Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Energy

Oil tankers in Vancouver are loading plenty, but they can load even more

Published

7 minute read

From Resource Works

Despite years of protest, ballooning costs, and political hurdles, the federally funded TMX pipeline expansion has become a strategic economic success story for Canada.

The federally funded expansion of the Trans Mountain oil pipeline from Alberta to tidewater at Burnaby has been much attacked by critics, but has quickly turned into a gold-star success story.

The 980-km expansion, known as TMX, opened in May 2024, almost tripling the capacity of the original (1953) Trans Mountain Pipeline. Since then, TMX has enabled major expansion of our crude oil exports to American and Asian buyers.

It is, says Trans Mountain CEO Mark Maki, “one of the most strategic investments Canada has ever made,” providing Canada with new trading options to Pacific Rim nations in the face of Donald Trump’s tariffs, and bringing in billions in new revenues.

Since opening on May 1, 2024, Trans Mountain has sent half of its tanker shipments to countries other than the US, and half to refineries on the US west coast.

Alberta Central chief economist Charles St-Arnaud said in a report earlier this year that TMX had brought in an extra $10 billion in revenues in 2024, equivalent to “adding a thirteenth month of production to the year.”

The export picture would be even brighter if the Port of Vancouver could accommodate larger loads in departing oil tankers, and that now is being addressed by both federal and provincial governments.

Right now, 245-metre-long Aframax-size tankers can handle up to 120,000 tonnes of oil. But under our port restrictions and limited depths of water in Burrard Inlet, they usually load only up to 96,000 tonnes.

In the BC legislature, Gavin Dew, Conservative MLA for Kelowna-Mission and the Opposition critic for jobs, economic development and innovation, asked if BC and the new federal government are indeed supporting dredging Burrard Inlet to allow fully laden Aframax oil tankers.

The simple reply from Adrian Dix, BC’s minister of energy and climate solutions: “Yes.”

Dix added later in an interview that the idea most recently came from Prime Minister Mark Carney. “Broadly, the premier and us have indicated our support for it,” Dix said.

No plan or timing has yet been announced.

While fully loaded Aframax tankers would carry more oil, they still have to meet requirements that include these: All tankers calling at the Westridge Marine Terminal must first be pre-screened by Trans Mountain to ensure criteria are met for safety and reliability; They must be double-hulled, and have segregated internal cargo tanks; They must have two radar systems in working order, one of them being a specialized collision-avoidance radar. For loading, a containment boom is deployed to enclose the tanker and its berth while loading. The tankers are escorted by tugs, and carry a fully qualified and licensed marine pilot.

There are also upgraded emergency facilities to cope with any spill, but Trans Mountain notes that there has not been a single oil spill from one of its tankers since the original pipeline opened in 1956.

The terminal now can handle some 34 tankers a month.

While a success story now, the TMX expansion went through a lot of pain, protest, obstruction, money, and red tape to get there.

The expansion was first proposed in 2012 by the Canadian division of US pipeline giant Kinder Morgan Inc., which bought the original Trans Mountain pipeline in 2005. It applied in December 2013 for federal approval of expansion, and estimated the cost at $5.4 billion.

The expansion proposal then ran into endless protests, opposition from the BC government (then-premier John Horgan promised to use “every tool in the toolbox” to stop the expansion), and a federal approval process that took almost three years of red tape.

Ottawa’s approval finally came with 157 conditions, and BC’s “toolbox” now included restrictions on any increase in diluted bitumen shipments pending further studies.

By 2018, Kinder Morgan Canada said estimated costs had risen to $7.4 billion, and the company began to send up distress signals.

Ottawa then bought TMX from Kinder Morgan for $4.5 billion, calling the purchase “a serious and necessary investment made in the national interest.”

The feds added: “The completion of this important infrastructure project is making Canada and the Canadian economy more resilient by diversifying global market access for our resources.”

Construction began in the Edmonton area in November 2019. By 2020, though, Trans Mountain said the cost of the expansion had risen to $12.6 billion, and in 2022 the cost was estimated at $21.4 billion, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic among the reasons. In March 2023, Trans Mountain put the cost at $30.9 billion.

Some of the benefits listed by Ottawa: Opening new markets for Canadian energy exports, reducing our reliance on a single customer, and ensuring that Canada receives fair market value for its resources while maintaining the highest environmental standards; Significantly increasing the royalties and tax revenues that all levels of government receive: According to an independent study, TMX is expected to add $9.2 billion in GDP and $2.8 billion in tax revenues between 2024 and 2043; Contributing to global and regional energy security by providing a secure, long-term supply of energy; Creating economic benefits for many Indigenous groups through contracting, financial compensation, and employment and training opportunities.

But Ottawa has said all along that it would not own the pipeline forever, and that at some point it will divest itself of ownership, and make at least partial ownership available to Indigenous groups.

Trans Mountain CEO Mark Maki now wonders if the feds might postpone that divestment, particularly if they decide TMX shouldn’t be the last oil export pipeline built in Canada.

We await word from the new federal government on its plans.

Business

Trump reins in oil markets with one Truth Social post

Published on

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

President Trump on Monday warned oil producers not to raise prices in the wake of U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, cautioning that a spike would benefit America’s enemies. “EVERYONE, KEEP OIL PRICES DOWN. I’M WATCHING!”

Key Details:

  • Trump posted on Truth Social: “YOU’RE PLAYING RIGHT INTO THE HANDS OF THE ENEMY. DON’T DO IT!”

  • Oil prices fell after the post, with Brent Crude and West Texas Intermediate both slipping by about one percent following earlier gains driven by Middle East tensions.

  • In a follow-up message, Trump told the Department of Energy: “DRILL, BABY, DRILL!!! And I mean NOW!!!”

Diving Deeper:

President Donald Trump issued a blunt warning to oil producers Monday morning following a weekend of U.S. military action against Iran, urging them to keep prices under control amid rising geopolitical tensions. His message, posted on Truth Social, was clear and emphatic: “EVERYONE, KEEP OIL PRICES DOWN. I’M WATCHING! YOU’RE PLAYING RIGHT INTO THE HANDS OF THE ENEMY. DON’T DO IT!”

The timing of the post was significant. Over the weekend, U.S. forces struck three major Iranian nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan—in a bold escalation that raised fears of a broader regional conflict and potential threats to global energy infrastructure. Initial market reactions were swift, with Brent Crude jumping over 5 percent and briefly breaking above $81 a barrel. West Texas Intermediate followed, climbing to its highest level since January.

However, after Trump’s post circulated Monday, both benchmarks began to pull back, each falling by about one percent. Traders appeared to interpret Trump’s comments as a call for restraint, especially as domestic producers weigh output decisions amid a softening price environment and a looser global supply picture.

While Trump didn’t name names, his message seemed clearly aimed at American oil companies, some of which have recently floated the possibility of scaling back production due to lower margins. Meanwhile, OPEC+ continues its efforts to bring previously curtailed output back online, further complicating the global supply-demand dynamic.

In a second post, Trump added: “To The Department of Energy: DRILL, BABY, DRILL!!! And I mean NOW!!!”

Despite the military flare-up, markets have largely stabilized, suggesting that investors are waiting to see how Iran will respond. Tehran’s parliament has called for the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for global oil shipping, but such a move would require the approval of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

For now, traders appear cautious but unconvinced that supply routes will be disrupted in the immediate term. Trump, however, has made it clear that if oil producers try to capitalize on the crisis by raising prices, he’ll be watching—and he won’t be quiet.

Continue Reading

Business

The U.S. Strike in Iran-Insecurity About Global Oil Supply Suddenly Makes Canadian Oil Attractive

Published on

From Energy Now

By Maureen McCall

The U.S. strike on three nuclear sites in Iran is expected to rattle oil prices  as prices change to include a higher geopolitical risk premium.

Anticipated price rises range from a likely rise of $3-5 per barrel forecast by Reuters to predictions of a “knee-jerk” reaction price spike with  Brent crude, currently at $72.40, possibly rising to $120+ in a worst-case scenario, according to JPMorgan.


Get the Latest Canadian Focused Energy News Delivered to You! It’s FREE: Quick Sign-Up Here


Whatever the choice of action Iran will take in response- it is creating fears of reprisals striking U.S. oil infrastructure. Impacts on the Strait of Hormuz are feared as a senior Iranian lawmaker was quoted on June 19th as saying that the country could shut the Strait of Hormuz as a way of hitting back against its enemies.

In a recent interview, ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods said there is sufficient supply in the global oil market to withstand any supply disruption to Iranian exports.

“There’s enough spare capacity in the system today to accommodate any Iranian oil that comes off the market,” Woods told Fox News  “The bigger issue will be if infrastructure for exports or the shipping past the Strait of Hormuz is impacted.”

The Strait of Hormuz is considered the world’s most important oil chokepoint, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA).  Iran voted late Sunday to shut down the Strait through which about 20% of the world’s daily oil supply flows. The resulting oil supply risk leaves countries contemplating their options as they look for more long-term capacity.

We could be facing a return to the identification of “Conflict Oil”, a term Ezra Levant first coined in his book “Ethical Oil: The Case for Canada’s Oil Sands” to describe oil-producing countries with dismal human rights records, such as Iran. Conflict oil would now signify oil sourced from areas of the world subject to political conflict, instability and supply disruption. Levant used the term originally to argue that Canadian Oil Sands production should be considered a more ethical alternative to oil from countries with oppressive regimes. However, the argument could now be made that oil supply and pricing from conflict-free countries like Canada would be more reliable. Canadian oil could come into focus as conflict oil once again becomes a concern.

Katarzyna (Kasha)Piquette, CEO, of Canadian Energy Ventures

Katarzyna (Kasha)Piquette, CEO, of Canadian Energy Ventures (CEV), an organization formed to connect Canada’s energy with Europe’s growing needs in the face of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, foresees dramatic changes in global energy trade.

“The consequences of the US strike on Iran are a potential game-changer, not just in terms of pricing, but in how countries think about long-term energy security,” Piquette said. “In the short term, Canada can help stabilize supply to the U.S. and Europe as geopolitical risk premiums surge. But the long-term impact may be even more profound: countries in Asia are likely to deepen ties with stable, non-Middle East suppliers like Canada. This is an opportunity to position Canadian energy as a cornerstone of energy security in a more divided world, and we must act strategically to expand our infrastructure and secure that future.”

Piquette says CEV is hearing directly from buyers in Europe and Asia, at least half a dozen countries, who are urgently looking to secure long-term contracts with reliable, conflict-free suppliers.

“Canadian oil is back in focus, and not just for ethical reasons. With the Trans Mountain expansion now operational, we can access Asian markets directly through the BC coast, while the U.S. The Gulf Coast remains a viable path to Europe. Yes, transportation adds cost—but buyers today are willing to pay a premium for stability. This is Canada’s moment, but it requires Ottawa to deliver on its promises: we need regulatory certainty, investment in infrastructure, and export capacity that matches global demand.”

Maureen McCall is an energy professional who writes on issues affecting the energy industry.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

X