Other Manitoba and Saskatchewan Developments

[Cyro]

Bitumen Bubble, Need a place to Ship it, Sask, Alberta? Deep Water port is now feasable in Manitoba, from what The Oil/Gas Industry is saying. With pipelines still ..what 5 years away if they go through..shipping by rail to reach markets, is sounding good to the oil czars in Calgary? Thoughts?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pipeline bottlenecks, price discounts and the uncertainty surrounding future projects like the Northern Gateway pipeline have oil producers in Western Canada searching for new outlets to reach new markets.

The Port of Churchill in northern Manitoba falls into the latter category. The town, located on the west coast of Hudson Bay, has long been a key export point for western Canadian grain. Now it’s seeking to become an important export hub for the west’s oil – giving producers access to markets on the East Coast, Gulf Coast and Europe.

Read More:
Manitoba port could provide Alberta producers access to tidewater and new markets
By Alberta Oil Staff
Link:
http://www.albertaoilmagazine.com/20...oil-churchill/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The thawing of the Arctic is a chilling environmental prospect, but Port of Churchill proponents say it heralds a new era for Canada’s long-neglected and underutilized northern deepwater port.


Link:
Posted Apr. 10th, 2013 by Daniel Winters
http://www.agcanada.com/manitobacoop...for-churchill/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I know it's the Sun..But the articles are every where these days, shipping season is closing in and the descision would have had to be made month's ago:

Manitoba’s oil boom could just happen in Churchill
Port looking to diversify with potash, coal and other high-priced goods

Link:
http://www.winnipegsun.com/2013/02/2...n-in-churchill

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by jw6969

So I was in Moose Jaw yesterday.

Wow, I have never seen six foot snow drifts along the highway. At Belle Plain turnoff there was a snow blowing truck followed by a highway plow truck struggling to cut threw a 14 foot snow hill. Also there was a semi on its side, many cars in the the ditch. One car on its roof. So much snow. Allot of people are going to have flooded basements. Not to mention house's full of mold.

Saw a Construction fence around the area where the new hospital is going to be built.

Town Country Mall. Hadn't been in there for 4 - 5 years. Walked in threw the Sears entrance into the mall. Very few stores in that section until I turned the corner at Calico Junction (good fries there) and was met by a bustling mall. Shocked. Has there been any talk of what going into the Zellers.

Please note, do not know the names of any off these buildings.

Noticed the back side of this building is still opened to the elements. I remember seeing that 2 years ago like that.

There building a new building here. Replacing the ones that burned down. Wonder if they will find anymore tunnels with booze in them. Or maybe Capones vault. Was watching Forget About It.

This building has a new windows.

I love the Architecture on this building Very unique. I hope it has heritage designation.

Allot of buildings where torn down here for the new arena. Wish google earth would update Moose Jaw now that they have done Regina.

I like how Moose Jaw still has a lot of old 4 to 5 story old brick buildings. Looks like there are some good abandoned building in Moose Jaw that need exploring.

Noticed that Moose Jaw has some 10 story skyscrapers. There is no diagram page for Moose Jaw.

moosejaws my favourit place in sask

[1ajs]

churchill?

hah that rail line has train derailments all the time...

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by 1ajs

churchill?

hah that rail line has train derailments all the time...

I guess that's why the the heads of the oil industry in Calgary are considering it. But I guess thier are no other rail derailments any where else in the western provinces?

`````````````````````````

Oil producers worried about pipeline bottlenecks and the future of proposed pipelines to the U.S. Gulf Coast and Canada’s West Coast are taking a serious look at an Arctic backup — the Port of Churchill in northern Manitoba — to get their oil to tidal water.

Discussions are quietly underway between Calgary’s oil community, Canada’s only Arctic seaport, railway companies, and refiners on the East Coast and the Gulf Coast, as well as in Europe, to collect unrefined oil by rail from fields across Western Canada, get it to the port on the west coast of Hudson Bay and load it on Panamax-class tankers.

I guess your in the know my friend but what does the financial post know?

LINK:
http://business.financialpost.com/20...ertain-future/

[Riverman]

The rail line to Churchill is in very poor condition with speed limits down to 10 mph for long stretches. I don't know what petroleum tank cars weigh but the 100 ton grain cars are only filled 1/3-1/2 full due to weight restrictions on the line.

[bomberjet]

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs/sur...itoba-1813.htm

That line is supposed to be undergoing some upgrading. Not sure how far $60M will get them. Generally it costs about $1M+ per mile of new track to be constructed, under good conditions. So 500-1000 miles of railway rehab, $60M doesn't seem like much. I know they're not rebuilding the whole thing, but sometimes rehab work costs more than building new.

If you look at southwest Manitoba, oil trains aren't moving much faster than 20-30 mph anyways. Not like they're doing 55 mph. So don't need a high speed super track to the north. Just something reliable that doesn't washout. Over time improvements can be made.

Oil by rail is a huge market and growing in leaps and bounds. Definitely a good idea for the Port to get into commodities like potash, oil and others. Makes you wonder why they haven't been looking at this for decades. Or maybe they have, I don't know.

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Generally it costs about $1M+ per mile of new track to be constructed, under good conditions.

Yes, but this line is over muskeg and melting permafrost for a great deal of its length. And it is for the most part privately owned. $60M will do very little I'm afraid.

[Cyro]

As the thread topic gets down to fine points and details, reg: feasability and rail line integrity, load amounts on crude carrying tanker cars,(About 30-32 thousand gallons, yes I still do things the old way), speed of tanker cars on the lines involved in the proposal, rail transport of crude is "Booming", Tanker car Production is Booming", there is too much of a back log in bitumen,crude, the prices for the product will dictate if they ship it to churchill, even if it's a wonky railine, as poster here are saying.

But the details are in the Dollars. If the large oil corporations believe they can make even 5$ a barrel more to ship it by rail to Hudson Bay, even with a short shipping season, they will. Will they (possibly upgrade the port if needed, even though It "Already ships some oil north" they will.

It's an oppurtunity for Churchill to become relevent for manitoba and it's economy. That's a good thing,especially with the loss of the CWB(won't go thier in this thread). I believe. If we want to start an enviormental impact thread, about shipping in the artic I will. Tht's a whole different ball of wax.

[khabibulin]

Congratulations to the grade 8 students at Caronport school who won this Canada wide contest. Their prize will be a week long trip to the Fortress of Louisbourg National Historic Site, who are celebraing their 300th anniversary this year.

http://contest.myparkspass.ca/

[casper]

Originally Posted by Riverman

The rail line to Churchill is in very poor condition with speed limits down to 10 mph for long stretches. I don't know what petroleum tank cars weigh but the 100 ton grain cars are only filled 1/3-1/2 full due to weight restrictions on the line.

Does the speed matter all that much? It is a rail line that is not over utilised, so if it takes an extra day or two for a train to get up there and back it’s probably a minor issue. Someone would need to build holding tanks in Churchill and a suitable transfer station onto the ships.

[Riverman]

I give up.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by casper

Does the speed matter all that much? It is a rail line that is not over utilised, so if it takes an extra day or two for a train to get up there and back it’s probably a minor issue. Someone would need to build holding tanks in Churchill and a suitable transfer station onto the ships.

The speed matters because the faster the train is going , if there's a derailment there's going to be a lot more damage done.

As for delays , they cost money. In business , delays are one of the biggest worries any company may have to deal with. Even if it doesn't really affect your company , if it affects your customer's bottom line then that will eventually affect yours.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by Spocket

The speed matters because the faster the train is going , if there's a derailment there's going to be a lot more damage done.

As for delays , they cost money. In business , delays are one of the biggest worries any company may have to deal with. Even if it doesn't really affect your company , if it affects your customer's bottom line then that will eventually affect yours.

I understand ur post although , I'm finding that the 2 paragraphs contradict each other in some ways.
~~~~~~~~~~~
"The speed matters because the faster the train is going , if there's a derailment there's going to be a lot more damage done."

--- So higher speed on the BNR line,and a deraliment/cleanup is very costly? $$ and eviromentally costly to the eco system.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
But:
"As for delays , they cost money. In business , delays are one of the biggest worries any company may have to deal with."

So as for the speed of a crude carrying tanker car (lower even 10mph as some posters have quoted), be more profitable or benificial rather than a derailment/spill? I understand the logic of the post but I'ts all about, which u mention the profilt margin for the oil company. The speed issue is relevent, but I'm sure this is part of the process involved in all the negotiatians going on. If 10 mph makes money for company "A", we'll go that speed and profit.

[micheal]

Saskatchewan surpasses B.C. in exports for first time. Sask. ranked 4th in country for exports.

http://www.leaderpost.com/business/S...192/story.html

[Riverman]

Originally Posted by micheal

Saskatchewan surpasses B.C. in exports for first time. Sask. ranked 4th in country for exports.

http://www.leaderpost.com/business/S...192/story.html

Congrats! Sask. has nowhere to go but up.

[Stormer]

Originally Posted by casper

Does the speed matter all that much? It is a rail line that is not over utilised, so if it takes an extra day or two for a train to get up there and back it’s probably a minor issue. Someone would need to build holding tanks in Churchill and a suitable transfer station onto the ships.

Speed is not that important for short hauls in the railway biz, but is a huge deal for long hauls. Railways do not like their crews, power and rolling stock tied up anylonger than it need to be as it costs big bucks.

Churchill is a long haul.

[Riverman]

To get oil on ships there is already a pipeline to Superior, WI and another is being proposed. Churchill is a complete non-starter.

[Shinook]

The downplaying of anything Manitoba and the blatant boosterism of Saskatchewan in this and other threads is nauseating.

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by Shinook

The downplaying of anything Manitoba and the blatant boosterism of Saskatchewan in this and other threads is nauseating.

Saskatchewan residents saw the light and booted the NDP to the curb, Saskatchewan is now humming along nicely while in Manitoba the govt. can only come with new ways to nickel and dime and over tax it's citizens.

[DowntownRiderFan]

Originally Posted by Riverman

Yes, but this line is over muskeg and melting permafrost for a great deal of its length. And it is for the most part privately owned. $60M will do very little I'm afraid.

If this is a serious consideration, I wonder how feasible it would be to move (or build new) the line a few miles to the west to the series of beach ridges (sand and gravel, no muskeg and no permafrost) for the first ~130 km north of Limestone. It would be very challenging to get the appropriate grades and curves here, but foundation conditions would be a MASSIVE upgrade and maintenance costs significantly reduced for at least half of the distance for this stretch. You would still need to traverse ~130 km of probably the worst kind of terrain to build and maintain anything on to get to Churchill though. Load it with cryo-anchors perhaps?