Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

CANEXUS CORP 6.5 PCT DEBS T.CUS.DB.D



TSX:CUS.DB.D - Post by User

Comment by ocean112on Feb 04, 2015 8:23pm
446 Views
Post# 23397384

RE:Latest Article - Seeking Alpha - Canexus

RE:Latest Article - Seeking Alpha - Canexus

pm1231 wrote: I would argue those of you holding CUS may be well positioned given most of the negative news has been priced into the stock. Here is my latest article from Seeking Alpha for those that are interested.

______________

  • Why Obama May Reject Keystone XL - And Who Stands To Benefit [Edit or Delete]0 comments
    Jan 30, 2015 8:36 AM | about stocks: GBNXF, CXUSF, CP, CNI

    As you've probably heard, the Senate passed the Keystone XL pipeline short of a majority that would enable them to override a presidential veto. Subsequently, the White House reiterated their stance that they would not be pushed to make a decision they feel falls squarely in the executive branch and would veto the bill. The State Department has set a deadline of February 2, 2015 for other federal agencies to weigh in after which, the Obama administration will have the "facts" they need to make a decision.

    Obama has made clear that the decision will be made on two important criteria:

    1) Keystone XL will not contribute to climate change

    2) Keystone XL is deemed to be in the national interest

    The State Department has concluded that the contribution to global warming is negligible at best. That being said, the EPA may weigh in considerably on this conclusion after February 2 to make their opinion known. However, for argument sake, let's assume the conclusion stands, and that Keystone XL will not contribute materially to global warming.

    Where Keystone XL will likely fail is the 2nd part of the litmus test, is it in the national interest. Obama has already made clear his opinionthat the pipeline will few permanent jobs despite claims from the opposition it will create thousands of jobs. Obama has made clear his opinion that Keystone is merely a conduit to pump Canadian crude to export markets, hardly serving the national interest. However, the one argument Obama may be able to argue effectively given the recent developments in global oil is the US path to energy independence. Oil prices have been cut by over 50% in large part to the growth of US Shale over the last 5 years. The US is awash in oil. Oil inventories are at all time highs with the marginal cost of production falling with the advent of new technology. In a nutshell, Obama will simply argue we don't need "dirty oil" from the Canadian Tar Sands, we have plenty of our own. The US is on a fast track to energy independence. Yes, the US is still importing crude to meet current demands, but those imports have been shrinking as domestic production has surged.

    Ten years ago, the argument was reducing dependence on rogue states for oil by tapping into an unlimited supply from your friendly neighbor to the north. Fast forward to today, and the US might rightfully argue, we don't need Canadian oil either. In a few short years, we will have enough production to meet our own needs. The facts won't dispute this as the US has virtually eclipsed Saudi Arabia as the world's largest oil producer.

    Therein lies what I think Obama may use to claim "Keystone XL is not in the national interest". The oil landscape has changed dramatically in just a few short months and has given Obama a credible "out" to satisfy his Democratic base on whether the pipeline serves the national interest. Consumers are happy because they are consuming cheap oil for the time being so they won't care as much as they did just 6 months ago when gas prices were significantly higher. He clearly has been telegraphing it doesn't serve the national interest in the buildup to yesterday's senate decision.

    He will likely veto the Senate bill in a few days, and then shortly thereafter, provide his final assessment of Keystone after 7 long years. Given the argument above, my take is he will "kill" the Keystone XL bill, at least for the remainder of his administration. It doesn't mean Keystone XL goes away, but likely gets delayed another 2 years until a new president is installed in the Oval Office. In the meantime, Democrats appease the environmental lobby for the time being.

    If this plays out, which companies stand to benefit? Clearly, rail infrastructure companies would benefit since Canadian Tar Sands will still find a market via rail. In Canada, Gibson, Canexus, CP and CN stand to benefit substantially from such an outcome. On the flip side, heavy oil producers may see some temporary pain.

    Stocks: GBNXF, CXUSF, CP, CNI



Folks - I don't know if you are are aware of this - but PM1231 was spot on with his assessment. The EPA did come back with "concerns" and are using the current oil environment to throw another bottleneck into the process.

Read the article below. For Trans Canada to get into the rail business "in a few months" - they would have to purchase rail infrastructure - and my bet - that path of least resistance is NATO. I am personally convinced TransCanada, Kinder Morgan and Enbridge are in a potential bidding war for NATO (my personal conviction) - after reading this article. I'm feeling VERY positive about what's to unfold in the coming weeks. Judge for yourself.

https://business.financialpost.com/2015/02/04/transcanada-about-to-enter-the-rail-business-as-keystone-xl-delay-drags-on/?__lsa=078e-799a

TransCanada about to enter the rail business as Keystone XL delay drags on

| | Last Updated: Feb 4 6:58 PM ET
More from Yadullah Hussain | @Yad_FPEnergy

TORONTO – Facing increased pressure from rail cutting into its business, while the Keystone XL pipeline remains under unending American review, TransCanada Corp. said it is planning to diversify into the oil-by-rail business within months, improving its customers’ ability to connect to its sprawling North American pipeline and storage network.

“We are approaching 1.2 million barrels per day of [rail-] loading capacity — nobody has waited for Keystone XL pipeline to get built,” Russ Girling, president and CEO of the Calgary-based pipeline operator, said Wednesday following a speech to a business audience in Toronto.

“Depending on our conversations [with customers], we will probably enter the rail business in some form or fashion in the coming months,” Mr. Girling said, noting he expects shippers to move to the pipeline once its gets built, as it offers lower costs.

TransCanada has storage space in Heartland and Hardisty, Alta., near Edmonton, Cushing, Okla. and in Texas, Mr. Girling said, and shippers were keen to connect to those facilities. “There are certain places they want to go where they would like to hook up to facilities that we can build as loading facilities in Alberta, and to get to certain places in North America where we are already positioned,” he said. “So if we can build loading and offloading facilities for them — and we are having conversations with them as we speak.”

David Paul Morris/Bloomberg
David Paul Morris/BloombergOil tankers sit at a rail yard at the Kinder Morgan Inc. facility in Richmond, California.

TransCanada has hinted at a rail link to connect its customers to the U.S. market in the past, but talks with customers appear to have advanced as the company has faced six years of delays in waiting for Washington to approve its 830,000-bpd Keystone XL pipeline proposal. President Barack Obama has been warned off approving the pipeline by environmentalist activist donors, who insist that it should be scrapped, since it would encourage production of carbon-intensive oil sands.

Pipelines are widely considered to be safer and more environmentally friendly forms of oil transport, compared to rail. TransCanada has stated that oil by rail emits three times the greenhouse gases of pipelines, although rail companies dispute the figure.

Mr. Girling said the company does not expect to be “a big player” in the rail business, but forecasts the industry’s capacity to rise to two million bpd, “as we wait for pipeline approvals.”

TransCanada’s move to include rail in its arsenal has become necessary as rail companies Canadian National Railway Co. and Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd. enjoy a windfall from the oil transportation business. TransCanada’s competitors, including Kinder Morgan Inc. and Enbridge Energy Inc., are also building rail capacity to get around pipeline infrastructure constraints.

More crucially, the midstream company is frustrated at not being able to offer solutions to its shippers as Keystone’s review process drags on. On Tuesday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency advised the U.S. State Department, which is continuing to review the project, to “revisit” some of its previous conclusions about the pipeline. The EPA questioned the State Department’s assessment of Canadian oilsands emissions, its assumptions about the price of oil and asked it to “look harder” for alternative routes for the pipeline.

Mr. Girling said the EPA letter is a delaying tactic, noting that the company had looked at dozens of alternative routes that have been “studied and studied and studied.”

“At US$50 a barrel, the oilsands are still going to get developed anyway … I don’t think anything the EPA said the other day changes any of those facts. We don’t need to another market study to tell us that.”

The State Department has been reviewing the northern leg of the Alberta-to-Texas pipeline for six years, but the project appears to have cleared most of the procedural hurdles.

The department is expected to makes its final recommendations to President Obama after having recently received comments from eight key government agencies.

Last week, the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate passed a bill to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, setting up a showdown with the president, who has threatened a veto.

Mr. Girling says a veto won’t be the final nail in Keystone’s coffin.

“If [the bill] is vetoed I believe we are exactly where we were before, which is with the State Department process,” Mr. Girling said.

“That doesn’t mean that the political agitation on this project is going to go away, by any means. This is an issue that many people have a great interest in and will continue to be agitated by. But the State Department process is the process we’ve been participating in for the last six years, and have met every threshold and hurdle that they’ve set out.”

As Keystone XL suffers delays, TransCanada has applied for a permit to build a $12-billion Energy East pipeline to connect Western Canada to tidewater to the east. But criticism of that project has been rising, too, as anti-oilsands activists rally opposition to another pipeline, and Ontario and Quebec governments expressing a possible unwillingness to co-operate with the project.

Ontario Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli said Monday that the province had “significant concerns” about the impact of the project on First Nations, the environment and the price of natural gas.

“He is just highlighting his concerns and if I were in his shoes those would be my concerns too,” Mr Girling, noting that the company was had just begun the consultation process. “We have a lot of work to do.”


<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>