Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

A Cut to the Jugular of Alberta`s Industrial Heartland

Jack

0
Registered
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
428
-Cathy Olesen is the Mayor of Strathcona County, part of an area that as recently as six months ago was slated to host as much as $90-billion worth of heavy-oil upgrader projects. At least seven projects had been penciled in, each of them promising millions in economic spinoffs.-But rather than count projects to come, she is counting casualties, victims of the credit crisis, slumping energy prices and regulatory uncertainty: BA Energy Inc., Total SA and Petro-Canada to name three, all of which have recently announced delays. More names are right on the tip of her tongue.-Instead of a crop of upgraders sprouting up in the empty fields northeast of Edmonton, bitumen squeezed out of the province`s oil sands may bypass this rural area and head via pipeline to the refineries in the U. S. Gulf Coast. Jobs, coattail industries and federal, provincial and municipal tax dollars will follow the black goo south.

[*](an aside: Thomas, you invest in Texas, don`t you? Keen foresight! )-"If the pipelines are built, and it`s getting shipped south, it`s gone; there`s no chance to build an upgrader,"
Ms. Olesen, 47, says. "Once it`s gone, it`s gone. Many of these could be gone forever."

-
new shale-gas discoveries in Texas and Louisiana are hurting the province`s natural-gas industry and that the credit crisis is hampering companies needing cash to drill for oil and gas, all putting local jobs at risk.

-When heavy oil is upgraded in Canada, about 60% to 65% of the tax dollars go to the federal government, 30% to 35% to Alberta and about 5% to the local municipalities, Mr. Rigney said. But when bitumen is shipped raw, the federal government`s take drops to about 55%, the province`s to 40%, while the municipalities hang on to their 5%."That`s real money," he says. "They are only going to wake up when they start to run a deficit."

-"If you build the exact same plant in Texas versus Alberta, there probably could be a [cost] difference as much as one-and-a-half to two times more,"
Real Cusson, Canadian Natural Resources Ltd.`s senior vice-president of marketing, said in Calgary this month. It costs between $20,000 and $25,000 per barrel of capacity to tweak an existing refinery in the U. S. Gulf Coast to handle Canada`s heaviest crude, Mr. Cusson said. To upgrade in Alberta, where ancillary costs are higher, is more like $40,000 per barrel of capacity.

-None of this comforts Ms. Olesen and Mr. Rigney. "We`re on the cusp of a potential great loss that can never be recovered,"
she says. Mr. Rigney, his voice sagging just a touch, agrees: "Never be recovered."

(FP 081122)
 
A couple of notes regarding this.1) Most companies won`t walk away from investments of 5+ Billion. Some of these projects are far enough along that it would be unrealistic to assume they won`t be completed. Last REIN meeting in Edmonton we had the industrial heartland representative speak. I don`t recall the exact figures, but most of the projects were in the range of having 3+ Billion invested already. The project with the lowest investment to date was 400 million I believe. What will it take to get them going? I`d guess another run-up in oil prices, something that seems likely given a rising demand trend.2) This article speculates about the bitumen being refined in Texas. This would take a pipeline from Alberta to Texas. Does anyone remember the Trans-Canada Pipeline from north-western alberta to Chicago? It takes years and billions more to undertake such a project. Given that many oil companies are drastically reducing their capital allocations in this economic environment (i.e., refineries and upgraders in Fort Sask), why is it any more likely they`d be willing to put up the money for a pipeline?

3) I met a Petro-Canada engineer at a REIN meeting. He assured me that the Petro-Can project was still a go; in other words, they were still designing and planning the project. He said that putting the project on hold was part posturing and part money saving until prices are more attractive again. But, behind the scenes, the design and planning continues.



QUOTE (Jack @ Nov 23 2008, 10:30 AM) -Cathy Olesen is the Mayor of Strathcona County, part of an area that as recently as six months ago was slated to host as much as $90-billion worth of heavy-oil upgrader projects. At least seven projects had been penciled in, each of them promising millions in economic spinoffs.

-But rather than count projects to come, she is counting casualties, victims of the credit crisis, slumping energy prices and regulatory uncertainty
: BA Energy Inc., Total SA and Petro-Canada to name three, all of which have recently announced delays. More names are right on the tip of her tongue.

-Instead of a crop of upgraders sprouting up in the empty fields northeast of Edmonton, bitumen squeezed out of the province`s oil sands may bypass this rural area and head via pipeline to the refineries in the U. S. Gulf Coast. Jobs, coattail industries and federal, provincial and municipal tax dollars will follow the black goo south
.

  • (an aside: Thomas, you invest in Texas, don`t you? Keen foresight!
    style_emoticons
    )
-"If the pipelines are built, and it`s getting shipped south, it`s gone; there`s no chance to build an upgrader,"
Ms. Olesen, 47, says. "Once it`s gone, it`s gone. Many of these could be gone forever."

-
new shale-gas discoveries in Texas and Louisiana are hurting the province`s natural-gas industry and that style="font-family:Arial">the credit crisis is hampering companies needing cash to drill for oil and gas, all putting local jobs at risk.-When heavy oil is upgraded in Canada, about 60% to 65% of the tax dollars go to the federal government, 30% to 35% to Alberta and about 5% to the local municipalities, Mr. Rigney said. But when bitumen is shipped raw, the federal government`s take drops to about 55%, the province`s to 40%, while the municipalities hang on to their 5%."That`s real money," he says. "They are only going to wake up when they start to run a deficit."

-"If you build the exact same plant in Texas versus Alberta, there probably could be a [cost] difference as much as one-and-a-half to two times more,"
Real Cusson, Canadian Natural Resources Ltd.`s senior vice-president of marketing, said in Calgary this month. It costs between $20,000 and $25,000 per barrel of capacity to tweak an existing refinery in the U. S. Gulf Coast to handle Canada`s heaviest crude, Mr. Cusson said. To upgrade in Alberta, where ancillary costs are higher, is more like $40,000 per barrel of capacity.

-None of this comforts Ms. Olesen and Mr. Rigney. "We`re on the cusp of a potential great loss that can never be recovered,"
she says. Mr. Rigney, his voice sagging just a touch, agrees: "Never be recovered."

(FP 081122)
 
QUOTE 3) I met a Petro-Canada engineer at a REIN meeting. He assured me that the Petro-Can project was still a go; in other words, they were still designing and planning the project. He said that putting the project on hold was part posturing and part money saving until prices are more attractive again. But, behind the scenes, the design and planning continues.

Interesting. Posturing is something that it definitely could be. The concern, though, is that it costs twice as much to build in Alberta than Texas, and I`m sure the operating expenses are quite a bit higher, too.
 
It does cost more to build here, and that`s likely why they`re waiting a while. won`t costs come down as everything else comes down? why does it cost so much more anyways? Labour is one for sure, but haven`t materials come down a long way with everything else commodity based? will labour costs come down as the unemployment rate comes back to something sustainable? I`m not sure, but if I had to guess I`d say yeah, people who used to make $80 am hour might be happy to make $40 again now that 80 is unachievable.

as for the posturing, I`m not sure why they`d do this except to earn subsidies or something government related. is this all wrapped up in the royalty review?

there is a lot going on here, but i don`t think the writer of the article included the cost of getting the oil to texas in the first place. building and maintaining a pipeline of that size is no easy task. i think the costs might be very similar when that`s accounted for. Also, haven`t I heard over and over that refining capacity is severely limited all over north america? why would they spend $20,000 per barrel of capacity to change their operation when they`re at full capacity refining light crude. doesn`t seem like a good idea.

building a pipeline to texas and not having it finished in alberta also reduces the ability (of the owner of the oil) to ship a finished product west to china (a pipeline project that is also in the works). just a thought, but the point is there are still some compelling reasons to upgrade and refine bitumen in Fort Sask.


QUOTE (Jack @ Nov 23 2008, 01:48 PM) Interesting. Posturing is something that it definitely could be. The concern, though, is that it costs twice as much to build in Alberta than Texas, and I`m sure the operating expenses are quite a bit higher, too.
 
That`s why it was important to get the facts right from the source by bringing head of the Industrial Heartland right to the REIN Workshop in November.

He made a great presentation that didn`t pull any punches, with both long-term and short term views of what is REAL in the area.

A fantastic follow-up to his presentation from a year ago when there were 6+ upgraders on the books.


Hmmmm, I wonder if the changes in the wind was one of the reasons that the county fell down the Top Alberta Towns List....

Yes, fundamental investigation (not just media stories) always ends up working in the end.
 
[quote name=`DonCampbell` date=`Nov 25 2008, 06:01 PM` post=`43046`]
That`s why it was important to get the facts right from the source by bringing head of the Industrial Heartland right to the REIN Workshop in November.

He made a great presentation that didn`t pull any punches, with both long-term and short term views of what is REAL in the area.

A fantastic follow-up to his presentation from a year ago when there were 6+ upgraders on the books.


Hmmmm, I wonder if the changes in the wind was one of the reasons that the county fell down the Top Alberta Towns List....

Yes, fundamental investigation (not just media stories) always ends up working in the end.


The problem is the fundamentals changed too quickly (1 year) and the properties aren`t worth as much now. I guess they weren`t really fundamentals. Who would have guessed that all of the upgraders would have been stopped a year ago?
 
QUOTE (Jack @ Nov 23 2008, 01:48 PM) Interesting. Posturing is something that it definitely could be. The concern, though, is that it costs twice as much to build in Alberta than Texas, and I`m sure the operating expenses are quite a bit higher, too.
That IS a concern ! Everything is cheaper in TX: land, labor, fridges, houses, condos, apartment buildings, cars, electricity, gasoline .. especially with a Can $ @ 80 cents US !

However, the mortgage situation IS a mess, too !!

Plus the heavy oil / oilsands are in AB, not in TX and have to get there first to be upgraded !

Plus we are running at higher cost / door due to: slower labour (more people/unit), MUCH higher taxes !

So not an easy answer !

More on "Why Texas" here: http://www.prestprop.com/tx.html and "Why Alberta" here: http://www.prestprop.com/ab.html
 
QUOTE That IS a concern ! Everything is cheaper in TX: land, labor, fridges, houses, condos, apartment buildings, cars, electricity, gasoline .. especially with a Can $ @ 80 cents US !

And our fine premier, Mr. Ed Stelmach, just decided to make the oilsands that much more unaffordable, and continue his passionate mission to drive all investment to other jurisdictions, with new regulations that will require companies to better manage their waste so as to reduce the "environmental footprint" of the projects. What does this do to in terms of development and operating costs? They go UP
!
style_emoticons
And it`s just yet another
cash outflow that companies will need to discount to the present value when doing their project feasability analyses, driving the IRR down and discouraging investment.

Dumb, dumb, dumb! Although what can we expect from this short-sighted government, where royalties were hiked to increase revenues by about $1.2B annually, while simultaneously losing
about $3 - $4B annually in land sales! Good trade, guys!
style_emoticons
 
Thanks Thomas, there is some fantastic information on your website regarding Texas, very informative. You might be interested to know that Texas is referred to as a province rather than a state on the "Why Texas?" page.

Regarding the economy of Texas. How did they build such a juggernaut? There seems to be a culturally ingrained entrepreneurial spirit in that part of the world. Everyone thinks of Texas and oil, well they`ve parlayed their early last century oil boom into ownership of much of the non-state owned oil of the world (and the means to produce it). Then again, they have a SEMI-CONDUCTOR INDUSTRY!!! Hardly an oil derivative... We have a tiny nano-technology industry here in Edmonton, and there are some seriously bright minds who want to build it into a juggernaut as well, but there seems to be no vision for that. I don`t know exactly what it would take except maybe LOWER TAXES. Well, Alberta has done well in this regard in the past, but the federal government has hardly done their part.

I`m slipping into an aimless rant here, so I`ll just post this question to the greater minds of my fellow members: what can we do individually to make our home province and country MORE COMPETITIVE? It would be nice to not be at risk of losing some of these upgraders and rather have even greater plans for a petro-chemical industry, with home grown expertise, that we can export!



QUOTE (thomasbeyer2000 @ Nov 26 2008, 10:15 PM) That IS a concern ! Everything is cheaper in TX: land, labor, fridges, houses, condos, apartment buildings, cars, electricity, gasoline .. especially with a Can $ @ 80 cents US !

However, the mortgage situation IS a mess, too !!

Plus the heavy oil / oilsands are in AB, not in TX and have to get there first to be upgraded !

Plus we are running at higher cost / door due to: slower labour (more people/unit), MUCH higher taxes !

So not an easy answer !

More on "Why Texas" here: http://www.prestprop.com/tx.html and "Why Alberta" here: http://www.prestprop.com/ab.html
 
QUOTE (ZanderRobertson @ Nov 27 2008, 09:08 AM) Thanks Thomas, there is some fantastic information on your website regarding Texas, very informative. You might be interested to know that Texas is referred to as a province rather than a state on the "Why Texas?" page.
indeed .. thx .. it should be the COUNTRY of Texas !
 
Jack

Are you suggesting that the oil industry should be exempt from the costs associated with protecting the environment or that they should pay for it in some other way.
 
QUOTE (ZanderRobertson @ Nov 27 2008, 09:08 AM) We have a tiny nano-technology industry here in Edmonton, and there are some seriously bright minds who want to build it into a juggernaut as well, but there seems to be no vision for that. I don`t know exactly what it would take except maybe LOWER TAXES. Well, Alberta has done well in this regard in the past, but the federal government has hardly done their part.

Where do you get your information on calling Edmonton`s nano-tech industry tiny? We have many of the brightest minds in Canada working in Edmonton in various nano-tech facilities all over the city. U of A`s Dr. Michael Brett (profile) is the NSERC/Micralyne/iCORE Industrial Research Chair in Thin Film Engineering and a world renowned leader in Nano-tech. The National Institute for Nanotechnology (NINT) was built in Edmonton with Provincial and Federal funding for a reason. The only thing "tiny" about the nano-tech industry in Edmonton is the name.
 
QUOTE Are you suggesting that the oil industry should be exempt from the costs associated with protecting the environment or that they should pay for it in some other way.
I`m suggesting that our government is foolish to be implementing all these cost-hikes in a time of unrivaled economic uncertainty and fear! Get the projects going first, then find ways to pinch pennies and responsibly collect more revenues without killing the golden goose.

Ask yourself this - is protecting the environment more important than protecting tens of thousands of jobs and tens of billions in investments? We`ve already allocated $2B to shut up the special interest groups - ER
- to invest in "carbon capture technology" (that`s never really been proven to actually work), so why the Alberta government has decided to add this other cost at this time
is something I`d love to hear explained.
style_emoticons
 
The decision to protect the environment was a work in progress that coincided with this economic downturn. The environmental concerns are long term where as the downturn is temporary considering the big picture. No point in putting off the inevitable besides when will the industry decide it is a good time to implement the changes.
Don`t misunderstand I am not a tree hugger nor am I on board with this footprint stuff I am simply saying it is inevitable so bite the bullet.
 
Apologies. I admittedly don`t know the numbers on this. AND, I really do applaud those great minds and the government for bringing what nano industry we have here.

However, consider China, India, Malaysia, Korea, Taiwan, Silicon Valley, Japan. In China for example, there are numerous high tech parks. These are places where foreign and Chinese high tech companies can operate tax free for periods of time. In some of these countries and likely others, the high tech/nano/mems industry is HUGE. I actually had the pleasure of briefly working at a MEMS company in Shanghai. In all of my associations with international companies there, Canada was not on the map. It`s not a slight against Alberta to say our high-tech industry is small RELATIVELY speaking.

This is what I meant by lacking vision. If we REALLY want this industry to flourish in ALberta, there will have to be things like tax-exempt zones etc. such as China has.

Also, India and China graduate something like 1,000,000 engineers every single year. Math and science are THE focus in Asia.

But again, I applaud the efforts that those involved have made in Alberta, I just want MORE! Hence my question: What can an individual do? Don is right on the money about being politically active., Should we initiate a letter writing campaign to promote high-tech and petro-chemical investment via tax breaks etc???





QUOTE (seanverret @ Nov 27 2008, 01:08 PM) Where do you get your information on calling Edmonton`s nano-tech industry tiny? We have many of the brightest minds in Canada working in Edmonton in various nano-tech facilities all over the city. U of A`s Dr. Michael Brett (profile) is the NSERC/Micralyne/iCORE Industrial Research Chair in Thin Film Engineering and a world renowned leader in Nano-tech. The National Institute for Nanotechnology (NINT) was built in Edmonton with Provincial and Federal funding for a reason. The only thing "tiny" about the nano-tech industry in Edmonton is the name.
 
QUOTE Don`t misunderstand I am not a tree hugger nor am I on board with this footprint stuff I am simply saying it is inevitable so bite the bullet.

If that`s the case, then why did Stelmach make the amendments that he did 10 days ago? These aren`t iron-clad, they never are. They can be amended, as Alberta`s premier unsuccessfully
tried to (a panic move, no less), last Monday.

The smart move would`ve been to put all these senseless hikes on hold, until the economy stabilizes a little. Look at all the projects that have been put on hold. Look at all the criticism that our government`s been taking by influential industrials. Look at all the positive things that are happening one province east! Tax cuts! PotashCorp going forward with development and forecasting thousands of jobs required on a going-forward basis! You haven`t really seen the same good news coming out of Alberta lately, right? Look at Calgary - parking hikes, property tax hikes, recycling hikes...it`s crazy! And it couldn`t be done in a worse time.

It`s just a little mind-boggling that there`s this new cash-grab being implemented when the industry`s already pissed and wanting to take their investment elsewhere. How`s this for a leading indicator - check land sales in B.C. & Saskatchewan for the year, and contrast them to Alberta`s - hmm - what does that tell you?
style_emoticons
 
QUOTE (ZanderRobertson @ Nov 27 2008, 03:05 PM) This is what I meant by lacking vision. If we REALLY want this industry to flourish in ALberta, there will have to be things like tax-exempt zones etc. such as China has.investment via tax breaks etc???
Hi Zander, perhaps you will interested in reading about what the Red Deer College is doing:


Tech program should boost RD


By Harley Richards - Red Deer Advocate

Published: November 19, 2008 8:25 PM
Updated: November 19, 2008 8:33 PM By HARLEY RICHARDS

Advocate business editor

A $178-million program to encourage commercialization of Alberta technology should benefit Red Deer College, says Ron Woodward, the college`s president.

Woodward offered this assessment during a luncheon in Red Deer on Wednesday, at which time Advanced Education and Technology Minister Doug Horner described the province`s plan for bringing technology to market.

Announced by Premier Ed Stelmach in June, the Connect program involves nine actions to enhance the tax environment for technological development, encourage capital investment, help build companies and their products, and promote entrepreneurship.

Read Full Article
http://http://www.albertalocalnews....s/local_biz/Tech_program_should_boost_RD.html


Thanks,

Glenn
 
yes! Thanks Glenn. This definitely appears to be a positive step. Again I say MORE please.QUOTE (GlennLasiuta @ Nov 27 2008, 08:47 PM) Hi Zander, perhaps you will interested in reading about what the Red Deer College is doing:


Tech program should boost RD


By Harley Richards - Red Deer Advocate

Published: November 19, 2008 8:25 PM
Updated: November 19, 2008 8:33 PM By HARLEY RICHARDS

Advocate business editor

A $178-million program to encourage commercialization of Alberta technology should benefit Red Deer College, says Ron Woodward, the college`s president.

Woodward offered this assessment during a luncheon in Red Deer on Wednesday, at which time Advanced Education and Technology Minister Doug Horner described the province`s plan for bringing technology to market.

Announced by Premier Ed Stelmach in June, the Connect program involves nine actions to enhance the tax environment for technological development, encourage capital investment, help build companies and their products, and promote entrepreneurship.

Read Full Article
http://http://www.albertalocalnews....s/local_biz/Tech_program_should_boost_RD.html


Thanks,

Glenn
 
Back
Top Bottom