure would make the Board ACCOUNTABLE for deciding about system integrity--an ACCOUNTABLE BOARD--what a novel concept??
How is the typical big company(business) ‘run’---I see three scenarios,below;
1.A large investment or financial business will have many accounting,economists, financial specialists folks offering advice to the Board(via the CFO)—great--hell some of these mega companies have survived—with help from Joe Bloe’s tax dollars(recall the ‘handy’ government bailouts)..?
2.A large public utility (electric,gas,water typically)can be under the jurisdiction of a Public Utilities Commission and is allowed fixed return on their investment and no more—The utility must yield to Public Utilities Commission(PUC) directions as to it’s operating practices,and expenses...the PUC basically is required to assure the users(ratepayers) that the Utility is providing the service at a reasonable cost ...the PUC may compare operating costs with other similar utilities nationwide ...the typical Hearing will examine utility company officials on any and all matters raised by customers and the public..all testimony(transcripts) is recorded and offered to the public for their information...the problem sometimes lies with governments of the day that have their own agenda—and decide ,for their own political reasons to ,curtail the PUC ‘powers’---so the scrutiny of the PUC then becomes moot...like in British Columbia  today!
3.A typical large pipeline company—a complex business with huge financial investments and very significant public issues to manage.I don’t know how the typical pipeline company Board operates.Yes the board has fiduciary responsibilities AND public issues also—There have been recent changes in the UK and USA for Boards—in the UK the Board needs to consider “the impact of the company’s operations on the community and the environment”—and there are five other interesting ‘factors’.—In the U.S. there is the Sarbanes –Oxley Act which broadens the Boards area of responsibility,(resulted from the recent financial crisis in the U.S.-and signed into law by George W. Bush)-looks to me to be directed primarily at large financial public companies.
In light of these’ trends’ for Boards will this spill over into Canada and put more pressure on the Enbridges and Kinder Morgans to consider more” the impact of the company’s operations on the community and the environment”—I’m assuming that some of these changes will happen in Canada??
Or am I living in a fairy land--still??

move all of kinder morgan facilities out of Burrard Inlet!

This idea removes Kinder Morgan(KM) tanker loading terminal and oil storage tanks,all oil tanker and barge traffic and the Chevron Refinery from Burrard Inlet—an old Bill Vander Zalm idea in part.

Subject: Combine oil refinery and Kinder Morgan tank farm at new site,not in Burrard Inlet.

Some of us do not like a greatly expanded oil tank farm high on the slopes of Burnaby Mountain and with a gravity feed into Burrard Inlet!

Some may recall that Bill Vander Zalm in his heyday proposed a plan to combine our refineries –get them out of Burrard inlet and have a more efficient single refinery operation .Well now let’s bring that idea forward and solve a huge problem for Greater Vancouver.

1.As some have suggested; relocate Kinder Morgan(KM )LOADING terminal to Roberts Bank—where it belongs!

2.Relocate KM TANK FARM to the suggested new refinery site and include super earthquake proof containment enclosures for all facilities

3.Chevron could build a new larger REFINERY at this site—maybe a joint operation with another interested refiner?

4.Challenge: Find a suitable site for new refinery and combined tank farm facilities.

5.Benefits:Reduce hazard potential of large oil spill in Burrard Inlet and local beaches.

: create larger, more secure local supply for refined products—and possibly some other oil based products--even export ?

:more,better jobs potential.

6.Who to promote this project——are you ready Bill?

bakken bewilderment

The more I look at the huge Bakken type reserves world wide the more I become dumbfounded—huge deposits in central North America in the Williston Basin(North Dakota,Montana,Saskatchewan,etc.)—some production is now happening. The Texas? producer intends THIS FALL to ship by rail over 100,000 bbls a day to Washington state refineries See http://af.reuters.com/article/commoditiesNews/idAFL2E8J25SJ20120802 ( Kinder Morgan may not be happy).

There are many online items about this unbelievable massive resource world wide—as a minimum, oil people say decades of new world supply exist—maybe more!—The Russia fields dwarf the North America fields—even Israel has just contracted a Canadian firm to help them develop their Bakken type field—just recently a story in Calgary press suggests that the Northwest Territories field may larger than the Williston Basin,and on and on it goes--—of course everyone is touting their holdings—mind boggling.

Most of these sites have been known for decades—but the new production methods have made these locations viable—we’ll see.

And more unwelcome news for tar sands folks—the Bakken oil is a light oil,easily refined—and likely already is less costly to produce than the tar sands oil---so maybe(BC-Alberta cat fight) Christy Clark has Alison Redford running scared—even ‘forgotten’ Saskatchewan with it’s large Bakken reserves could end up being a bigger producer than Alberta—‘sacre bleu’!

This whole subject is becoming absolutely mind boggling—then there’s heavy debate about the serious pollution potential involved when fracking the rock formations to yield the Bakken oil—Some say that this pollution from ‘fracking’ may stymie the Bakken production-others say nonsense--

So,what to do—all sorts of weird scenarios come to mind;

If the Bakken oil becomes less expensive to produce than tar sands oil—Northern Gateway pipeline costs exceed revenue—?? The world may stop buying tar sands oil..why not?Of course the pipeline gang don’t care a bunch—they’ll just reverse flow and pump Bakken oil—then maybe Alison won’t be so cheeky—maybe the $17 trillion from the tar sands ain’t going to happen--

And of course there’s that glut of natural gas—an even more desirable fuel selling for peanuts today—(how’re your Encana shares doing these days)?

And on and on---does anyone have any idea where we’re headed—the energy crisis has come full circle---we now have an over supply crisis looming--

Now—what to do—sell Syncrude ,move to Saskatchewan,sell real estate holdings as Albertans will no longer be coming with big bankrolls???

Harper and the 'science of politics'

Mr. Harper tells us that science should be the RATIONALE for deciding about the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project—I say ‘horse feathers!The science of pipeline building is long established and if applied correctly will result in a SAFE pipeline—

POLITICS has been deciding factor of every major pipeline – governments have fallen because of their pipeline decision—and our Prime Minister knows this—and he deftly created some wiggle room ,for his government, during his recent visit to Vancouver .

Enbridge appear to have a lot of ‘splainin’ to do before THEY should allowed to build or OPERATE a pipeline in our backyard! We see lots of fancy words—but where’s the beef?

The Enbridge full page ‘fluffy’ ads tell us nothing about HOW and WHO will be RESPONSIBLE and ACCOUNTABLE for ensuring a safe operation,system wide. For instance;tell us that the ‘state of the all Enbridge systems’ will be reported to the Board by an appointed Operations Safety OFFICER and any AREAS OF CONCERN will be addressed by the Board and timely action will be directed by the full Board!

Imagine, ACCOUNTABILITY by a Board of Directors—what a novel concept?

In the end the politicians ultimately may ‘fashion’ their decision based on the latest political poll. The next election becomes the THE RATIONALE for deciding the issue-—again SCIENCE is not the deciding factor ;we all know this.

Of course the election result can be influenced by making the politically correct decision!

...

Subject: politics/pipelines

 

The study of politics(let me paraphrase) is scientific to the extent to that in the end the politicians must distinguish between facts and values—and then there are the biases of the participants— The typical review boards(National Energy Board)—are likely made up largely of politically appointees—

And in the end the politicians ultimately may ‘fashion’ their decision based on the latest political polls—so politics(not science) does become the deciding factor ;we all know this!

Recall the era of W.A.C. Bennett—no environmental review panels-just a ‘damned the torpedoes’ approach—just do it.Yes we must assume that a lot of study went into the process—but mostly the so-called STUDIES were likely rationalized to reinforce the ‘values/vision’ of the leader of the day –that’s how it’s been done since whenever---yes,some decisions made by leaders didn’t pan out so well—so what?

POINT:Leaders have a difficult job—and will continue to make ‘good’ and some ‘not so good’ decisions—funnily the whole shemozzle works not too badly—

Now some might say “if we could just get rid of those annoying TREE HUGGERS”—life would be much simpler...and on and on...