U.S. carbon bill could put squeeze on oil sands
The U.S. climate change bill, which is currently being debated in the House energy and commerce committee, includes a measure modelled on low carbon fuel rules just approved in California. It would set a baseline standard for the amount of carbon produced during production of transportation fuel throughout its life cycle.
Under the draft bill, refineries would be required to reduce annual life cycle emissions from their fuel to 2005 levels between 2014 and 2022, and then cut them by at least another five per cent between 2023 and 2030.
In effect, the rules would force U.S. refiners to measure carbon intensity of a fuel from ‘wells to wheels.' Because the life cycle emissions from oil sands crude is up to 30% higher than in conventional oil, Canadian officials are worried the country's energy industry would be devastated by a national low carbon fuel standard in the U.S.
Canada's concerns about the U.S. climate bill follows "the same logic" as objections Ottawa raised last week in a failed bid to derail the California measures, Mr. Prentice said following two days of meetings in Washington.
This could be bad for Alberta and all of Canada. Funny how the environmentalists fail to mention "blood" oil from the Mideast, and given that Obama bowed to the Saudi King, we know how he feels. What can Alberta do? Glad you asked!
CN idea a winner for oil sands
The energy and geopolitical ramifications of Canadian National Railway's "Pipeline on Rails" initiative is a game-changer for Canada. As I revealed in Thursday's Financial Post, the railway has developed a transformative strategy to move oil sands production more quickly and cheaply to markets in North America or Asia.
This project, in its early stages, will eliminate three barriers to the development of Canada's vast oil sands: the cost, delays and financial risks involved in building multi-billion-dollar pipelines; the politics of obstruction south of the border from environmentalists and the danger of selling oil to monopoly buyers in the United States which has, in the past, resulted in contracts being ripped up when times were tough.
It also allows Canada to decouple from the American economy when it comes to its most important commodity, which is oil products. This is because all the oil sands production can be routed to the west coast for shipment to Asia or anywhere, thus avoiding monopoly pricing and bullying by the Americans.
Now that's what I call a great idea! If the Americans put up trade barriers, we can stop the flow using their own policies against them, and if Obama doesn't think losing 20% of their energy supplies isn't going to hurt, the guy is dreaming.
Notice how Minister Day was in China lately, could oil be something the Chinese need? How about India? Both countries would love a secure supply of "dirty" oil and if the US doesn't want it, so be it. Enjoy your $10 a gallon gas. If the US breaks the terms of NAFTA, it frees Canada from supplying oil to the US.
The Democrats are dumb enough to think they can slap a tariff/carbon tax on our oil like they did with softwood lumber, in the guise of a cap and trade tax. It's time to turn off the tap for a few days, and see what happens. It's also time for Quebec to be forced to buy Canadian oil, no more "blood" oil for Quebec, not when they get $8 billion from Alberta a year.
Turn off the taps, just for a few days, see what happens!