Oil Via Rail Is The Bakken's Most Dangerous Friend

We all have a friendship that isn't necessarily healthy. For oil producers in the Bakken, it is becoming more and more apparent that oil via rail is one of those unhealthy friendships. Sure, companies like Continental Resources (NYSE: CLR  ) , Hess (NYSE: HES  ) , and Oasis Petroleum (NYSE: OAS  )   have used oil via rail to move their product to places where it can get the best price, but recent accidents have made it more apparent that moving Bakken crude could be a dangerous dance that could lead to big issues. Let's take a look at why this is a very Bakken problem and what it could mean for the companies involved.

Railway to the Danger Zone
The case can certainly be made that the ability to move oil via rail is one of the biggest reasons that oil production in the Bakken region has taken off as much as it has in the past couple of years. Not only has it increased the total volume that can be moved away from the region, but it also allows producers to access centers of demand that are not served by pipelines like the East and West coast. On its most recent earnings call, Continental boasted that all of its Bakken production moves via rail to these centers of demand, which has allowed the company to get $98 per barrel of oil from a region that has some of the highest transportation costs in the U.S. Both Hess and Oasis have also said recently that they move 50% and 80% of their oil via rail, respectively.

Today, the Bakken has become extremely dependent upon oil via rail. Without it, the region would not be able to move about 30% of its product to market. Furthermore, there doesn't appear to be any indication that the proposed pipelines for the region will ever be enough to meet production projections. 

Source: Continental Resources Investor Presentation

Unfortunately, moving Bakken oil via rail is proving to be a risky bet. In the past several months there have been three major train incidents that have resulted in oil fires. One in Lac Megantic, Quebec, one outside of Casselton, North Dakota, and another near the U.S. border in New Brunswick. Bakken crude is extremely light crude, so it is more volatile and thus more likely to catch fire in the event of an accident in comparison to other crudes such as bitumen from Canadian oil sands.

With rail running through population centers and these stories getting national attention, it is possible oil transportation could lead to some major reforms and regulations. Estimates from the Association of American Railroads estimates it would take over $1 billion to improve the safety of the existing tanker fleet to reduce the chance of oil fires. These costs would most likely be passed down to the oil companies and could reduce the competitive advantage that oil via rail gives. 

A wake up call
The responsibility for these incidents probably lies at the feet of the rail industry much more than the oil companies using rail to move their product, but companies like Continental and Oasis should seriously reconsider their transportation strategies in light of these incidents. These train incidents will likely result in these rail lines going offline for a time, which could restrict the amount of oil that these companies can move out of the region.

Sure, all companies that use rail will suffer, but Continental and Oasis would disproportionately suffer because they are so dependent on rail to move oil. If the two companies were to commit more of their oil to pipelines, they would take a small hit on realized prices, but reduce the risk of disrupting their takeaway capacity. 

This could also be a very opportune time for pipeline companies such as Enbridge Energy Partners (NYSE: EEP  )  and Plains All American (NYSE: PAA  ) to increase their pipeline offerings in the region. Enbridge is currently running an open season for its 225,000 barrel per day Sandpiper pipeline that would transport oil from the Bakken to its mainline in Clearbrook, Monnesota. With oil via rail looking more vulnerable, Enbridge could even look to expand the capacity of that pipeline and lock in volumes for longer term contracts. 

What a Fool believes
As much as oil via rail has aided the development of the Bakken, these incidents should point out to major producers in the region that they cannot have their cake and eat it too. There is no perfect way to move oil, but striking a balance between pipeline and rail will help to reduce transportation risks. 

What will be 2014's Top Performing Stock?
The Motley Fool's chief investment officer really nailed his 2013 top stock pick with oil services company Core Labs, which shot up a spectacular 75%! Now, he has selected his No. 1 stock for 2014, and it has top performing stock written all over it. You can find out which stock it is in the special report: "The Motley Fool's Top Stock for 2014." Simply click here and we'll give you free access to the name of this under-the-radar company.


Read/Post Comments (1) | Recommend This Article (2)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On January 09, 2014, at 1:03 PM, yuchi1 wrote:

    The Keystone XL pipeline (northern leg) was originally shot down by the POTUS because of Nebraska's objection to the route through their state. I understand this has been mitigated yet the POTUS is refusing to sign the US/Canada border crossing permit, for unknown reason(s).

    Meanwhile Canadian and Bakken crude is being shipped via rail, primarily via BNSF's line. Warren Buffett owns (Berkshire) BNSF and is one of the POTUS' major supporters.

    Is this a case of follow the $$'s?

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2789204, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 9/22/2014 10:23:58 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement