Christy Clark read a ministerial statement today in our legislature, this is her second ministerial statement in the last week, the first statement on Monday was her public apology over the ethnicgate scandal, today Christy Clark dove back into a future-world filled with unicorns and shiny ponies, Christy Clark`s ministerial statement today praised David Black`s refinery proposal, she called him a great Canadian, a visionary, Clark spoke in terms of this proposal being a once-in-a-lifetime-opportunity, right up there with her $trillion dollar LNG scheme..
Christy Clark is right about one thing, both proposals are on par with each other on a certain level...
They are both fantasy, yes Christy blathered about 6000 construction jobs, blathered about world class oil spill response, Clark spoke as if David Black`s proposal was a done deal, and that is indeed very scary, for a non-elected premier to issue a ministerial statement about a project with zero chance of coming to fruition, a proposal based in fiction, a project that makes no economic sense, a idea that, even if was serious proposal would be 10 years away from completion..
David Black did get favourable press in the last few days, appearances with Simi Sara and others, yet no one asked him about his financial backers beyond broad vague terms, for all David Black has in the way of investors is "seed money" from a Swiss investment house...
"Richard Cooke, the senior managing director of Oppenheimer Investments Group, said the firm has enough investors interested in the project to fund the entire amount through a debt-financing model that would keep 100% of the ownership in British Columbia. The refinery would have to be approved by the province.
“We have the investor seed. We have the commitment for this. I was being serious about that when David said we have 100% commitment to this,” Mr. Cooke said.
Mr. Cooke said he believes first nations will also take a share in the ownership of the company.
Mr. Black told the chamber the cost of the refinery has risen by $3-billion from the original proposal of $13-billion because it will use new greenhouse gas-reducing technology developed by Alberta-based Expander Energy"
What comes first, the chicken or the egg, a refinery takes about 7 years to complete, a pipeline 2 years...
There are so many flaws in David Black`s proposal, where to begin, first off, David Black wants use of Enbridge`s pipeline, and the tar oil flowing through it, nowhere has Enbridge talked about anything but shipping raw bitumen, so in theory a second pipeline would be required unless Enbridge and their Asian partners decide to go into the selling of finished petroleum products business in partnership with David Black..That seems problematic to a Chinese Government interested in upgrading domestically..
David Black talks about the dangers of tankering raw bitumen, he is correct, however he fails to realize or admit the dangers of tar oil pipelines traversing 800 BC rivers and streams..David Black`s proposal if at all serious would include a tar oil upgrader at source in Alberta, by doing that cleaner refined oil could be piped, the problem with piping abrasive, sandy, ether-laden raw dilbit through a pipeline, and a second pipeline for tar-oil condensate, by not even suggesting an upgrader be built in Alberta at source makes David Black`s proposal a joke....Pipeline would be cheaper to build and the product slightly safer to pipe..
Other issues include, who will David Black`s customers be, there is no large metropolis around Kitimat requiring infusions of jet fuel, diesel and gasoline, existing supply lines are adequate for years to come, China isn`t interested in buying finished petroleum products, refining costs in China are a fraction of the Canadian labour rate..
David Black also talked of creating his own super-tanker fleet, there too lie serious problems, in the last decade China has bought up most on the industry, super-tankers are barely staying afloat financially, China has driven costs down to the point of killing off all competition, David Black`s vague investor pool are probably not aware of this, the other issue with shipping by tanker finished products, the giant tankers aren`t used, smaller ones are employed, these are floating bombs, therefor long-distance shipping of finished product is not a very profitable venture, a proposal surrounded in risk..I wonder if David Black`s vague investors were told this..
China’s plan for 80 super tankers worries owners
Beijing’s goal to transport half its oil imports on its own ships brings huge problems for foreign fleets
Keith Wallis in Boao, Hainan Island
07 November 2011
Plans by mainland ship owners to order up to 80 super tankers would be disastrous for foreign ship owners who would likely see charter rates plunge and vessels left idle, a senior shipping industry figure warned.
Torben Skaanild, secretary general of the Baltic and International Maritime Council (Bimco), said if all 80 ships were ordered “it would kill the tanker market for years - it would be a catastrophe”.
Skaanild was speaking on the sidelines of the World Shipping (China) summit at Boao on Hainan Island on Friday about renewed speculation that China Ocean Shipping (Cosco) and China Shipping Development as well as other mainland owners intended to embark on an ordering frenzy for new tankers. This was to ensure mainland ship owners met Beijing’s target that 50 per cent of China’s oil imports should be carried on its own ships by 2015.
Figures from China’s customs bureau show the mainland imported 130 million tonnes of crude oil in the first half of this year, equivalent to 434 super tanker shipments, and up 7 per cent year on year.
Moves to acquire a further 80 very large crude carriers (VLCCs) would more than double the existing combined fleet of China’s four largest ship owners, who together control 56 super tankers each of about 300,000 deadweight tonnes.
Based on existing orders, China Shipping Development plans to add a further three VLCCs to its fleet by 2013 and Nanjing Tanker Corporation, part of Sinotrans and the China Shipping Company, will take delivery of a further 10 large tankers by the end of next year. They are among 30 super tankers on order to Chinese ship owners.
Captain Wei Jiafu, Cosco chairman, confirmed that mainland ship owners would acquire a further 80 VLCCs over the next four years.
Explaining Cosco’s strategy, he said it was likely to form shipping joint ventures with mainland oil companies such as China National Petroleum (PetroChina), China Petrochemical (Sinopec) and China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC). These joint ventures were likely to order new tonnage.
Skaanild said some independent owners were worried about the impact on the crude oil tanker market if China went through with its tanker-owning target. Bimco, which had 900 owners as members who controlled 66 per cent of global merchant ship tonnage, believed in free competition, he said, “but we have to express our concern”.
With ship owners facing the worst crisis for years as too many vessels chase fewer cargoes, Skaanild said some owners would not survive, so there would be plenty of ships to buy. Bimco’s position was that owners should not be building new ships.
Peter Sand, Bimco’s shipping analyst, said the VLCC market was in dire straits. “Last year, a modern VLCC earned US$37,929 per day, while year-to-date 2011 earnings are down 55 per cent at US$17,157 per day,” he said - an amount that barely covered operating costs.
And from the Mud report...
"Here's a few of the ecomonic reasons why the oily-garchs prefer transporting raw crude, be it Tar Sands crap or not, to distant refineries located near the population and industrial hubs that will eventually comsume the refined products.
First, is that 8 pipelines or tankers or whatever would be needed to ship the 8 different types of refined oil products that are in crude oil. You can't transport gasoline in the same pipeline as diesel or kerosine [jet fuel]. But you can if they are all still mixed in crude oil. Another big factor up here in Canuckistan is the combination of high labour rates, the more costly to comply with environmental regulations and the 'Dutch Disease' over-valued looney that makes it far cheaper to build and operate refineries in Asia, Texas or just about anywhere else.
Then there's the fact that it takes at least 7 years to get approval to build refinery in Canada which would put any possible refinery operation far behind the proposed Kitimat/Northern Gateway project.
So, it looks like this idea of Black's is just hot-air but i doubt it will be the last attempt by the oily-garchy to bribe British Columbians into selling the future of their natural heritage for a few shiny bobbles as BC Premier Christy Clarke would have us do. Hoefully we here in BC won't agree with Christy and end up being, in Oscar Wilde's words, a people who know the "cost of everything and the value of nothing?"
This David Black proposal is just "black Noise".....It`s really about Enbridge Gateway pipeline, a back-door lifeline being offered up by David Black, pretend to propose a value-added industry while stealthily promoting Gateway bitumen pipeline..
Lastly, I`m rather disappointed how lazy the mainstream media is, cknw is, Global news is, even Simi Sara just lapped up David Black`s buttermilk, no hard questions about the financial risks associated with supertankers, no mention of the issues with raw bitumen being piped over 800 BC rivers and streams, no indepth look at Black`s vague investor group..
No discussion of who Black`s customers will be, a whole bunch of positive press for David Black and not one real question about those above issues raised, easy attainable facts, nothing....Hello media, is anyone home..hhhhheeeelllloooo, hhhheeeellloooo, is anybody out there..
I do understand David Black`s motivation, it`s all about Gateway, however, Christy Clark by talking about this unicorn and future ponies for everyone scheme in a ministerial statement shows that indeed the BC Liberal Government has run out of gas..
Here is the non-elected premier`s ministerial statemen..
"Hon. C. Clark: If we want to strengthen health care and education and other vital public services in our province, we of course first must strengthen our economy. Yesterday the people of British Columbia were presented with a credible and a bold proposal to do just that.
B.C. businessman David Black made a major announcement with respect to his company Kitimat Clean and his proposal to build and operate a world-class petroleum refinery in Kitimat.
Now, Mr. Black needs little introduction. He's one of the most successful British Columbia entrepreneurs. He built a newspaper empire at a time when newspapers around the world were going under. Throughout his business life he has found success where others have found failure. He is not to be underestimated.
Yesterday Mr. Black announced that he had found investors willing to back his bid to invest $25 billion in his project. He proposes to build a $16 billion refinery, $8 billion in pipelines and a further $1 billion in new tankers to carry the refined petroleum products to customers in Asia.
This is a credible proposal from a credible B.C. businessman. Without question, this would be the largest single, private sector investment in the history of our great province. It would be potentially a tremendous game changer for our children and their children. Six thousand new jobs during construction; 3,000 full-time jobs created once the refinery is in operation. And importantly, Mr. Black's proposal would keep ownership of this project right here at home in British Columbia.
I have long said that British Columbians believe in the benefit of environmentally sound economic development and are fully supportive of getting higher value for B.C. and Canadian goods in markets outside of North America.
Last July our government stood up and put five conditions in place by which we would gauge support for any heavy-oil pipelines in British Columbia. Our five conditions are the way to ensure the highest standards for environmental protection and First Nation involvement possible should any heavy-oil pipeline go through British Columbia.
Mr. Black has proposed a new pipeline across northern B.C., and I want to be clear. The five strict conditions that we have very clearly set out would apply to his proposal, as they would to any other. But the difference between the first pipeline proposal and Mr. Black's is that the refinery in Kitimat could form part of the economic benefits needed to satisfy our fifth condition, although I do need to be clear that although it could form a part of that, it will not go all the way.
Thousands of jobs could create a significant economic benefit that does not exist under any current proposal. As well, Mr. Black has said he plans to use greenhouse gas–reducing technology that would cut GHG emissions from his refinery in half.
Finally, Mr. Black's proposal radically reduces the environmental risks associated with the shipping of oil off our coast to Asia. Because
HSE - 20130307 PM 004/hbw/1345
And finally, Mr. Black's proposal radically reduces the environmental risks associated with the shipping of oil off our coast to Asia because refined products are transported in much smaller ships, refined products are much easier to remediate in case of an incident, and these products are already very regularly moving up and down B.C.'s coast.
I'd like to tell this House that our government has been working constructively with Mr. Black in his quest to identify a suitable location on which to build a potential refinery. Our government wants to use every tool at our disposal to move the proposal forward where it can be judged on its merits by a robust, rigorous and, most importantly, independent environmental process free from political influence.
Like our potential with liquefied natural gas, these opportunities do not come around every day — opportunities that can strengthen our economy, sustain public health care and education and put thousands of British Columbians to work at high-paying, family-supporting, long-term jobs. Our government takes the view that we should work together to address legitimate environmental and safety concerns and find a way to get to yes on projects that will grow our economy.
This project and the LNG opportunity both require leadership, and this is where my government stands. We are British Columbians. We are Canadians. We can grow our economy. We can make environmentally responsible economic development happen if we put our minds to it. If we are clear, if we are consistent, if we are strong-minded, we can make economic development happen.
We have to take a stand, we have to make sure investors have certainty, clarity and a fair process, and we have to do that not just for this generation but for future generations."
Legislative video from our legislature for Thursday afternoon available here(soon)
The Straight Goods
Cheers Eyes Wide Open