There is another gate and that is the decision by the oil sands companies to invest in increased production in order to fill Smith's ephemeral pipeline. Right now, planned optimization of the Enbridge and TMX system and expansion of TMX will add another 600K bpd of capacity fairly quickly. Then there is the South Bow/Bridger pipeline proposal which would add another 450+K bpd. If all go ahead, this 1,050,000+ bpd increase in egress will enable a 30% increase in oil sands production without any commitment to Pathways and that will require capital investment well into the $100 billion+ range. The pipeline to the Pacific addresses the next million bpd but the oil sands companies will be required to commit to spending another big whack of capital now, and put Pathways in place, in order for any private sector entity to agree to build the pipeline. This is a political agreement that is entirely dependent on private capital and there is no indication that the companies are willing to play. Note that in the Oil Sands Alliance press release last week they stated that it was the Premier's goal to double oil production. They did not say that they supported it!
Thank you for this note — it was sharp, structurally accurate, and it surfaced a dimension of the deal that deserved explicit treatment in the Dispatch. I’ve gone back into the piece and added two formal Addenda, both directly inspired by the architecture you pointed out.
The first addresses the quiet, low‑risk expansion path now available to industry — the million‑barrel‑per‑day of capacity that requires no Pacific corridor and no Pathways commitment. The second tackles the ceiling question: how far the oil sands can actually grow, and where the real limits sit in the political and regulatory system.
Both additions exist because your comment clarified the underlying geometry of the deal.
Have a look at the updated copy — you’ll see your fingerprints in the structure.
There is another gate and that is the decision by the oil sands companies to invest in increased production in order to fill Smith's ephemeral pipeline. Right now, planned optimization of the Enbridge and TMX system and expansion of TMX will add another 600K bpd of capacity fairly quickly. Then there is the South Bow/Bridger pipeline proposal which would add another 450+K bpd. If all go ahead, this 1,050,000+ bpd increase in egress will enable a 30% increase in oil sands production without any commitment to Pathways and that will require capital investment well into the $100 billion+ range. The pipeline to the Pacific addresses the next million bpd but the oil sands companies will be required to commit to spending another big whack of capital now, and put Pathways in place, in order for any private sector entity to agree to build the pipeline. This is a political agreement that is entirely dependent on private capital and there is no indication that the companies are willing to play. Note that in the Oil Sands Alliance press release last week they stated that it was the Premier's goal to double oil production. They did not say that they supported it!
Thank you for this note — it was sharp, structurally accurate, and it surfaced a dimension of the deal that deserved explicit treatment in the Dispatch. I’ve gone back into the piece and added two formal Addenda, both directly inspired by the architecture you pointed out.
The first addresses the quiet, low‑risk expansion path now available to industry — the million‑barrel‑per‑day of capacity that requires no Pacific corridor and no Pathways commitment. The second tackles the ceiling question: how far the oil sands can actually grow, and where the real limits sit in the political and regulatory system.
Both additions exist because your comment clarified the underlying geometry of the deal.
Have a look at the updated copy — you’ll see your fingerprints in the structure.
Thanks again for elevating the conversation.
Thank you. I enjoy and value your deep dives into issues!