Cenovus Energy Inc. says it will consider slowing development of a 50,000-barrel-per-day oilsands expansion project that it started building early last year if there isn’t meaningful progress on increasing pipeline capacity out of Alberta.
The vow came as the Calgary-based company blamed clogged export pipelines for its worst heavy oil price discounts in five years during the first three months of 2018, contributing to a higher-than-expected $914-million net loss in the first quarter.
READ MORE: Cenovus cuts oilsands production due to price differential, pipeline constraints
Constraints in existing pipelines, slow response by railroads to supply locomotives to move oil, and oilsands output increases from new projects conspired in the first quarter to prevent the price of Western Canadian Select heavy crude from keeping pace with improvements in New York benchmark oil prices.
Cenovus said the difference between WCS and West Texas Intermediate widened to US$24.28 per barrel, 67 per cent higher than in the same period last year.
Drew Zieglgansberger, executive vice-president for upstream, told analysts on a conference call that construction on the Christina Lake G expansion is going well and it is expected to start producing in the middle of next year.
But he said Cenovus may slow commissioning of the $675-million project or decide to delay full production from it.
READ MORE: Cenovus Energy revives work on Christina Lake expansion project
CEO Alex Pourbaix said the company isn’t interested in any new spending at the moment.
“We will not be considering any material new additions until we see clear line of sight to increased pipeline capacity out of the province,” he said on the conference call.
Get weekly money news
Pourbaix’s comments follow years of delays and uncertainty surrounding several major pipeline projects from Alberta’s oilsands to export markets. The Keystone XL project to Texas has been delayed, work on the Energy East line to Quebec and New Brunswick is halted and the future of an expanded Trans Mountain line to Vancouver is in doubt.
READ MORE: Trans Mountain pipeline: Some of the main arguments for and against it
Watch below: Some videos from Global News’ ongoing coverage of the controversy surrounding the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project.
-
![]()
‘Uncertainty’ surrounding B.C.’s legal opposition to Trans Mountain holding up pipeline: Jim Carr -
![]()
Support for Trans Mountain pipeline growing in B.C.: poll -
![]()
Greenpeace builds ‘Crudeau’ pipeline around Canada House in Trans Mountain protest -
![]()
Trans Mountain pipeline battle heats up again -
![]()
Could ‘Free the Beer’ decision be applied to Trans Mountain? This lawyer doesn’t think so -
![]()
Support for Trans Mountain expansion grows amidst pipeline dispute -
![]()
Edmonton Chamber of Commerce pushes feds to get Trans Mountain pipeline expansion built -
![]()
Minister argues Trans Mountain has policies opposition should agree with during emergency debate -
![]()
Alberta taking ‘bold action’ amid Trans Mountain pipeline dispute with B.C. -
![]()
Alberta’s Notley speaks about ‘frank discussion’ on Trans Mountain pipeline -
![]()
Trudeau blames B.C. government for Trans Mountain pipeline construction uncertainty -
![]()
Trudeau says he has jurisdiction to build Trans Mountain pipeline -
![]()
Notley believes Trans Mountain pipeline will be built despite B.C. opposition -
![]()
Trudeau to move ahead with Trans Mountain pipeline despite B.C. opposition -
![]()
John Horgan continues to disagree with Trans Mountain pipeline plan -
![]()
Federal government determined Trans Mountain pipeline will be built: Carr -
![]()
Federal push for Trans Mountain would trigger constitutional crisis: B.C. Green Leader -
![]()
Alberta, B.C. premiers to meet face to face over Trans Mountain pipeline
Crude-by-rail shipments are expected to ramp up in the second half of this year and into the first half of next year to “very material volumes of oil,” Pourbaix said, adding price discounts will improve but will likely remain higher than usual because rail costs more than pipeline transport.
Cenovus slowed oilsands production in February and March but has returned to normal levels.
Weak pricing was the biggest reason that Cenovus missed on most forecasts, said analyst Travis Wood of National Bank Financial Markets.
Oil pricing led to the company posting $469 million in risk management losses and poor natural gas prices forced it to record a non-cash $100-million asset impairment charge for its Clearwater assets.
Wood said major maintenance turnarounds at the two U.S. refineries Cenovus owns with partner Phillips 66 prevented its downstream operations from realizing the benefit of good profit margins in that business.
Cenovus reported one-time severance costs of $43 million as it cut its staff count by 15 per cent in the first quarter, and a $59-million non-cash expense for Calgary office space that exceeds current needs.
On the call, Pourbaix said the cuts are finished and he doesn’t expect any more large-scale layoffs.
READ MORE: Cenovus plans to cut 15 per cent of workforce as it looks to reduce costs
Watch below: In November 2016, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau explained his reasoning for approving two major pipeline projects by arguing that the oil would instead have to be transported by rail, at greater risk and cost.
Cenovus’s net loss amounted to 74 cents per share, compared with a year earlier profit of $211 million or 25 cents per share.
Its operating loss from continuing operations was $752 million, or 61 cents per share, compared with a $39-million loss last year.
Revenue was $4.61 billion, up from $3.54 billion a year ago and above analyst estimates, as oilsands volumes nearly doubled as a result of Cenovus buying out its 50 per cent partner, ConocoPhillips, in May of last year.
Analysts had estimated a net loss of 12 cents per share with $4.2 billion of revenue, according to Thomson Reuters data.
Comments