Natural Resources committee  One very simple example is it's cheaper to send crude or bitumen through a pipeline than it is by rail. If in fact you do construct pipelines, that would mean there's more money flowing back to the producers, which would by implication suggest that they would then be able to rein

Natural Resources committee  I'm not sure I totally understand the question, but maybe I can just answer it this way. The energy east pipeline is a vehicle where western Canada landlocked crude-based systems can access global markets, so if the Keystone XL pipeline is disallowed, then the energy east pipel

Natural Resources committee  The oil sands are the marginal barrel production. They're very expensive to produce. I agree with that. They require a lot of human capital, a lot of technology, a lot of innovation to produce those. In the absence of a pipeline or any kind of pipeline, that development would not

Natural Resources committee  The petrochemical business actually has two centres in Canada, one in Alberta, primarily in the Joffre and the Edmonton area, and the other in Sarnia. Probably of more concern are the Alberta facilities. As you indicated, because of the reduction in the flows on the export pipel

Natural Resources committee  No, I can't add any light to that.

Natural Resources committee  I suppose that could become a challenge if in fact the pipeline is disallowed. But as it stands right now, it's basically in the President's hands, and since he hasn't said yes or no to the pipeline, a NAFTA challenge really isn't relevant right now.

Natural Resources committee  Sorry. I'm not familiar with the speech he actually gave. What I can suggest to you is here in Alberta the relationship between the industry and the first nations is imbedded in our regulatory process now so that a consultation process takes place, and I think that's a good thing

Natural Resources committee  I'm not sure I can define the agenda. I would suggest it's probably just politically motivated. But I do—

Natural Resources committee  Okay, I'll answer it this way. On the gas side of the spectrum, it's all about supply. The U.S. is going to be in an oversupply position within the coming years, so Canadian gas is not going to be needed in that market, at least on a net basis. On the oil side, we've looked at

Natural Resources committee  We do it a little bit. I'll give you a couple of examples. We investigate, monitor, and challenge the industry's relationship with first nations. What we've found over the past years is the collaboration between the oil sands producers and the first nations groups and the pipel

Natural Resources committee  That would be fine. Thank you. I will skip forward and go right to the end on the gas system. The health of the gas transmission system in Alberta will also have implications on the petrochemical business, especially as it relates to ethane. On facts about the Canadian petroc

Natural Resources committee  Thank you. Good morning. My name is Peter Howard. I am president and CEO of the Canadian Energy Research Institute, CERI. Founded in 1975, CERI is an independent, not-for-profit research institute specializing in the analysis of energy economics related to environmental issues

Natural Resources committee  Yes. Actually, if you count the molecules, it's probably not.... The Marcellus molecule doesn't make it to Quebec, but by displacement you could say that in fact within a couple of years Marcellus gas will be occupying that demand space.

Natural Resources committee  I would have to say we haven't looked at it in that context, although we do have a report out there that looks at the economic impact of shale gas development within Quebec. Basically this report says that we fully recognize that there's a moratorium in place, but if that morator

Natural Resources committee  Yes.