美加石油合作流产，加拿大人转向中国

您具体说的是什么意思？“其他什么”可能指的是？

    现在，在加拿大有很多关于“管道改向”的讨论。也许现在听起来有点怪，我们的东海岸已经在进口石油，然后在安大略省萨尼亚进行精炼。而阿尔伯塔省的石油正在运往南方的美国。这完全是经济因素作用。我们现在正在讨论管道改向的可能，将西部出产的石油输送至东海岸，并供应沿途城镇。它将开启输油管道从加拿大东部进入美国东部的可能。如果Keystone项目继续因政治原因受阻，我们会另想办法。

Keystone项目遭到否决，环保组织起了很大作用。但不管美国想不想，未来几年还是要面对油砂的问题，对吧？毕竟你们有丰富的石油储量。

    你说的完全正确。我们坐拥世界第三大已探明石油储量。未来10年，随着技术的进步，我们将超过沙特，成为世界上已探明储量最多的国家。“已探明储量”的计算是以是否具有经济开采可行性为标准的。如今，我们知道的储量中仅有10%为“已探明”储量。但如果科技取得突破，这个比例提高到15%，我们就会拥有世界上最大的（已探明）储量。

因为这个原因，环保组织才盯上了你们？

    的确如此。如果我所在的机构是以让世界摆脱化石燃料为宗旨，我可能也会将目标锁定在最大的障碍上，即拥有世界最大已探明储量的国家。

Keystone项目取消后，加拿大总理很快对中国进行了访问。这只是一个礼节性拜访么？

    我可以告诉你，此行不仅仅是涉及大熊猫的礼节性拜访。访问的意图是向中国发出这样的信息：“中国是我们的重要投资者，中国需要我们的物产，而我们有富余的物产，我们希望卖给你们。”就这么简单。

    如今，阿尔伯塔省每天出口150万桶石油。随着产量逐渐增加，到2020年我们每天将出口400万至500万桶。出口将出现巨大的增长。美国有能力全部消化掉。但我们不想完全依赖某一家客户。到2020年，如果一切正常，美国将成为我们的大客户，我们供应的石油在美国石油用量中的占比也将达到历史最高水平。但与此同时，我们也将为我们的产品打开国际市场。

听起来加拿大在谈判中有望处于非常有利的地位。

    我想关于未来可能的情形，天然气就是一个很好的例子。加拿大绝大部分天然气一直销往美国。如果将天然气价格和汇率结合起来计算，五年前我们的天然气销售额约为50亿美元，而今年只有10亿美元。页岩气的发现拉低了天然气价格，并抢走了我们唯一的客户。我们现在有4项方案，希望将液化天然气运往我们的西海岸然后出口。我们将放开天然气开采商取得国际价格的能力，它是我们在北美价格的3-4倍。我们过去依赖于一个客户，但由于美国国内供应激增，他们不再那么需要我们了，我们所有的天然气只能低价出售。我们不能让这样的情况再在石油行业重演。

你本身就是一名政界人士。我们怎么才能结束阻碍美加两国实现这一双赢格局的政治僵局？

    你是说从美国方面吗？那得由你来告诉我。这些障碍的确都涉及政治。但你们要做的就是把政治因素放在一边，看看经济效益。拿石油来说。美国每天以布伦特原油价格进口1,000万桶。沙特不不可能按西德克萨斯中质油（WTI）的价格把石油卖给美国。布伦特原油价格比美国付给加拿大的油价每桶差不多高20美元。这怎么符合经济常识？傻子都知道，我们得另外想办法拓展业务。

What does that mean? What might "something else" be?

    There is a lot of talk in Canada about "reversing lines." Currently today, as strange as this might sound, we have imported oil that comes into the east coast that is then refined in Sarnia, Ontario. And Albertan oil is going south. It's just economics. Now we're talking about reversing that line -- taking western oil for usage all the way to the east coast. That would open up the potential for lines from eastern Canada to head into the eastern U.S. We will find some way of making it work if Keystone continues to be caught up in politics.

    Evironmental groups helped kill Keystone. But whether or not the U.S. wants to, they're going to need to deal with the tar sands for years to come, right? You've got all the oil.

    You're absolutely correct. We're currently sitting on the third-largest proven reserves in the world. With technology advancement over the next ten years, we will have the largest proven oil reserves in the world, ahead of Saudi Arabia. "Proven reserves" is calculated by determining you can economically pull out of the ground. Right now only 10% of what we know is there is considered "proven." But with any tweak in technology, that goes to 15%, and at that point, we have largest reserves in the world.

Which makes you the obvious target for environmental groups.

    Indeed. If I am part of an organization that wants to rid the world of fossil fuels, I may as well put my target on the place that is the largest obstacle, which has largest proven reserves in the world.

Your Prime Minister made a fairly quick visit to China shortly after Keystone was quashed. Was it just a social visit?

    It wasn't just about panda bears, I can tell you that. The intent of that trip was to send this message to China: "You are a major investor in our country, you need our product, we have excess product, and we want to get it to you." It's as simple as that.

    Today, Alberta exports 1.5 million barrels a day. Just with production that is coming on-stream, we will be exporting between 4 and 5 million barrels per day by 2020. That's a huge jump. The U.S. could consume it all. But we don't want to rely on just one customer. By 2020, all things being reasonable, the U.S. will be a larger customer of ours, and we will be supplying a larger portion of your oil than at any time in history. But at the same time, we will be opening up global markets for our product.

Sounds like a great negotiating position to be in.

    I think we have a very good example of what can happen when you look at natural gas. The vast majority of Canadian gas has been sold to the U.S. And if you combine the price of gas and exchange rate, our revenues from gas sales were about $5 billion five years ago. This year, they will be $1 billion. The discovery of shale gas has driven down prices and taken away our only customer. We now have four proposals to get liquefied natural gas to our west coast to send it abroad. We will be opening up, for our producers, the ability to get international prices for gas, which are three to four times what we get in North America. We relied on one customer, but the U.S. domestic supply exploded, they don't need us as much, we are stuck with all of our gas at giveaway prices. We can't let that happen with oil.

You're a politician. How do we end the politics of what seems a win-win situation for both countries?

    At your end? You tell me. The roadblocks are indeed political. But all you have to do is set the politics aside and look at the economics. Take oil. You're importing 10 million barrels a day at Brent prices. The Saudis are not selling you oil at WTI prices. Brent is almost $20 a barrel more than you would be paying for oil from us. How the hell does that make any economic sense? It's a no-brainer that we find a way to get more business done.