Why US oil train traffic is falling

Booming US oil production in recent years encouraged producers to ship their crude by train, writes Charles Kennedy, but a slump in prices and increased pipeline capacity have made rail transport less appealing.

Matt Rourke/AP/File
A man walks his dog past train tank cars with placards indicating petroleum crude oil standing idle on the tracks, in Philadelphia.

Crude-by-rail is no longer growing like gangbusters.

The number of shipments for crude oil on North America’s railways surged in recent years from previously negligible levels. As oil gushed from the Bakken and pipelines couldn’t keep up, the industry scrambled to fill every train car possible with oil, shipping it to U.S. refineries on the East Coast and Gulf of Mexico. (Related: Peak Oil: Myth Or Coming Reality?)

The phenomenon was growing so fast that safety mechanisms could not keep up. A spate of derailments and explosions led to criticisms of the U.S. federal government that it was not imposing enough safeguards. That led to federal regulations this spring intended to make shipping crude less dangerous.

But now, after years of explosive growth, shipping crude by rail has suddenly fallen out of favor. There are a few reasons for this.

First, pipeline construction is finally catching up. Moving crude by pipeline is much cheaper than rail – essentially $12 per barrel via pipeline versus $24 per barrel on the railways. As pipelines come online, rail looks comparatively more expensive. (Related: The Dark Side Of The Shale Bust)

Related to that is the fact that certain grades of crude that traded at a discount relative to the larger benchmarks like WTI are starting to see their prices rise as they gain more access to markets.

For example, Western Canada Select traded at a discount because of a dearth of pipeline capacity, which meant shipping it by rail made sense. But the discount Western Canadian oil has traded for has narrowed (because of more pipelines), making rail shipments no longer cost effective.

Like this article?

Subscribe to Recharge, the Monitor's weekend digest of global energy news.
Click here for a sample.

Furthermore, oil production is starting to level off, putting less pressure on the existing pipelines. North Dakota saw its output peak in December 2014, and it has ticked down since then. With production slowing, there is less of a need for rail. (Related: Oil Markets Could Be In For A Shock From China Soon)

Overall, oil moving from Canada to the U.S. by rail fell by 28 percent in the first quarter of this year. That is bad news for U.S. rail shipper BNSF, which hopes to see a recovery in shipments after they dropped from a record high of 17,074 carloads in December down to just 13,000 in March.

BNSF’s executive chairman spoke at the EIA’s annual conference in Washington DC on June 15, and said that the recent rebound in oil prices could lead drillers to begin completing wells that they have been holding onto. As those wells are completed, more supplies will lead to more shipments.

But for now, crude by rail is no longer growing like it once was.

By Charles Kennedy of Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:

Original story: http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Crude-By-Rail-Falling-Out-Of-Favor.html

Source: http://oilprice.com/

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.