The midstream sees growing opposition to crude-by-rail shipments from many sectors, a Southern Methodist University researcher told the recent 10th annual Pipeline Opportunities Conference in Houston.

“We’re starting to see some pushback against rail,” Dr. Bernard (Bud) Weinstein, associate director of SMU’s Maguire Energy Institute, told Midstream Business following the day-long conference.

He mentioned in particular reports of the growing number of mile-long unit trains that bottleneck other rail traffic passing through the important Chicago rail hub and “grain shippers who feel like they’re getting short shrift” from railroads seeking more lucrative crude shipments. These concerns add to already widely discussed safety, tank car integrity and environmental concerns.

Despite these issues, “I think what we’re going to see, at least in the short term, is rail capturing a larger percentage of crude shipments,” Weinstein said, adding the multiple pipeline construction and repurposing projects now under way eventually will close some of the gap between service oil producers need and what the North America’s pipeline network can offer.

“Long term, I think both pipelines and rail are important—and will sometimes be complementary and sometimes competitive,” he said.

Legalizing crude oil exports could have a significant impact on the economics that drive crude by rail now, he said.

“The only reason that hauling oil from the Bakken to the East Coast works is the price differential between light crude and Brent. If we ever integrate our oil markets with the global market, than that price differential goes away,” Weinstein said.

But he dismissed concerns of crude export opponents that selling domestically produced oil abroad will lead to higher U.S. fuel prices. “I don’t buy the argument,” he added, explaining that equalized domestic and worldwide crude prices would occur as transportation and logistics costs fall into balance.

Comments