DOCSLIB.ORG

Annual Information Form 2007

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Annual Information Form 2007 7FEB200604161381 ANNU AL INFORMATION FORM February 23, 2007 ENCANA CORPORATION ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM This is the annual information form of EnCana Corporation (‘‘EnCana’’ or the ‘‘Corporation’’) for the year ended December 31, 2006. In this annual information form, unless otherwise specified or the context otherwise requires, reference to ‘‘EnCana’’ or to the ‘‘Corporation’’ includes reference to subsidiaries of and partnership interests held by EnCana Corporation and its subsidiaries. Unless otherwise specified, all dollar amounts are expressed in United States (‘‘U.S.’’) dollars and all references to ‘‘dollars’’ or to ‘‘$’’ are to U.S. dollars and all references to ‘‘C$’’ are to Canadian dollars. All production and reserves information is presented on an after royalties basis consistent with U.S. protocol reporting. Unless otherwise indicated, all financial information included in this annual information form is determined using Canadian generally accepted accounting principles (‘‘Canadian G AAP’’), which differs from generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (‘‘U.S. G AAP’’). The notes to EnCana’s audited consolidated financial statements contain a discussion of the principal differences between EnCana’s financial results calculated under Canadian G AAP and under U.S. G AAP. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page NOTE REGARDING FORW ARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS . 1 NOTE REGARDING RESERVES DATA AND OTHER OIL AND GAS INFORMATION . 2 CORPORATE STRUCTURE . 3 Name and Incorporation . 3 Intercorporate Relationships . 3 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS . 4 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF THE BUSINESS . 8 Canadian Plains Division . 9 Canadian Foothills Division . 11 USA Division . 14 Integrated Oilsands Division . 16 Offshore & International Division . 19 Midstream & Marketing Division . 20 RESERVES AND OTHER OIL AND GAS INFORMATION . 22 Reserves Quantities Information . 22 Other Disclosures About Oil and Gas Activities . 24 Sales Volumes, Royalty Rates and Per-Unit Results . 28 Drilling Activity . 39 Location of W ells . 41 Interest in Material Properties . 42 Acquisitions, Divestitures and Capital Expenditures . 44 Delivery Commitments . 45 GENERAL . 45 Competitive Conditions . 45 Environmental Protection . 45 Social and Environmental Policies . 45 Employees . 46 Foreign Operations . 47 Reorganizations . 47 DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS . 47 AUDIT COMMITTEE INFORMATION . 51 DESCRIPTION OF SHARE CAPITAL . 53 CREDIT RATINGS . 54 MARKET FOR SECURITIES . 55 DIVIDENDS . 55 LEGAL PROCEEDINGS . 55 RISK FACTORS . 56 TRANSFER AGENTS AND REGISTRARS . 61 INTERESTS OF EXPERTS . 61 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION . 61 APPENDIX A — Report on Reserves Data by Independent Qualified Reserves Evaluators . 62 APPENDIX B — Report of Management and Directors on Reserves Data and Other Information . 64 APPENDIX C — Audit Committee Mandate . 65 ii NOTE REGARDING FORW ARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS This annual information form contains certain forward-looking statements or information (collectively referred to in this note as ‘‘forward-looking statements’’) within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. Forward-looking statements are typically identified by words such as ‘‘projected’’, ‘‘anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘expect’’, ‘‘plan’’, ‘‘intend’’ or similar words suggesting future outcomes or statements regarding an outlook. Forward-looking statements in this annual information form include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to: oilsands strategy and the benefits of this strategy, Suffield development plans, potential shut-ins and the possible receipt of royalty credits, the effect of Alberta Energy & Utilities Board commingling guidelines, capital investment levels and the allocation thereof, drilling plans and the timing and location thereof, production capacity and levels and the timing of achieving such capacity and levels, the timing of completion of the Foster Creek and Christina Lake expansions, the anticipated capacities of and the timing of capacity expansions for the Wood River and Borger refineries, anticipated capacity for and timing of expansion of the Steeprock natural gas plant, the development of the Jonah area, the potential for natural gas resource play development on the Foix permit lands, reserves estimates, the level of expenditures for compliance with environmental regulations, site restoration costs including abandonment and reclamation costs, pending litigation, exploration plans, acquisition and divestiture plans, including farmout plans and net cash flows. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, as there can be no assurance that the plans, intentions or expectations upon which they are based will occur. By their nature, forward-looking statements involve numerous assumptions, known and unknown risks and uncertainties, both general and specific, that contribute to the possibility that the predictions, forecasts, projections and other things contemplated by the forward-looking statements will not occur. Although EnCana believes that the expectations represented by such forward-looking statements are reasonable, there can be no assurance that such expectations will prove to be correct. Some of the risks and other factors which could cause results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements contained in this annual information form include, but are not limited to: volatility of and assumptions regarding oil and natural gas prices, assumptions based upon EnCana’s current guidance, fluctuations in currency and interest rates, product supply and demand, market competition, risks inherent in EnCana’s North American and foreign oil and natural gas and market optimization operations, risks of war, hostilities, civil insurrection and instability affecting countries in which EnCana and its subsidiaries operate and terrorist threats, risks inherent in EnCana’s and its subsidiaries’ marketing operations, including credit risk, imprecision of reserves estimates and estimates of recoverable quantities of oil, natural gas and liquids from resource plays and other sources not currently classified as proved reserves, EnCana’s and its subsidiaries’ ability to replace and expand oil and natural gas reserves, the ability of EnCana and ConocoPhillips to successfully manage and operate the integrated North American heavy oil business and the ability of the parties to obtain necessary regulatory approvals, refining and marketing margins, potential disruption or unexpected technical difficulties in developing new products and manufacturing processes, potential failure of new products to achieve acceptance in the market, unexpected cost increases or technical difficulties in constructing or modifying manufacturing or refining facilities, unexpected difficulties in manufacturing, transporting or refining synthetic crude oil, risks associated with technology, EnCana’s ability to generate sufficient cash flow from operations to meet its current and future obligations, EnCana’s ability to access external sources of debt and equity capital, general economic and business conditions, EnCana’s ability to enter into or renew leases, the timing and costs of construction of gas storage facilities, wells and pipelines, EnCana’s ability to make capital investments and the amounts of capital investments, imprecision in estimating the timing, costs and levels of production and drilling, the results of exploration, development and drilling, imprecision in estimates of future production capacity, EnCana’s and its subsidiaries’ ability to secure adequate product transportation, uncertainty in the amounts and timing of royalty payments, imprecision in estimates of product sales, changes in environmental and other regulations or the interpretation of such regulations, risks associated with existing and potential future lawsuits and regulatory actions against EnCana and its subsidiaries, political and economic conditions in the countries in which EnCana and its subsidiaries operate, difficulty in obtaining necessary regulatory approvals and such other risks and uncertainties described from time to time in EnCana’s reports and filings with the Canadian securities authorities and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the ‘‘SEC’’). Statements relating to ‘‘reserves’’ are deemed to be forward-looking statements, as they involve the implied assessment, based on certain estimates and assumptions, that the reserves 1 described exist in the quantities predicted or estimated, and can be profitably produced in the future. Readers are cautioned that the foregoing list of important factors is not exhaustive. The forward-looking statements contained in this annual information form are made as of the date hereof and, except as required by law, EnCana undertakes no obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. The forward-looking statements contained in this annual information form are expressly qualified by this cautionary statement. NOTE REGARDING RESERVES DATA AND OTHER OIL AND GAS INFORMATION National Instrument 51-101 (‘‘NI 51-101’’) of the Canadian Securities Administrators imposes oil and gas disclosure standards for Canadian public companies engaged in oil and gas activities. NI 51-101 and its companion policy specifically contemplate the granting of exemptions from some of the disclosure standards prescribed by NI 51-101 to companies that are active in the U.S. capital markets, to permit the substitution
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: a Primer
    U.S. Department of Energy • Office of Fossil Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory April 2009 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe upon privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: A Primer Work Performed Under DE-FG26-04NT15455 Prepared for U.S. Department of Energy Office of Fossil Energy and National Energy Technology Laboratory Prepared by Ground Water Protection Council Oklahoma City, OK 73142 405-516-4972 www.gwpc.org and ALL Consulting Tulsa, OK 74119 918-382-7581 www.all-llc.com April 2009 MODERN SHALE GAS DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES: A PRIMER ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) under Award Number DE‐FG26‐ 04NT15455. Mr. Robert Vagnetti and Ms. Sandra McSurdy, NETL Project Managers, provided oversight and technical guidance.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulation of Access to Oil Pipelines 777
    REGULATION OF ACCESS TO OIL PIPELINES 777 THE NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD: REGULATION OF ACCESS TO OIL PIPELINES JENNIFER HOCKING* In the past few years, a number of long-distance oil pipelines have been proposed in Canada — Northern Gateway, the Trans Mountain Expansion, Keystone, and the Energy East Project. This article describes the criteria used by the National Energy Board in approving the allocation of capacity in oil pipelines to firm service contracts while requiring that a reasonable percentage of capacity is allocated for uncommitted volumes (common carriage). It explains the economic theory related to regulation of access to major oil pipelines. It reviews and analyzes relevant NEB decisions, which show that the NEB supports well- functioning competitive markets, but will exercise its discretion to resolve complaints where markets are not functioning properly. The article also explains the economic significance of the proposed long-distance oil pipelines to Canada and Alberta despite the current low price of crude oil. The article concludes with recommendations for a written NEB policy regarding access to capacity in oil pipelines. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SIGNIFICANCE OF PROPOSED OIL PIPELINES TO THE CANADIAN ECONOMY ................................. 778 A. PIPELINES NEEDED DESPITE LOW PRICE OF OIL ............... 780 B. SHIPPING OF OIL BY RAIL ................................ 781 II. OIL PIPELINES AS COMMON CARRIERS ........................... 781 A. THE NATURE OF COMMON CARRIERS ....................... 781 B. COMMON CARRIAGE OBLIGATION SUBJECT TO REASONABLENESS TEST ............................... 783 C. WHY WERE OIL PIPELINES ORIGINALLY DESIGNATED AS COMMON CARRIERS? ................................. 784 III. MAJOR LONG-DISTANCE OIL PIPELINES TODAY ................... 785 A. ENBRIDGE PIPELINES .................................... 786 B. TRANS MOUNTAIN PIPELINE .............................. 787 C. SPECTRA ENERGY EXPRESS-PLATTE .......................
    [Show full text]
  • Hydraulic Fracturing in the Barnett Shale
    Hydraulic Fracturing in the Barnett Shale Samantha Fuchs GIS in Water Resources Dr. David Maidment University of Texas at Austin Fall 2015 Table of Contents I. Introduction ......................................................................................................................3 II. Barnett Shale i. Geologic and Geographic Information ..............................................................6 ii. Shale Gas Production.........................................................................................7 III. Water Resources i. Major Texas Aquifers ......................................................................................11 ii. Groundwater Wells ..........................................................................................13 IV. Population and Land Cover .........................................................................................14 V. Conclusion ....................................................................................................................16 VI. References....................................................................................................................17 2 I. Introduction Hydraulic Fracturing, or fracking, is a process by which natural gas is extracted from shale rock. It is a well-stimulation technique where fluid is injected into deep rock formations to fracture it. The fracking fluid contains a mixture of chemical components with different purposes. Proppants like sand are used in the fluid to hold fractures in the rock open once the hydraulic
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Undiscovered Resources of the Barnett-Paleozoic Total Petroleum System, Bend Arch–Fort Worth Basin Province, Texas* by Richard M
    Assessing Undiscovered Resources of the Barnett-Paleozoic Total Petroleum System, Bend Arch–Fort Worth Basin Province, Texas* By Richard M. Pollastro1, Ronald J. Hill1, Daniel M. Jarvie2, and Mitchell E. Henry1 Search and Discovery Article #10034 (2003) *Online adaptation of presentation at AAPG Southwest Section Meeting, Fort Worth, TX, March, 2003 (www.southwestsection.org) 1U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO 2Humble Geochemical Services, Humble, TX ABSTRACT Organic-rich Barnett Shale (Mississippian-Pennsylvanian) is the primary source rock for oil and gas that is produced from Paleozoic reservoir rocks in the Bend Arch–Fort Worth Basin Province. Areal distribution and geochemical typing of hydrocarbons in this mature petroleum province indicates generation and expulsion from the Barnett at a depocenter coincident with a paleoaxis of the Fort Worth Basin. Barnett-sourced hydrocarbons migrated westward into reservoir rocks of the Bend Arch and Eastern shelf; however, some oil and gas was possibly sourced by a composite Woodford-Barnett total petroleum system of the Midland Basin from the west. Current U.S. Geological assessments of undiscovered oil and gas are performed using the total petroleum system (TPS) concept. The TPS is composed of mature source rock, known accumulations, and area(s) of undiscovered hydrocarbon potential. The TPS is subdivided into assessment units based on similar geologic characteristics, accumulation type (conventional or continuous), and hydrocarbon type (oil and (or) gas). Assessment of the Barnett-Paleozoic TPS focuses on the continuous (unconventional) Barnett accumulation where gas and some oil are produced from organic-rich siliceous shale in the northeast portion of the Fort Worth Basin. Assessment units are also identified for mature conventional plays in Paleozoic carbonate and clastic reservoir rocks, such as the Chappel Limestone pinnacle reefs and Bend Group conglomerate, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeochemical Evaluation of the Uinta Formation and Green River Formation, Piceance Creek Basin, Northwestern Colorado, USA
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses Fall 11-1-2016 Hydrogeochemical Evaluation of the Uinta Formation and Green River Formation, Piceance Creek Basin, Northwestern Colorado, USA Megan E. Masterson Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Geology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Masterson, Megan E., "Hydrogeochemical Evaluation of the Uinta Formation and Green River Formation, Piceance Creek Basin, Northwestern Colorado, USA" (2016). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 3317. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.3297 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Hydrogeochemical Evaluation of the Uinta Formation and Green River Formation, Piceance Creek Basin, Northwestern Colorado, USA by Megan E. Masterson A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geology Thesis Committee: Robert B. Perkins, Chair Carl Palmer John Bershaw Maxwell Rudolph Portland State University 2016 ABSTRACT The Piceance Creek Basin in northwestern Colorado contains extensive oil shale deposits that produce natural gas and which could potentially yield ~1.5 trillion barrels of shale oil. However, much of the oil shale lies at depths too great for traditional mining practices and various innovative approaches for in situ conversion of kerogen to oil have been proposed. A firm understanding of the existing hydrogeochemistry is needed as resulting mineralogical changes or rock-fluid reactions may affect rock porosity and permeability.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Study of the Mississippian Barnett Shale, Fort Worth Basin, and Devonian Marcellus Shale, Appalachian Basin
    DOE/NETL-2011/1478 A Comparative Study of the Mississippian Barnett Shale, Fort Worth Basin, and Devonian Marcellus Shale, Appalachian Basin U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe upon privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors greatly thank Daniel J. Soeder (U.S. Department of Energy) who kindly reviewed the manuscript. His criticisms, suggestions, and support significantly improved the content, and we are deeply grateful. Cover. Top left: The Barnett Shale exposed on the Llano uplift near San Saba, Texas. Top right: The Marcellus Shale exposed in the Valley and Ridge Province near Keyser, West Virginia. Photographs by Kathy R. Bruner, U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). Bottom: Horizontal Marcellus Shale well in Greene County, Pennsylvania producing gas at 10 million cubic feet per day at about 3,000 pounds per square inch.
    [Show full text]
  • TXOGA Versus Denton
    FILED: 11/5/2014 9:08:57 AM SHERRI ADELSTEIN Denton County District Clerk By: Amanda Gonzalez, Deputy CAUSE NO. __________14-08933-431 TEXAS OIL AND GAS ASSOCIATION, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF § Plaintiff, § vs. § § DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON, § § Defendant. § § § _____ JUDICIAL DISTRICT § ORIGINAL PETITION The Texas Oil and Gas Association (“TXOGA”) files this declaratory action and request for injunctive relief against the City of Denton, on the ground that a recently-passed City of Denton ordinance, which bans hydraulic fracturing and is soon to take effect, is preempted by Texas state law and is therefore unconstitutional. I. INTRODUCTION This case concerns a significant question of Texas law: whether a City of Denton ordinance that bans hydraulic fracturing is preempted by the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas. The ordinance, approved by voters at the general election of November 4, 2014, exceeds the limited authority of home-rule cities and represents an impermissible intrusion on the exclusive powers granted by the Legislature to state agencies, the Texas Railroad Commission (the “Railroad Commission”) and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (the “TCEQ”). TXOGA, therefore, seeks a declaration that the ordinance is invalid and unenforceable. To achieve its overriding policy objective of the safe, efficient, even-handed, and non-wasteful development of this State’s oil and gas resources, the Texas Legislature vested regulatory power over that development in the Railroad Commission and the TCEQ. Both agencies are staffed with experts in the field who apply uniform regulatory controls across Texas and thereby avoid the inconsistencies that necessarily result from short-term political interests, funding, and turnover in local government.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy East Pipeline Project
    WhenEnergy the pipeline East: spills... Previous ruptures along TransCanada’s Mainline – part of the planned Energy East pipeline project. Photos by the Transportation Safety Board of Canada. Cover photos Pipeline Investigation Report P09H0074 Top left: Aerial Photo of the Englehart Occurrence Site, from , Transportation Safety Board of Canada. Available at http://www.tsb. gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/pipeline/2009/p09h0074/p09h0074.aspPipeline Investigation Report P11H0011 Top right: Downstream line-break section of Line 100-2, from , Transportation Safety Board of Canada. Available at http://www.tsb. gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/pipeline/2011/p11h0011/p11h0011.aspPipeline Investigation Report P09H0083 Bottom: Aerial photo of the Marten River occurrence site, from , Transportation Safety Board of Canada. Available at http://www.tsb. gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/pipeline/2009/p09h0083/p09h0083.aspEnergy East: When the pipeline spills... is published under the Creative Commons licence Attribution-NonCommercial- ShareAlike 4.0. Images used within this document remain copyrighted by their respective owners except where specifically indicated. Energy East: When the pipeline spills... TransCanada’s Energy East pipeline project would convertIt would an up be to the40-year-old largest oil natural pipeline gas inpipeline North to America, carry crude oil from Saskatchewan to Ontario, connecting it with new pipeline through Quebec and on to Saint John, New Brunswick. transporting 1.1 million barrelsif of oil every day. when where how much When it comes to pipelines, it is not a matter of a pipeline spills, it is a matter of , and it spills. NL AB SK MB Edmonton Hardisty Regina ON QC PE Winnipeg Thunder Bay Quebec City NB Montreal NS North Bay Saint John Ottawa Selective memory: TransCanada’s safety record.
    [Show full text]
  • Mesaverde Group and Wasatch Formation - Piceance Basin, Colorado
    NONTRIBUTARY GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT: MESAVERDE GROUP AND WASATCH FORMATION - PICEANCE BASIN, COLORADO Submitted to: OXY USA INC. AND OXY USA WTP LP Date: November 4, 2009 Norwest Corporation 950 South Cherry Street, Suite 800 Denver, CO 80246 Tel: (303) 782-0164 Fax: (303) 782-2560 Email [email protected] www.norwestcorp.com 004280 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..............................................................................................................1 1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1-1 2 CONCEPTUAL MODEL .....................................................................................................2-1 2.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING ....................................................................................................2-1 2.1.1 Mancos Shale ..............................................................................................2-1 2.1.2 Iles Formation ..............................................................................................2-2 2.1.3 Williams Fork Formation ..............................................................................2-2 2.1.4 Wasatch Formation......................................................................................2-3 2.2 HYDROLOGIC DATA .....................................................................................................2-3 3 HYDROLOGEOLOGIC PARAMETERS.............................................................................3-1
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of the Canadian Province of Alberta's Oil Sands
    Project Document A sub-national public-private strategic alliance for innovation and export development: the case of the Canadian province of Alberta’s oil sands Annette Hester Leah Lawrence Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) This background document was prepared by Annette Hester and Leah Lawrence, Consultants of the Division of International Trade and Integration, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), within the activities of the study “Public-private alliances for innovation and export upgrading“, coordinated by Robert Devlin and Graciela Moguillansky with the financial support of SEGIB, through the project “Alianzas público-privadas para la Innovación y el Desarrollo Exportador: Casos Exitosos Extraregionales y la Experiencia Latinoamericana”. Some of their preliminary findings were formerly presented at ECLAC, in Structural Change and Productivity Growth 20 Years later: Old Problems, New Opportunities, (LC/G.2367 (SES.32/3)), Santiago de Chile, 2008, chapter VI, pages 231 to 299.. The paper benefited from the support and comments of Inés Bustillo, Clement Bowman, and Eddy Isaacs, as well as the research assistance of Timmy Stuparyk and Michael Bagan. Annette Hester and Leah Lawrence are Calgary-based economists and writers. Ms. Hester is a research fellow with the Centre for International Governance Innovation in Waterloo, Canada and a Senior Associate with the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC. The views expressed in this document, which has been reproduced without formal editing, are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Organization. LC/W.292 Copyright © United Nations, April 2010. All rights reserved Printed in Santiago, Chile – United Nations ECLAC – Project Documents collection A sub-national public-private strategic alliance for innovation and export… Contents Abstract……………………..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • PUBLIC DISCLOSURE DOCUMENT Proposed Development Plan OPTI
    PUBLIC DISCLOSURE DOCUMENT Proposed Development Plan OPTI Canada Inc. & Nexen Inc. Long Lake Phase 2 SAGD Project July 2005 1.0 INTRODUCTION OPTI Canada Inc. and Nexen Inc. (OPTI/Nexen) are proposing to expand our Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) bitumen production at our Long Lake Project. This document has been prepared to inform you about our preliminary plans related to the proposed Long Lake Phase 2 SAGD Project (Phase 2). We encourage and welcome your input on this plan and your participation in the regulatory process. OPTI Canada and Nexen Inc. are joint-venture partners developing the Long Lake Project in the Athabasca oil sands region of northern Alberta. The Long Lake Project (Phase 1) is located on Lease 27, approximately 40 kilometres southeast of Fort McMurray, Alberta. Throughout the life of the Long Lake Project, we are committed to: • Understanding & addressing stakeholder concerns • Enhancing local employment & business development • Investing in communities to build capacity & self-sufficiency • Developing the Project in a safe & environmentally responsible manner Under the Memorandum of Understanding (IL 96-7) between the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) and Alberta Environment (AENV) with respect to Oil Sands Developments, OPTI/Nexen will be filing a joint application related to the Long Lake Phase 2 SAGD Project to amend the following approvals: • Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act Approval No. 137467-00-00 • Oil Sands Conservation Act Approval No. 9151 We view the consultation process for the OPTI/Nexen Phase 2 Project as building on an ongoing co-operative approach with stakeholders that addresses such regional issues as fresh water conservation and protection, and air quality management.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Investment in the Oil Sands and British Columbia Shale Gas
    Canadian Energy Research Institute Foreign Investment in the Oil Sands and British Columbia Shale Gas Jon Rozhon March 2012 Relevant • Independent • Objective Foreign Investment in the Oil Sands and British Columbia Shale Gas 1 Foreign Investment in the Oil Sands There has been a steady flow of foreign investment into the oil sands industry over the past decade in terms of merger and acquisition (M&A) activity. Out of a total CDN$61.5 billion in M&A’s, approximately half – or CDN$30.3 billion – involved foreign companies taking an ownership stake. These funds were invested in in situ projects, integrated projects, and land leases. As indicated in Figure 1, US and Chinese companies made the most concerted efforts to increase their profile in the oil sands, investing 2/3 of all foreign capital. The US and China both invested in a total of seven different projects. The French company, Total SA, has also spread its capital around several projects (four in total) while Royal Dutch Shell (UK), Statoil (Norway), and PTT (Thailand) each opted to take large positions in one project each. Table 1 provides a list of all foreign investments in the oil sands since 2004. Figure 1: Total Oil Sands Foreign Investment since 2003, Country of Origin Korea 1% Thailand Norway 6% UK 7% 2% US France 33% 18% China 33% Source: Canoils. Foreign Investment in the Oil Sands and British Columbia Shale Gas 2 Table 1: Oil Sands Foreign Investment Deals Year Country Acquirer Brief Description Total Acquisition Cost (000) 2012 China PetroChina 40% interest in MacKay River 680,000 project from AOSC 2011 China China National Offshore Acquisition of OPTI Canada 1,906,461 Oil Corporation 2010 France Total SA Alliance with Suncor.
    [Show full text]