[Return to the Question Period archive]

2009 Jun 15 (Mon)

Imperial Oil Kearl Lake Project

Kevin Taft asks questions regarding Imperial Oil's announcement that it will proceed with its Kearl Lake bitumen mine.

 

Alberta Hansard, May 25, 2009

Dr. Taft: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. Well, as we all know, Imperial Oil today announced it is proceeding with its Kearl Lake bitumen mine. About three years from now the first stage of that will be producing over a hundred thousand barrels of bitumen every day. My question is to the Minister of Energy. Will he tell this Assembly where that bitumen is going to be upgraded?

Mr. Knight: Well, Mr. Speaker, that, of course, will be a matter to be determined by the proponent of the project. Now, there are a number of options, of course, available to them. I’m not exactly sure, but I would think that the member opposite would understand that Imperial Oil, it occurs to me, has a relatively large refining operation in the Edmonton area.

The Speaker: The hon. member.

Dr. Taft: Yeah. Thanks, Mr. Speaker. I am aware of that. Actually, it might interest the minister to know that back in my university days I had a summer job helping build it. Then I’ll pursue the minister’s question. Is the minister aware of information that Imperial Oil is considering altering its Strathcona refinery or some other facility in Alberta to upgrade bitumen?

Mr. Knight: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think it’s quite obvious by the announcement that was made today. It’s public information. I think I’ve got two or three different articles that indicate that the announcement has been made. The matter of the upgrading of bitumen in the province of Alberta is continually being addressed by this government and, most certainly, industry players. What I will suggest is that phase 1 – phase 1 – of the Kearl Lake project does not include an upgrader at Kearl Lake.

Dr. Taft: Yeah, well, we knew that. That’s the point of the questions. Holy smokes, Mr. Speaker. Alberta gets the largest share of environmental liabilities, including tailings ponds and an open pit mine. We should also get the largest share of the wealth which is overwhelmingly generated by the upgraders. This government approved Kearl Lake in 2007 in an order in council. My question is to the minister. Why did the government approve Kearl Lake mine without requiring some portion of upgrading here in Alberta?

Mr. Knight: Mr. Speaker, again, the way I would like to have that understood and answer the question is that Kearl Lake as a project will very likely end up at the end of the day producing somewhere in the neighbourhood of 340,000 or 350,000 barrels a day of product. In the initial mining operation, that’s being developed by the proponent now, 100,000 to 110,000 barrels a day, that product will move someplace and very likely into the Alberta heartland. Part of that product may move to upgraders that are outside of Alberta. I would not be able to stand here today and say that every bit of the bitumen relative to Kearl is going to have the molecules adjusted in Alberta.

 

 

 

 

 

Date: Mon Jun 15 14:51:21 MDT 2009 changed by: Rebecca IP: 199.213.91.1