Keystone pipeline
Premium
The Keystone Delay Won't Stop These Canadian Oil Sands Stocks
I'm not a knee-jerk hater of the Obama administration.
But the President's decision to reject the Keystone pipeline was one of his worst.
Aside from creating jobs, the pipeline would have decisively swung U.S. energy supplies more toward domestic sources and those of our friendly neighbor Canada.
Granted, the pipeline wouldn't create energy independence but it would mean importing less oil from the Middle East.
It is the kind of switch that could help save the U.S. large amounts of blood and treasure in the future.
Because in practice, our dependence on Middle Eastern oil forces us to incur huge foreign costs – after all, we just finished paying $800 billion for the Iraq war. As you know, that is just a drop in a much larger bucket.
Add in the human losses and the costs are incalculable.
In this case, caring less about what goes on in the Middle East – other than ensuring the safety of our ally Israel – would save us all those costs, and get us that much closer to balancing the damn Federal budget.
So let's just say shelving the Keystone pipeline wasn't exactly the president's finest hour.
Bullish on Canadian Oil Sands Stocks
However, while the Keystone Pipeline continues to twist in the wind, investors shouldn't ignore the Canadian energy sector – especially the Athabasca tar sands.
Because with oil prices on the rise, these Canadian resource plays are likely to offer investors serious returns.
Here's why: oil prices are headed higher.
In fact, Fed chairman Ben Bernanke's recent promise that U.S. interest rates will remain near zero until the end of 2014 has given a huge boost to commodity and energy prices.
What's more, the $600 billion injection into EU banks and the promise of another $600 billion this month just adds more fuel to the inflationary flames.
Eventually, oil prices will get so high that they will cause a recession all by themselves, just like they did in 2008. But remember, that happened at $147 per barrel, so we've still got quite a way to go. This time oil could get closer to $200 per barrel.
That's bullish for places like the Athabasca tar sands.
The Ultimate Fate of the Keystone Pipeline
The Obama Administration last week decided not to approve the Keystone XL pipeline.
This has introduced another political firestorm into an already uncertain market.
If there is one subject that is likely to stimulate more angst over economic recovery prospects, it is the availability of energy.
Energy is central in everything that happens in the U.S. market.
And Keystone is designed to transport up to 700,000 barrels of oil a day from Alberta to refineries on the U.S. Gulf coast. It represents a new North American-centered initiative to lessen reliance on Middle Eastern imports and would create thousands of new jobs.
It also would create new opportunities for investors.
But the pipeline has had its detractors from the beginning.
Environmentalist Concerns Reign
Environmental concerns have been raised over the greenhouse gas emissions and passage of the pipeline through ecologically sensitive areas.
It is also opposed by those who view the current condition of virtually guaranteed crude oil price increases as an opportunity to invest in alternative and renewable energy technologies.
Some of the environmental issues can be resolved by simply moving the pipeline route.
But others are more difficult to counter.
The crude involved is very heavy oil, primarily from the Athabasca oil sands and similar deposits in Alberta and Saskatchewan. That raw material requires upgrading to synthetic oil and that is far more environmentally invasive than processing lightweight crude.
Therefore, proponents of the pipeline can't resolve environmental concerns simply by changing the route.
And then there is the added problem of a current U.S. statute, namely, §526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007. This prohibits federal agencies from procuring (which includes importing) synthetic fuel unless its life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions are less than those for conventional petroleum sources.
The "life-cycle" considers the GHG emissions throughout the extraction and processing of the oil – that is, from the time it is taken out of the ground, through its transport and upgrading, to its delivery to a refinery (and its emissions there).
When originally passed, this section was designed to benefit domestic American producers over the import of heavier and higher sulfur content foreign oil. It was never intended to create a problem with our neighbors to the north.
Unfortunately, we sure have a problem now.
Approval of Keystone Pipeline Will Pump Profits Out of Canadian Oil Sands
With U.S. President Barack Obama expected to approve the long-delayed Keystone XL oil pipeline late this year or early in 2012, several companies already producing in the Canadian oil sand fields stand to benefit.
The 1,700-mile pipeline, which could be finished as soon as mid-2013, will carry 700,000 barrels of crude per day from the Canadian oil sands in Alberta to refineries in Port Arthur, TX.
That will make it easier for the oil-producing companies to get their product to market.
"It's a great idea," said Money Morning Global Resources Specialist Peter Krauth. "According to the EIA, Canada is the top petroleum exporter to the United States – delivering more oil than Saudi Arabia and Mexico combined and, for the most part anyways, Canadians don't hate Americans."
Approval of the Keystone pipeline, first proposed by TransCanada Corp. (NYSE: TRP) in 2008, has been delayed for more than a year because of environmental concerns.
In particular, Nebraska residents fear leaks from the pipeline fouling the Ogallala Aquifer, which supplies the drinking water for more than 2 million residents. Environmental groups say the complex methods required to extract the oil from the sands are destructive to the land and generate excess greenhouse gasses.
However, political pressure to "do something" about the high price of oil and a desire to create jobs almost certainly ensures that the pipeline will get built.
"For the Obama administration, having an answer to high prices will be much more important in 2012 than it is today," Kevin Book. managing director at the research firm ClearView Energy Partners, told CNN Money. "We think it will get approved."
Up to Obama
Because the Keystone pipeline crosses an international border, the U.S. State Department is responsible for approving it, but President Obama is expected to make the final decision.
The State Department issued a report in August that said the environmental impact would be limited, and is expected to recommend that the president approve it.
"We still anticipate State will approve the project by year end," Christine Tezak, an energy and environmental policy analyst at asset management firm Robert W. Baird & Co., wrote in a research note last month. "The White House will cite national energy security, trade with a close neighbor, new jobs, and historically strict permitting requirements as justification for approval."
RSS