Most Energy East pipeline oil will go overseas, new report claims

TransCanada's (TRP) proposed Energy East pipeline won’t be the boon to eastern Canadian refineries that supporters claim because most of its oil would be bound for export markets, environmental groups argue in a new report.

The $12B project likely would use the lion’s share of its 1.1M bbl/day capacity to send unrefined oil sands crude to markets such as India, Europe and possibly the U.S., according to the report.

Supporters say Energy East will help ailing refineries in the East - reliant on high-cost crude from abroad - by connecting them with a stable, low-cost supply from western Canada; TRP has said the project’s economic benefits would be massive and has described it as a nation builder on a level with the Canadian Pacific Railway.

From other sites
Comments (6)
  • marpy
    , contributor
    Comments (1762) | Send Message
    When you take into account that all the refineries in the east are currently using much more expensive imported oil and that the author is an environmental group, this report has zero credibility.
    18 Mar 2014, 05:02 PM Reply Like
  • tomdgascop
    , contributor
    Comments (96) | Send Message
    I keep picking TRP up on every dip sooner or later the flood gates will open and the oil will flow. Then the price will soar, so until than buying and reinvesting the dividend :-$
    18 Mar 2014, 05:23 PM Reply Like
  • bobby44
    , contributor
    Comments (501) | Send Message
    Of course these groups are privy to the 'inside' knowledge from 'eastern refiners" as to how much they will refine long term.


    There will be refined export of course and it will be directed to the friends of Canada. Something a certain president would be wise the learn about. He has had the chance at a game changer and there may not be another. -- silver medals forever.
    18 Mar 2014, 05:38 PM Reply Like
  • fossilfree
    , contributor
    Comments (58) | Send Message
    “It’s way more than we would ever use at this refinery, so the bulk of it would all be exported,” Mark Sherman, Plant Manager, Irving Oil refinery (Canada’s largest refinery), on the fate of Energy East’s crude.


    ICYI, here is a link to the actual report (it's a quick read and it is complete with footnotes):


    According to the authors: "This report uses information from TransCanada, along with sources from industry, government reports and legal documents." The groups releasing the report are the Council of Canadians, Environmental Defence, Equiterre and Ecology Action Centre.


    Here is a link to a synopsis of the report:


    “If we’re going to be an oil-exporting nation, we’re going to have to get oil exported on the water,” Russ Girling, TransCanada CEO, 04-13 in an interview for The Globe and Mail.
    20 Mar 2014, 08:47 AM Reply Like
  • marpy
    , contributor
    Comments (1762) | Send Message
    Fossil you again post erroneous or biased data - just the 2 big refineries in Quebec and and Irving refinery in New Brunswick process over 1 million barrels a day. - That is just 3 refineries, does not take into account any American or Ontario refineries.
    Also, below is a link that gives some idea of the effort that the industry in Western Canada is making as far as environmental improvement is concerned.It is way way more than what Venezuela and all the other places America imports heavy oil from spend combined. Canadian oil is getting cleaner by the day.

    20 Mar 2014, 10:16 AM Reply Like
  • fossilfree
    , contributor
    Comments (58) | Send Message
    marpy - If the four very well respected Canadian groups that conducted this research are erroneous, show me the facts that disprove their report. Their argument is very clearly laid out and they have 2 pages of resource footnotes included, most of which I have looked through, including the links, and it sounds to be on the money as far as I can tell.


    Regarding your notion the the oil sands industries are greening themselves, I sincerely hope you're right as for starters, they would need to rectify this:


    and this:


    (And that's just for starters. National Geographic has called the Alberta oil sands mining operations the most destructive project on earth. There are millions of people who agree with that. Its really a no-brainer if you look at the facts.)


    Not too mention even if there were to be any claim of success, it would be difficult to verify as the oil-controlled Harper Government has cut the budget of all the Canadian environmental watchdog and regulatory groups:



    I also find the timing of this coalition of oil sands polluters a little questionable. After all, the oil sands mines have been commercially viable since 1967. There has never been any concern about destroying the boreal wetlands and forest, polluting the waters and land and increasing CO2 emission before… why now? My guess, its just smoke and mirrors. They are trying to put on a little green hat and hope the world is gullible enough to believe it.


    If they do somehow manage to reduce there huge negative impact on the environment and our atmosphere, it would of course be a good thing but given the enormity to the wanton destructiveness of their operations, it is doubtful it would be enough to make a difference.
    20 Mar 2014, 05:27 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs