RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Economics of WCSB vs Marcellus shipments to Eastern Canada?yes I understand that. but tou does not pay to ship beyond DAWN. and marcellus producers don't pay TRP to ship beyond reciept points like Niagra or DAWN. this goes to your original point about which customers are important to TRP and which are not. I don't agree with you that marcellus customers are more important tham WCSB customers on the mainline. You have not established that. but that's a minor point. we are all learning more about this business and its challenges. And its increasingly challening for WCSB producers. :) cheers.
Yasch22 wrote: Ceremony: return thanks for getting all of us deeper into the labyrinth of pipeline politics. I actually first got going on this when the bitter disputes between all the WCSB producers and TRP were making headlines last year. I'll get my links to you in a separate post, but for the time being I'll just go back briefly to the typical narrative of a natural gas shipment.
When TRP (or Alliance) makes a deal to ship 1 mmcf of gas from Company X in Alberta to a distant Hub Y, there's a chance that not a single molecule in that original shipment actually makes it to Hub Y.
Some of it
-- goes to storage
-- gets filtered or condensed out at straddle stations
-- gets used (a very small part of it) to run the turbines for compressor stations
-- gets taken out by local utilities all the way along the line.
However, at the end of the day, 1 mmcf of gas from scores of feeder points in the system will be delivered to Hub Y, and the source of that 1 mmcf will be recorded as coming from Company X, who will receive the price offered by Hub Y on the designated day of receipt.
That's interchangeability (a.k.a. fungibility) at work.