"Trains Leave Kinder Morgan Pipeline in Lurch - Growing Use of Railroads to Ferry Crude Leads to Cool Reception for $2 Billion Project" - Wall Street Journal, datelined May 23, 2013 5:42 PM, in "Marketplace" section of print edition dated Friday, May 24, 2013, pages B-1 and B-4, by Ben Lefebvre:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323463704578497003961136978.html
Related, see "Energy Journal: The Troubled Nightmare of Keystone’s Pipe Dreams" at: http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2013/05/24/energy-journal-the-troubled-nightmare-of-keystones-pipe-dreams/
Also, "Crosstex Energy Begins Open Season for NGL Pipeline System Project" at: http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20130524-906082.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Someplace, John Kneiling is grinning and saying "See - I told you so - many years ago !" ("A properly designed and [EDIT] built operated integral train will stop pipeline expansion cold.") And we haven't yet even been doing this kind of operation long enough to have reached optimum performance levels, let alone begin to implement his theory of integral trains.
- Paul North.
You know it's been a long week, if you open a thread just to see why railroads are hauling crude lead. Oof-duh!
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
(This link may avoid a sign-up to see the article).
The game has changed!
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
(Didn't work. Google the title of the article and hit the link there.
As shown in the first WSJ article regarding the California refineries, if the delivered price is the same, they opt for the flexibility of rail. But with rail shipping costs more than double pipeline's, they rely on crude price differentials. It's a good thing rail is flexible, as oil prices are volatile, and crude markets are rarely static for long.
There seems to be no way to make the link work in Canada. What pipeline are you speaking of? K-M is also in the news up here regarding an expansion proposal they have for a pipeline into Vancouver for loading ocean tankers..
Bruce
So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.
"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere" CP Rail Public Timetable
"O. S. Irricana"
. . . __ . ______
Personal opinion, but I'd much rather see crude transports by rail rather than pipeline for one simple reason. The crude can be transported to where it's needed rather than to a mega-refining complex along the Gulf Coast. Refineries scattered across the country are better and more secure than having things all in one place. Should an aggressor decide to target the latter with some ICBM's they could bring us to our knees in short order.
Also, when pipelines leak the spill is of a much larger order of magnitude than a few tankers being punctured in a derail. Enbridge is currently replacing a pipeline through Michigan that sprang a major leak requiring massive cleanup. The NIMBY's would rather see the pipeline abandoned.
Norm
Reasons I promote rail are: 1) infrastructure already exists so start up costs limited to minor improvements and cars-equipment and transloading facilities; 2) long term employment assured; 3) route can be altered without uprooting whole system.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
I don’t understand the gist of the links, or the topic title. Why has the reception for pipelines cooled? For as much as the railroads would like to see oil shipped by rail, pipelines do seem to be the preferred method in economic terms. It is just that economic rationale seems to be taking a backseat to regulatory policies.
Last year when the rug was pulled out from under Keystone, we were told that it was not dead, but just needed a little more time for the proper review and approval. I think we were told that the final approval was intended, but may take up to a year. We were emphatically told that the Keystone Pipeline has not been killed. So I expect the dirt to start flying any day now as soon as the okay is given.
AgentKid There seems to be no way to make the link work in Canada. What pipeline are you speaking of? K-M is also in the news up here regarding an expansion proposal they have for a pipeline into Vancouver for loading ocean tankers.. Bruce
http://www.kindermorgan.com/projects/freedom/default.cfm
The one you mention, Bruce, may the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project - see:
http://www.kindermorgan.com/business/canada/tmx_expansion.cfm
Thanks Paul.
"Get your programs here! You can't keep track of your pipelines without a program!"
It was interesting to read here that one of the senior people at Trans-Canada Pipe Lines, the builders of the Keystone XL project, has stated that they are going to think long and hard before making another proposal like Keystone. The time it takes, and the amount of resistance they have received, has made it too difficult to justify the upfront costs before they can even put a shovel in the ground. Clearly, people are going to have to experience much more sticker shock at the pump before projects like theirs can go ahead in a timely manner.
Bucyrus, the talk up here now is that TCPL is now thinking they might not see US government approval in 2013.
AgentKidBucyrus, the talk up here now is that TCPL is now thinking they might not see US government approval in 2013. Bruce
What is the holdup? When do they expect approval?
The story I was referencing was in today's Calgary Sun, by their Senior Washington Correspondent, Bryn Weese. I can't locate an online version to link to.
The headline reads; Keystone Proposal Sangs 1.2 M Comments.
The gist of the story is, the US State Department has released the first 100,000 comments. Of that sample 1,500 were a form letter devised by the Institute for Energy Research, in favour of the proposal. The Sierra Club developed a form letter sent by 40,000, who of course were opposed to the pipeline. So the project does seem to be running into a headwind.
Also, earlier this week, the House of Congress passed yet another bill urging approval of the pipeline, but President Obama stated that it didn't matter if the Senate passed a similar bill, as he would veto it.
So this saga is a long way from ending.
Its "Dirty Canada Sand Oil" Vs "Pennsy Clean Natural Gas "....We cbnt run a 21 Century Economy on fossil fuel from things that have been dead for a million years
Whats preventing the railroads getting into the pipeline buisness? If i recall UP did have a energy division
AgentKidThe Sierra Club developed a form letter sent by 40,000, who of course were opposed to the pipeline. So the project does seem to be running into a headwind. Also, earlier this week, the House of Congress passed yet another bill urging approval of the pipeline, but President Obama stated that it didn't matter if the Senate passed a similar bill, as he would veto it. Bruce
Well why would he veto it? He told us last year that he just needed a little more time to complete all of the approval process. As I understand it, that has all been approved for going ahead with the project. He never said that approval was up to the Sierra Club. What gives?
The State Department has yet to give final approval and the EPA has made serious efforts to get the State Department to not approve the project, saying their Environment Assessment is seriously flawed. There is considerable inter department arguing and they all have to agree before a proposal is put on Obama's desk for his approval. The current EPA chairperson got their job because the previous chairman resigned because she though Obama was close to approving the deal earlier this year. There are roadblocks to this project being thrown up all over Washington DC.
One columnist speculated several weeks ago that given the current dynamic in Washington, Obama is waiting for some overseas issue like N. Korea or Iran to break loose. Then on a Friday afternoon at 4 PM, after most of the press has gone home for the weekend, he can stand at his podium and say, "My fellow Americans, in this time of uncertainty it is important that we have a secure supply of oil and to that end I am approving the Keystone XL project". If the current situation continues it could be several years before we see the pipeline go ahead.
To get this thread back on a rail related tack, it would seem in the next five years or so prospects are looking better than ever for crude by rail.
Bonas Its "Dirty Canada Sand Oil" Vs "Pennsy Clean Natural Gas "....We cbnt run a 21 Century Economy on fossil fuel from things that have been dead for a million years
The natural gas that comes from the Pennsylvania and other deep wells has to be cleaned before it can be used--and landfill natural gas has to be really cleaned.
Johnny
AgentKid The State Department has yet to give final approval and the EPA has made serious efforts to get the State Department to not approve the project, saying their Environment Assessment is seriously flawed. There is considerable inter department arguing and they all have to agree before a proposal is put on Obama's desk for his approval. The current EPA chairperson got their job because the previous chairman resigned because she though Obama was close to approving the deal earlier this year. There are roadblocks to this project being thrown up all over Washington DC. One columnist speculated several weeks ago that given the current dynamic in Washington, Obama is waiting for some overseas issue like N. Korea or Iran to break loose. Then on a Friday afternoon at 4 PM, after most of the press has gone home for the weekend, he can stand at his podium and say, "My fellow Americans, in this time of uncertainty it is important that were have a secure supply of oil and to that end I am approving the Keystone XL project". If the current situation continues it could be several years before we see the pipeline go ahead. To get this thread back on a rail related tack, it would seem in the next five years or so prospects are looking better than ever for crude by rail. Bruce
One columnist speculated several weeks ago that given the current dynamic in Washington, Obama is waiting for some overseas issue like N. Korea or Iran to break loose. Then on a Friday afternoon at 4 PM, after most of the press has gone home for the weekend, he can stand at his podium and say, "My fellow Americans, in this time of uncertainty it is important that were have a secure supply of oil and to that end I am approving the Keystone XL project". If the current situation continues it could be several years before we see the pipeline go ahead.
Bruce,
I don't think that any sort of international combat crisis will bring about the approval of the XL. Obviously it is opposed on a deep and powerful basis. So no pretext is needed to approve something when there is no desire to approve it.
I am not trying to take the thread off topic. After all, the topic does include pipelines, and the implication that rail transport is preferable to pipelines. I think it is important to point out that there is no choice between rail and pipelines if pipelines are not an option.
I have a feeling that the Sierra Club will not be amused by rail doing an end run around pipelines.
BucyrusI have a feeling that the Sierra Club will not be amused by rail doing an end run around pipelines.
To quote Bill Murray in the movie "Stripes", "That's a fact, Jack!"
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.