Canada's National Energy Board - US Should Expect 30% Less Canadian Gas Exports By 2015

A new report from Canada’s National Energy Board says the U.S. should expect exports of Canadian natural gas to the U.S. to fall approximately 30% between now and 2015. The report from Canada’s energy regulator further warns that, due to rising costs, the U.S. should expect to import less oil from the Alberta oil sands region than previously forecast.

This double dose of bad news could have a major impact on both the short- and long-term prices of both commodities. The U.S. is counting heavily on increased imports of Canadian oil, specifically to offset an expected decline in Mexican oil, and generally to counter the greater competition for oil among net importing countries as global demand continues its precipitous rise. After Saudi Arabia, Alberta’s tar-sands region is believed to contain the largest oil reserves in the world.

In citing higher costs as the reason why it was reducing its forecast for tar-sands output to 2.8 million barrels a day by 2015 from three million, the Energy Board clearly left open the possibility of further cost-related reductions in the months and years ahead. “A number of companies (working in the tar sands region) are reassessing the economics of their projects,” according to the report. Current output is about 1.3 million barrels a day.

Ironically, the drop in expected exports of natural gas from Canada to the U.S. is due in part to increased use of natural gas to separate the tar-like bitumen from the tar sands. That, plus smaller domestic discoveries and other increases in domestic consumption, are expected to cause the major falloff in exports.

EDIT

http://energytechstocks.com.previewmysite.com/wp/?p=540

> Ironically, the drop in expected exports of natural gas from Canada to the
> U.S. is due in part to increased use of natural gas to separate the tar-like
> bitumen from the tar sands.

> The U.S. is counting heavily on increased imports of Canadian oil,
> specifically to offset an expected decline in Mexican oil, and generally
> to counter the greater competition for oil among net importing countries
> as global demand continues its precipitous rise.

Yet another little chirp of alarm is heard from the canary ...

...even if it meant that Canada was left wanting.

What I don't recall is whether I read it in some NAFTA article, or some Security and Prosperity Partnership article, or an article on some other agreement that made that provision.

Can anyone back me up on that?

"Let the Eastern Bastards freeze in the dark."

The tubes on the Internet tell me it was Ralph Klein.

Welcome to DU, AlertLurker. Helpful Hint: Get your facts straight, or someone else will straighten them out for you.

:hi:

I was ACTUALLY doubly wrong - It WAS Ralph Klein, but it wasn't reaction to the NAFTA Proportionality clause, (which requires Canada to ship some 70% of its oil and 56% of its Natural Gas to the US, even if it faces shortages) but to Trudeau's NEP.

I think the NAFTA Proportionality Clause was what you were looking for, however. Canada was the only country stupid enough to agree to one...sad, sad, sad.

I had thought it was Lougheed, however, since I distinctly remember him railing on and on and on at the time, calling for slowdowns and boycotts...

Thanks for the welcome, and the correction!

Upon rereading, I sounded more snarky than I'd intended. Sorry for that.

And thank you for the information! The NAFTA Proportionality Clause seems to be exactly what I was thinking of.

http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/nafta-ALENA/chap06-en.asp


Basically this means that we must continue to ship the same proportion of our total production of oil and natural gas to the USA. If our total suppy declines (or we decide to cut back production) we can reduce shipments to the USA, but only if we take the same proportional cut in our domestic supply. It also means that we can't subsidize domestic consumption.

NAFTA will not force us to disadvantage ourselves relative to our participation in the world energy market, but it prevents us from giving ourselves any relative advantages with our own resources.

The anthemic phrase "Let the Eastern bastards freeze in the dark" was popularized in Alberta during the time of Peter Lougheed in 1980 as a response to Pierre Trudeau's National Energy Program. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Energy_Program.

Could this possibly be any crazier?

Yes, it's possible for it to get crazier, that is.

...to http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=115&topic_id=85647">bio-hydrogen. Then we can finally outlaw thermodynamics for ever!

You know you laughed, I heard you laugh.
You laughed and laughed and laughed, and then we ran out of oil.
And now you know I'm utterly mad.

And,

They're coming to take me away, ha ha,
They're coming to take me away, ho ho, hee hee, ha ha,
To Athabasca! With trees and flowers and chirping birds,
And energy analysts who sit and smile and twiddle their thumbs and toes,
And they're coming to take me away ha ha...

I'm sure that no one will ever consider building new coal-fired plants to replace the gas turbines that will be going offline. :sarcasm: