Go to the Globe and Mail homepage

Jump to main navigationJump to main content

An aerial view of an oil sands facility near Fort McMurray, Alta. (Jeff McIntosh/THE CANADIAN PRESS)
An aerial view of an oil sands facility near Fort McMurray, Alta. (Jeff McIntosh/THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Oil sands among riskiest energy plays in the world Add to ...

Some of the world’s costliest energy projects are in Alberta’s oil sands and some could be cancelled without higher oil prices, according to a new report by a financial think-tank that focuses on climate risk.

The study by the Carbon Tracker Initiative highlighted 20 of the biggest projects around the world that need a minimum oil price of $95 (U.S.) a barrel to be economically viable.

BNN Video Jul. 29 2014, 11:35 AM EDT

Video: China probe leaves Canada's billion-dollar oil sands project in limbo

More Related to this Story

Most on the list require prices well north of $110 a barrel and a few in the oil sands even need prices higher than $150, said the report.

Crude for September deliver was trading at around $97 a barrel in New York on Friday.

In total, the 20 projects represent close to $91-billion in capital spending over the next decade.

The report’s authors question whether those funds should be invested in risky projects.

“This analysis demonstrates the worsening cost environment in the oil industry and the extent to which producers are chasing volume over value at the expense of returns,” said CTI analyst Andrew Grant.

“Investors will ask whether it is prudent for oil companies to bet on ever higher oil prices when they could be returning cash to shareholders.”

High on the list were Houston-based ConocoPhillips’ oil sands operations, which include joint ventures with Cenovus Energy Inc. at Foster Creek and Christina Lake and with Total E&P Canada at Surmont.

A spokeswoman for Cenovus, which operates Foster Creek and Christina Lake, questioned how CTI came up with its figures, as its steam-driven projects have supply costs between just $35 and $65 a barrel.

CTI also flagged Shell’s Carmon Creek project and ExxonMobil’s Aspen and Kearl projects.

Other pricey projects highlighted in the report were in deep-water or ultra deep-water off West Africa and Brazil, as well as in the Arctic.

In May, Total and partner Suncor Energy Inc. decided to indefinitely defer their $11-billion Joslyn North mine in Alberta because the economics just weren’t good enough.

And in June, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers predicted oil sands production would grow at a slower pace than previously expected because of rising costs and capital constraints.

It sees output hitting 4.8 million barrels a day by 2030, about two and a half times higher than last year’s output of 1.9 million barrels.

But the figure is 7.7 per cent lower than the 5.2 million barrels of daily oil sands output CAPP predicted for the same time frame last year.

The CTI, funded by a range of European and American foundations, describes itself as a not-for-profit organization “set-up to produce new thinking on climate risk.”

In the know

Most popular videos »

Highlights

More from The Globe and Mail

Most popular