TC Energy formerly TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Discuss your favourite picks, broker, and trading or investment style.
tedster
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 8515
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:11
Location: Montreal

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by tedster »

Surely with Nebraska being "onside" with the Keystone, providing it was a different route, couldn't Obama have said yes to the parts that were outside of the state? That way the pipeline could start and people would work, etc, etc.
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33398
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by AltaRed »

tedster wrote:Surely with Nebraska being "onside" with the Keystone, providing it was a different route, couldn't Obama have said yes to the parts that were outside of the state? That way the pipeline could start and people would work, etc, etc.
Bankers won't fund partials that are unusable until the whole thing is in place. Until it is all approved, there is no guarantee.
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
tedster
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 8515
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 10:11
Location: Montreal

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by tedster »

Makes sense.
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33398
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by AltaRed »

This http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/T ... story.html suggests TRP is open to building the Cushing to GOM segment ahead of time but I doubt their shippers would agree. Should the northern part of Keystone not be built, then the Cushing to GOM section would likely be oversized and some of the Alberta based shippers committed to Keystone in general would have no interest in that southern section of the line. I think this is mostly corporate face saving at the moment.
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
User avatar
Shakespeare
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 23396
Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:25
Location: Calgary, AB

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by Shakespeare »

TransCanada seeks switch from gas to oil - The Globe and Mail
Eastern Canadian refineries have enquired about the possibility of moving oil through the Calgary-based company’s Mainline network instead of natural gas, said Russ Girling, the company’s chief executive officer....

Putting oil in the underused Mainline system could make that happen. But if it is to transform the line, TransCanada must first please current natural gas shippers, potential oil shippers and refineries.
Sic transit gloria mundi. Tuesday is usually worse. - Robert A. Heinlein, Starman Jones
Shine
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2022
Joined: 13 Dec 2010 01:32

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by Shine »

Shakespeare wrote:TransCanada seeks switch from gas to oil - The Globe and Mail
Eastern Canadian refineries have enquired about the possibility of moving oil through the Calgary-based company’s Mainline network instead of natural gas, said Russ Girling, the company’s chief executive officer....

Putting oil in the underused Mainline system could make that happen. But if it is to transform the line, TransCanada must first please current natural gas shippers, potential oil shippers and refineries.

This underlines what I think Premier Redford means about developing a national energy strategy. Sadly this will break down to a hydro versus petroleum debate. Think of the problems NFLD encountered trying to gain access through QC for power potentially developed at Churchill Falls.
User avatar
Springbok
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5438
Joined: 22 Mar 2005 16:47

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by Springbok »

In this slightly dated article, author (Roger Conrad) seems positive about outlook for TRP with or without Keystone approval
The only drawback of buying pipeline companies now is price. TransCanada, however, was never really caught up in the buying wave, mainly because of investor trepidation about Keystone. The upshot is it's still a fairly cheap growth stock. Moreover, even if the rest of Keystone never gets built, management has targeted some CAD50 billion in potential energy infrastructure projects, including CAD12 billion in the works for startup by 2015.

That includes a restart of the Bruce Power nuclear plant in Ontario, a project so massive it can potentially generate up to 25 percent of the province's electricity needs. The largest nuclear plant in North America, Bruce is already under long-term contract with the provincial power authority and is on track for startup by the second half of this year.

Once it does, the cash will immediately start flowing to TransCanada's bottom line, providing fodder for more dividend growth as well as further investment in growth. That's the fuel for a superior income investing opportunity in this low-risk company.
Ontario electricity costs were increased this week. Apparently just for the summer? Maybe when Bruce comes back on line cost of generation will drop?

My thought is to add to TRP holdings and hedge a little against our electricity costs.
User avatar
Shakespeare
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 23396
Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:25
Location: Calgary, AB

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by Shakespeare »

I'm pretty sure Redford will be in favour of converting the mainline and shipping oil to the Eastern refineries. (IIRC the mainline was twinned in the 1990's; it might be possible to convert half to oil.) This solves a number of problems and once, and the Eastern refineries apparently want the oil. That will keep the mainline operational for an extended period of time, despite low gas volumes.
Sic transit gloria mundi. Tuesday is usually worse. - Robert A. Heinlein, Starman Jones
schmuck
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1706
Joined: 21 Sep 2006 20:06
Location: Vancouver area

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by schmuck »

All good stuff, but how can they keep the protestors and environmental freaks off their back? The mere mention of "nuclear" ought to bring them out in force, and expansion of those outdated refineries wont be that popular either.

Ahh, the good old days when function and necessity of pipelines outweighed the concerns of our delicate deep thinkers.
Personally, I like the idea of a pipeline to eastern Canada, as well as the Keystone, and the Northern Gateway, and twinning the old Trans Mountain line to Vancouver. I have a nice view of Burrard Inlet, and it would be cool to see those super tankers gliding under the Lions Gate Bridge. Nor would it hurt my pipeline and oilsands stocks. :wink:

SO there!
like_to_retire
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5923
Joined: 27 Feb 2005 07:14
Location: Canada

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by like_to_retire »

TransCanada Corp. has been chosen to build a $4-billion natural gas pipeline to the British Columbia coast to feed a massive export project planned for construction at Kitimat.

ltr
JaydoubleU
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3103
Joined: 13 Sep 2007 22:52

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by JaydoubleU »

TransCanada Corp. has been chosen to build a $4-billion natural gas pipeline to the British Columbia coast to feed a massive export project planned for construction at Kitimat.
Just curious. Who supplies the pipe in these pipelines, and who does the actual construction?
Last edited by JaydoubleU on 05 Jun 2012 19:49, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33398
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by AltaRed »

The pipe will likely come from Asian mills and the construction most likely by a JV of general pipeline contractors, or several separate pipeline contractors such as Banister, OJ Pipelines, etc. There will also be engineering by any one of a number of engineering firms and dozens of sub-contractors.
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
JaydoubleU
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3103
Joined: 13 Sep 2007 22:52

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by JaydoubleU »

Thanks.

I was hoping you'd say Russell Metals and Bird Construction, two of my holdings :)
User avatar
Shakespeare
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 23396
Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:25
Location: Calgary, AB

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by Shakespeare »

TransCanada eyes an east coast export alternative - The Globe and Mail
TransCanada Corp. is now months away from formalizing its plan to pump oil through part of its cross-country natural gas pipeline network. This plan has won broad support from political and business leaders, who see it a way to ensure refineries in Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick consume Canadian oil, rather than relying on more expensive imports from Europe, Africa and the Middle East....

But TransCanada’s oil pipeline also stands to serve another important role: Allowing the energy industry to access Asia’s lucrative markets while bypassing the controversial projects that are designed to reach tidewater on the west coast....

It is shorter to reach India’s west coast refining hub via Canada’s east coast than it is to ship oil off the west coast....

In a presentation circulated among potential oil shippers earlier this year, TransCanada compared its project to Northern Gateway. It would cost $5.20 to $8.20 to send a barrel from Alberta to Shanghai via Northern Gateway, TransCanada then estimated. It would cost about $8.50 to send it via the east coast, making it economically feasible.
Sic transit gloria mundi. Tuesday is usually worse. - Robert A. Heinlein, Starman Jones
User avatar
Shakespeare
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 23396
Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:25
Location: Calgary, AB

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by Shakespeare »

Eastern oil pipeline feasible, TransCanada says - The Globe and Mail
Now TransCanada says it could carry 500,000 to one million barrels per day east, where it could feed a 600,000 to 700,000 barrel-a-day refining market in central and eastern Canada, as well as refineries using another million-a-day on the U.S. eastern seaboard and, potentially, export markets in Europe and Asia....

The preliminary $5-billion estimate would involve building some 375 kilometres of new pipe, and connecting it with 3,000 kilometres of existing gas pipe, to carry oil from the oil hub at Hardisty, Alta., to Montreal. A further 220 kilometres of new pipe, at a cost of several hundred million dollars, would be required to bring oil to Quebec City. Numerous new pumping stations would also be needed to press oil through a system designed for gas. TransCanada expects to formally solicit commercial support for the project early next year.
Note the relatively short amount of new pipeline needed. Adding pumping stations to the existing gas line (plus checking it for things like hydride cracking) will not involve the type of environmental disruption a new line would, so this project will likely meet significantly less opposition than Northern Gateway.
Sic transit gloria mundi. Tuesday is usually worse. - Robert A. Heinlein, Starman Jones
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33398
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by AltaRed »

Shakespeare wrote:...will not involve the type of environmental disruption a new line would, so this project will likely meet significantly less opposition than Northern Gateway.
We shall see what colour clothes the NGO/green lobby has. Why do I cynically think the misguided will still object against facilitating the movement of incremental Canadian fossil fuels while conveniently ignoring that in the absence of same, the hydrocarbons would still come from other places across the oceans where the environment is almost certainly of lesser concern?

Added: I do like this option with the exception that it does little to diversify our markets into Asia. Maybe Christy Clark will find out that the pipelines have called her bluff and will pack up and go home. She may also be surprised if the so called LNG panacea will fizzle as it has done so many times before, and in any event will never be any more than one of the proposed projects being bantered about, and not likely before at least 2017. So much for visions of buckets of resource hydrocarbon revenue in the next 5 years.
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
biker
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2488
Joined: 19 Feb 2005 08:57

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by biker »

I would think that shipping oil from Quebec to the Far East may become more profitable once the Panama Canal Expansion is complete in 2014 and allows bigger tankers.
Live like you are dying but invest like you are immortal.

"Men do not quit playing because they grow old ; they grow old because they quit playing" Oliver Wendell Holmes
User avatar
Shakespeare
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 23396
Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:25
Location: Calgary, AB

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by Shakespeare »

It may be shorter to India round Cape of Good Hope.


Oops - wrong cape.
Sic transit gloria mundi. Tuesday is usually worse. - Robert A. Heinlein, Starman Jones
User avatar
Springbok
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 5438
Joined: 22 Mar 2005 16:47

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by Springbok »

I guess approvals are easier South of the Border.

TransCanada Corp (TRP) – TransCanada to Build $1 Billion Mexican Natural Gas Pipeline. They received a contract to build, own and operate a 530-kilometer (329-mile) pipeline in Mexico to transport natural gas. The company, based in Calgary, expects to invest $1 billion in the pipeline project, according to a statement today. Mexico’s federal power company has agreed to a 25-year contract to ship gas on the line. The project is expected to go into service in the third quarter of 2016, according to the statement.

More here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/11/01 ... 55915.html
User avatar
patriot1
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 4883
Joined: 28 Feb 2005 03:53

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by patriot1 »

If all of Eastern Canada changed over to domestic oil, would there be any production of conventional oil left to export from the East Coast in the first place?
User avatar
Descartes
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1856
Joined: 03 Nov 2008 09:59

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by Descartes »

Up about 2% on the news.

Progress Energy picks TransCanada for $5-billion natural gas pipeline project
TransCanada will design, build, own and operate the proposed Prince Rupert Gas Transmission project for Progress. It will also extend an existing transmission line to connect with the Prince Rupert line to serve Progress and other gas suppliers.

The Prince Rupert transmission line will carry gas from the North Montney region in northeastern British Columbia to a proposed export facility near Prince Rupert, B.C.

The contract award to TransCanada is part of plans for Progress to export liquefied natural gas from the port to markets in energy-hungry Asian markets.

Progress was recently acquired by Malaysia's state-owned energy company in a controversial $6-billion deal that was finally approved by Ottawa in December.

With backing from Petronas, the Prince Rupert LNG terminal will be 60 per cent larger than it would have been if the Progress takeover had been blocked.
"A dividend is a dictate of management. A capital gain is a whim of the market."
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33398
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by AltaRed »

Amazing how TRP has jumped today on that announcement (and ENB is down). Any revenue from that is years away, and the project itself is probably barely better than 50/50. I shake my head in disbelief at how investors chase 'news'.
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
schmuck
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1706
Joined: 21 Sep 2006 20:06
Location: Vancouver area

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by schmuck »

Could be a glimpse of what might happen when Keystone gets the nod. :wink:
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33398
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by AltaRed »

schmuck wrote:Could be a glimpse of what might happen when Keystone gets the nod. :wink:
Keystone should be different. It is an almost real project on the verge of construction and there should be a kick in the stock price when US presidential approvals are obtained. Revenue streams would only be 2-3 years out.

The Prince Rupert LNG thing is simply a wild assed dream at this point. No revenue until at least 2017. I've seen many of these kinds of projects come and go... Alaska gas pipeline (3 or 4 times) and Mackenzie Gas (at least twice so far).
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
JaydoubleU
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3103
Joined: 13 Sep 2007 22:52

Re: TransCanada (Symbol-TRP)

Post by JaydoubleU »

I shake my head in disbelief at how investors chase 'news
'.

Now, now, Altared. TRP has lagged ENB for years. It only seems fitting that it should now trade around 24x trailing earnings to Enbridge's 25~30x :wink:

But what I really want to know, and can't seem to find an answer to, is which (publicly-traded) subcontractors that didn't make the news headlines are going to make that pipe, dig that trench, lay it, weld it; and where they will eat, sleep, drink and gamble while NOT involved in doing so!
Post Reply