Nebraska’s approval of an alternative route could throw more
uncertainty into the mix for the long-delayed Keystone XL oil pipeline.
The Public Service Commission approved TransCanada Corp.’s
project on a three-to-two vote, removing one of the last hurdles to the
Calgary-based company’s construction of the $8 billion, 1,179-mile
(1,897-kilometer) conduit, which has been on its drawing boards since
2008. The decision, though, wasn’t wrinkle-free: The panel mandated an
alternative route that was immediately targeted by the project’s
opponents as lacking adequate vetting.
TransCanada
is now "assessing how the decision would impact the cost and schedule
of the project,” Russ Girling, TransCanada’s chief executive officer,
said in a statement. The company’s shares rose 1.3 percent to C$63.35 at
12:24 p.m. in New York trading.
The uncertainty expressed by Girling was quickly reflected in analyst notes.
"While
today’s Keystone XL pipeline approval is an important milestone, it
does not provide certainty that the project will ultimately be built and
begin operating," said Gavin MacFarlane, a vice president at Moody’s
Investors Service. “Pipeline construction would negatively affect
TransCanada’s business risk profile through increased project execution
risk, and would likely put pressure on financial metrics."
Jane
Kleeb, president of the environmental advocacy group Bold Alliance, said
green-lighting the alternative may have helped the commission reach a
"middle ground solution.” But it opens new questions that she said her
group would likely explore in federal court.
That view mirrored a
dissenting opinion from Commissioner Crystal Rhoades. The alternative
route needed more study on both the state and federal level, she
said before the final vote, and it failed to give landowners along that
different path the ability to address the commission.
The
commissioners who supported the route change said it would impact fewer
threatened and endangered species, fewer wells, less irrigated cropland,
and that it included one less river crossing.
Additionally, they wrote, “it is in the public interest for
the pipelines to be in closer proximity to each other, so as to maximize
monitoring resources and increase the efficiency of response times”
with “issues that may arise with either pipeline.”
South Dakota Spill
The
decision came just days after a spill on TransCanada’s existing
Keystone line in South Dakota on Thursday sparked new attacks by
environmentalists who pointed to the event as something the state could
expect if the project is approved.
In its post-hearing brief,
TransCanada told the panel its "preferred route was the product of
literally years of study, analysis and refinement by Keystone, federal
agencies and Nebraska agencies," and that no alternate route, even one
paralleling the Keystone mainline as the approved path does, was truly
comparable.
Producers
in the Alberta oil sands region and elsewhere in Western Canada are
facing pipeline bottlenecks, forcing increased volumes onto rail cars.
Since rail is a more expensive form of transport, heavy Canadian crude
prices will need to trade at a bigger discount to West Texas
Intermediate futures.
That discount widened to more than $15 a
barrel Monday from less than $10 in August. Keystone XL construction,
along with Kinder Morgan Inc.’s Trans Mountain expansion and Enbridge
Inc.’s Line 3 expansion, could narrow the gap to less than $10 by early
next decade, Tim Pickering, chief investment officer at Auspice Capital
Advisors Ltd., said in a telephone interview.
Mexico, Venezuela
The
pipeline may also be more commercially viable given declining heavy oil
production in Mexico and ongoing instability in Venezuela, said Zachary
Rogers, a refining and oil markets research analyst at Wood Mackenzie,
said in a statement. Canadian producers are an alternate source of heavy
crude for U.S. Gulf Coast refiners.
Brett Harris, a spokesman for Calgary-based Cenovus Energy Inc.,
a committed oil-sands shipper on the proposed pipeline, said the
approval “is in the best interest of the industry, best interest of
Canada and the best interest of the U.S. as well. We are pleased to see
that decision.”
Dennis McConaghy, former executive vice president
of corporate development at TransCanada, said he would expect senior
management to announce they will go ahead with the project by year’s end
with construction by the later half of 2019. Completion of the line
would come a couple years later.
“The project could have been very seriously set back if they hadn’t got this approval today,” he said.
Volume Needed
McConaghy
said he believes the company has secured the volume needed to make the
project economically viable. But he added that “there is no question
there is going to be all kinds of legal obstruction that will be
resorted to by opponents.”
Nebraska’s decision overrode the
objections of environmental groups, Native American tribes and
landowners along the pipeline’s prospective route. The project had the
support of the state’s governor, Republican Pete Ricketts, its chamber
of commerce, trade unions and the petroleum industry.
With
Nebraska’s go-ahead in hand, TransCanada still must formally decide
whether to proceed with construction on the line, which would send crude
from Hardisty, Alberta, through Montana and South Dakota to Nebraska,
where it will connect to pipelines leading to U.S. Gulf Coast
refineries. The XL pipeline would add the ability to move 830,000
barrels a day, more than doubling the existing line’s capacity.
Shipping Commitments
The
company’s open season for gauging producers’ interest closed late last
month, and TransCanada executives have indicated that they’ve secured enough shipping commitments to make the project commercially worthwhile.
President Barack Obama’s administration rejected the pipeline in 2015. President Donald Trump
vowed to reverse that determination and, in January, invited the
company to reapply. Approval was quickly granted. He also championed
completion of the Energy Transfer Partners LP-led Dakota Access Pipeline, which runs from northwestern North Dakota to Illinois via South Dakota and Iowa.
The
panel heard testimony and took in evidence during a four-day August
hearing. Its power over the project is drawn from the state’s
constitution.
The case is In the Matter of the Application of TransCanada Keystone Pipeline LP for Route Approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline Project, 0p-0003, Nebraska Public Service Commission (Lincoln).
No comments:
Post a Comment