Every year the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) publishes their "Crude Oil Forecast" report. Unlike most other oil projections, CAPP doesn't run computer models. Instead they ask the oil companies for their actual plans. CAPP aggregates the responses, does some error checking, and publishes the results. In other words, their report shows what the oil industry says it is planning to do.(NOTE: This article originally published Feb 10, 2016 on the NationalObserver.com: click here to read the original article... )
Their latest 2015 report contains a number of surprises for me. The biggest one, by far, is the oil industry's slower-growth plans. Under these plans, Canada's oil and bitumen production levels apparently never rise high enough to require more big pipelines. Yeah, wow.
Spoiler alert: You won't find any hint in CAPP's report that big new pipelines might not be needed. Instead, they say all four of the big proposed pipes are required to meet the highest-growth scenario. A marketer's job, after all, is to maximize demand for their product. What they don't discuss is how many pipelines will be needed for the slower-growth plans. I went digging for the answer to that. Here's what I found...
Pipelines vs slower-growth plans
First let's look at pipeline capacity existing and proposed
from Western Canada.
The graphic below is the pipeline capacity chart from CAPP's report. I added some labels and removed non-pipeline items to focus just on pipeline capacity. Existing pipelines are shown in dark green and proposed pipelines are on top in yellow. The height of each shows the capacity.
Be sure to note in particular the four biggest and most contentious of the proposed pipes that sit at the top of the stack.
1.TransCanada's Energy East pipeline that would need to push thru a most unwilling Quebec
2.Enbridge's Northern Gateway pipeline that would require sending daily oil tankers through the Great Bear Rainforest and past united First Nations and BC opposition
3.KinderMorgan's Trans Mountain that would need to plow through deep local opposition from "Greenest City" Vancouver, several First Nations and local communities
4.TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline, ground-zero and casualty number one in the pipeline wars
We will be seeing more of these four mega-pipes very soon.
Now let's see how the industry's slower-growth needs stack up. To do that, I've taken a second chart from CAPP's report the slower-growth scenario's oil supply
and placed it on top.
Hmmm. Notice anything sticking up over the top?
These two charts, when overlaid, sure seem to indicate that none of four biggest proposed pipelines are required for the industry's slower-growth scenario. Once again, this isn't a Greenpeace proposal or an economic computer model. These are the industry's own plans and the industry's own charts. Just saying.
Does this mean Canada can avoid the festering and increasingly acrimonious pipeline wars? Have we hit peak oil mega-pipeline? The answer, obviously, depends on whether these slower-growth plans of the oil industry become reality. As I'll discuss in detail below, this looks increasingly likely to be the case.Click here to continue reading the full article at the National Observer
GDP per tonne of climate pollution for Canadian provinces, tar sands and Alberta Oil & Gas industry vs 2030 climate target