RE:RE:Will this story possibly affect our condensate demand?skiptoggle wrote: It applies to the shipping by rail transportation option and not pipeline transportation. With the logic being the cost difference to ship heavy bitumen vs diluted bitumen in rail cars is cheaper when undiluted. Makes sense from a ship by rail strategy if you can't find pipeline capacity to move product.
Shipping by pipeline is cheaper with the diluted product as the product flows using less energy when diluted. For Alberta's sake I hope it helps increase deman for the heavy stuff.
Remember also, the condensate is valuable in it's own right not just as a dilutent for bitumen. Plus the with shortage of condensate in in Canada to begin with I'd see it impacting imports before impacting domestic production.
montrus wrote: if now now, then somewhere down the road? Thoughts?
https://calgaryherald.com/business/energy/oilsands-crude-could-get-even-heavier-as-companies-look-to-save-transportation-costs
Agreed, it's an "and .... and" situation.
The more Alberta/Saskatchewan
can export, for more or less the same cost, the better.
Also the condensate that comes out of the heavy oil can help reduce imports from USA.
Pipeline transport will remain much more energy efficient than rail transport, so maybe this is an argument to get the greenies to consider building more pipelines ;-)
(not even I believe that they are as clever as that).
Have fun.