Seeking Alpha

Statoil may pick east coast over Alberta oil sands for new expansions

  • Statoil (STO) is weighing new expansions in Alberta's oil sands against the price tag of developing a trove of newly discovered crude oil on Canada's Atlantic coast, the head of its Canadian arm says.
  • Growth in Alberta potentially could take a back seat to offshore development on the east coast, where STO this year made a 600M barrel discovery at its Bay du Nord prospect.
  • STO's caution in the oil sands mirrors more conservative strategies unveiled recently by others such as Cenovus (CVE) and Suncor (SU); with uncertainty over pipelines, companies are eschewing large budgets and seeking to better align cash flow with expenses.
Comments (12)
  • Uncle Pie
    , contributor
    Comments (2661) | Send Message
     
    well that's one way to avoid President Do-Nothing's inability to make a decision about the Keystone Pipeline, and be assured of getting the Brent price for your oil.
    16 Dec 2013, 06:29 PM Reply Like
  • MisterJ
    , contributor
    Comments (573) | Send Message
     
    Why do we need a sour crude pipeline through our country when we soon produce enough light crude domestically? Common sense takes second place for many as long as they can criticize a black President at will.
    16 Dec 2013, 06:42 PM Reply Like
  • Bruce Baxter
    , contributor
    Comments (19) | Send Message
     
    Mister J:

     

    Hopefully much of the oil that would flow through the Keystone pipeline to the Gulf will be refined by American workers for export to other countries. Becoming a net-exporter of refined products helps our balance of trade as well as lowering unemployment of American workers.

     

    You liberals need to wise up and help grow, not shrink the economy.
    16 Dec 2013, 07:19 PM Reply Like
  • Uncle Pie
    , contributor
    Comments (2661) | Send Message
     
    Not withstanding the shale oil boom, America imports almost one half of its crude oil. Canadian oil via the Keystone pipeline would displace oil from Venezuela, primarily. In 2012 America imported 980,000 bbls/day of heavy oil from Venezuela. Do you think Venezuela is a more reliable source of oil than Canada, or a better steward of the environment? Which source of oil would be a bigger risk to the environment: heavy oil from Venezuela, shipped across the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico in foreign flagged tankers of unknown provenance, or oil from Canada shipped across dry land in a brand new state of the art pipeline? Mr. Obama has been dithering over this pipeline for six years! Even though his own State Department recommends its approval. Likewise, he has been unable to make a decision about the Guantanamo concentration camp for six years. He was unable to make a decision about intervention in Syria, choosing instead to kick the can over to the 535 politicians who make up America's so-called Congress. It's probable that these matters will be kicked down the road to the next president. This is not about whether Mr. Obama is "black" or "white". This is about governing, instead of campaigning.
    16 Dec 2013, 07:26 PM Reply Like
  • mletellier
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Oil sands crude isn't sour, for it to be sour it would need to have H2S in it. Due to Oil Sand being so near the surface H2S has usually escaped. It is called heavy Oil, due to bacterial processes which has made the crude oil to viscous to flow without being helped, but chemically it is quite similar to Brent Crude.
    17 Dec 2013, 10:11 AM Reply Like
  • TimeOnTarget
    , contributor
    Comments (2165) | Send Message
     
    @MisterJ --

     

    Don't think your comment was fair or accurate. Tight oil is not going to be nearly as big as shale gas-- only a few formations are proving profitable at all and only two have proven really good. We are going to need that Canadian oil in coming years, but now they are working just as hard as they can to figure out how to get it to market elsewhere. I can't tell you how badly that is going to cost us in coming years. Having essentially a dedicated supplier would have been a much better thing for the U.S. economically.

     

    It is legitimate to view the President as being a wimpy drooling cretin on this issue: That's my opinion and it has nothing to do with him being black.
    18 Dec 2013, 01:57 PM Reply Like
  • RS055
    , contributor
    Comments (1846) | Send Message
     
    We could become self sufficient in oil. Or , easily, in clothing. We dont really depend on bangladesh for clothing do we? We could easily make it - and beter quality, right here.
    The issue - both for oil and clothing is - yes , sure we can make it all here - but at much much higher cost.
    16 Dec 2013, 06:42 PM Reply Like
  • traderyin
    , contributor
    Comments (65) | Send Message
     
    Cost isn't the issue. The issue is shale gas can run out. The oil sands can last and you want to throw Canada into the mix so you don't become overly dependent on one energy source. That's common sense.
    16 Dec 2013, 07:10 PM Reply Like
  • moonmist
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    The product from Canada oil sand does not flow in a pipe line.
    16 Dec 2013, 10:31 PM Reply Like
  • Ajayyy
    , contributor
    Comments (310) | Send Message
     
    Yes it does. It's highly viscous and therefore mixed with solvent that makes the oil travel through the pipes pretty easy. At the end of destination the two can be separated easily.
    17 Dec 2013, 06:30 AM Reply Like
  • jack20
    , contributor
    Comments (287) | Send Message
     
    Uncle Pie: You nailed it. It is all about leadership, or lack thereof. If I were a Canadian I would be up in arms over the lack of either a E or W export oil pipeline. Why sell your oil for WTI prices when you could be getting Brent. I recently read a Canadian C. of C. article which estimated Canada is losing $50 million PER DAY due to the lack of a new export pipe. That is a lot of balance of payments and jobs!!
    16 Dec 2013, 10:42 PM Reply Like
  • Bad.example
    , contributor
    Comments (8) | Send Message
     
    J was pefect. Respond to a criticism of Obama with that handy race card. Most of us dont care if the President is two feet tall and green; we care about policy. Obama is a complete fraud. He ran for President beautifully, but has no idea how to be President. Barak makes Jimmy Carter look adequate.
    17 Dec 2013, 07:25 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|