Founded: 1951 as TransCanada PipeLines Limited
Incorporated: 2003
NAIC: 486210 Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas; 493190 Other Warehousing and Storage; 221111 Hydroelectric Power Generation; 221112 Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation; 221113 Nuclear Electric Power Generation; 221119 Other Electric Power Generation; 221121 Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control; 325182 Carbon Black Manufacturing
SIC: 4922 Natural Gas Transmission; 2895 Carbon Black
Calgary-based TransCanada Corporation is one of North America's leading owners of natural gas pipeline and is also involved in a growing array of power generation projects. The company's network of natural gas pipelines extends more than 59,000 kilometers (36,500 miles). Much of this network is comprised of the trans-Canadian pipeline upon which the firm was founded, and after which it was named. This pipeline connects the rich natural gas fields of Alberta with customers across Canada and in the United States as well. Another major portion of this network, acquired in 2007, encompasses 17,000 kilometers (10,500 miles) of pipeline linking fields in Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas, and the Gulf of Mexico to the U.S. Midwest.
In addition to its pipelines, TransCanada is one of the continent's largest providers of gas storage facilities with the capacity to store approximately 360 billion cubic feet of gas. The company is also a growing independent power producer, with outright ownership or interests in a variety of projects in Canada and the United States with a collective power generation capacity of around 7,700 megawatts. TransCanada's power plants encompass a diverse mix of nuclear, natural gas, coal, hydro, and wind generation facilities. Among other company interests, TransCanada's Cancarb Limited subsidiary is a leading international manufacturer of high-quality, thermal carbon black.
Overcoming the Hurdles to a Trans-Canadian Pipeline
TransCanada overcame engineering and financial hurdles in its early years. Building a gas pipeline across Canada was a project equal in scale to the building of the cross-country railway and was the subject of one of the most contentious chapters in Canada's economic and political history.
Although a trans-Canadian natural gas pipeline had been proposed as early as 1931, its actual establishment was linked to political, social, and economic events that took place in an atmosphere peculiar to Canada in the 1950s. For one, the country's population was booming, especially in the cities. The population of metropolitan Montreal alone grew from 1.83 million in 1956 to 2.57 million in 1966. The 1950s also witnessed the greatest economic boom in Canada's history, and the energy shortage was real. At no period of history was this more apparent than during the World War II era, when Canadians learned that they could not depend on energy from the United States, as the United States put its own energy needs first. The young generation of the 1950s was self-consciously Canadian and deeply suspicious of its neighbor to the south. Although economic prosperity increased, so did U.S. ownership of most of Canada's wealth: approximately 70 percent of Canada's oil industry, 56 percent of its manufacturing industry, and 52 percent of Canadian mines were owned by U.S. businesses, and these percentages would grow. Growing national sentiment called for railways and a trans-Canadian pipeline to be built completely within Canada, regardless of cost.
Economic boom times, the looming energy shortage, and the election of a new government in 1957, which brought renowned nationalist John Diefenbaker to the helm as prime minister, all set the stage for the adoption of a plan to harvest Alberta's rich deposits of natural gas. At the same time, the St. Lawrence Seaway, which would enable Canadian agricultural and industrial products to be shipped worldwide, was under construction.
As it turned out, it took an almost epic struggle to build the trans-Canadian pipeline. L. D. M. Baxter, a Canadian financier, was the first to advocate a trans-Canadian pipeline to bring Alberta natural gas to eastern Canada, although even he had doubts about the plan's feasibility. The obstacle, as he saw it, was the Laurentian Shield of northern Ontario, a vast rocky area that is the chief geographical barrier separating eastern from western Canada. Canadians were not alone, however, in perceiving the value of a pipeline. On the U.S. side, the prospect of natural gas from Canada also tempted some businessmen to invest in such a venture. Clint Murchison, a Texan and head of Canadian Delhi Oil Company, believed the pipeline could be run through the Laurentian Shield.
By 1954 both Canadian and U.S. interests had agreed on the usefulness of a pipeline through Canada that also would export gas to the United States. The difficulty, however, was in reaching agreement on the financing of the scheme. Because it was to be an all-Canadian route, the U.S. participants, who had formed a company called TransCanada PipeLines, insisted that financing should be split evenly, while the Canadian interest group, Western Pipe Lines Limited, opposed this 50-50 proposal because the United States had far greater financial resources at its disposal than did Canada. The Canadian group wanted the United States to take on 90 percent of the cost. In the end the Canadian investors agreed to the 50-50 split and sought to persuade their government to finance the pipeline. The person sponsoring the pipeline bill in Parliament was C. D. Howe, the minister of transport. An engineer by training, he would come to view the pipeline as the crowning achievement of his career.
Financing, Approval, and Construction of the Pipeline
TransCanada PipeLines Limited (TCPL) was incorporated in 1951 to undertake the pipeline project. The first president of the new company was Nathan Eldon Tanner, who remained at the helm until the pipeline was completed. While other members of the board of directors had greater influence and experience, Tanner was a mediator. The major problem to be negotiated in 1955 was convincing the government of the financial viability of the company. After prolonged negotiations, the Royal Bank of Canada lent TCPL CAD 25.5 million, and a Montreal financier successfully negotiated large loans from the Canada Bank of Commerce as well as from the Royal Bank, thus enabling the company to win crucial government backing.
The pipeline bill reached the floor of Parliament in 1956, and engendered months of rancorous debate and fears of a tighter U.S. hold, despite the strenuous effort of Transport Minister Howe to convince doubters of the wholly Canadian nature of the enterprise. By then, Canadian interests lobbying against the pipeline bill regarded it as a sellout to U.S. interests. Opponents felt that the pipeline would only provide the United States with cheap Canadian gas. Even in the United States opposition was beginning to mount. In the coal industry in particular fears were voiced that Canadian natural gas would displace coal and lead to layoffs, while only Canadians would benefit. Howe was not a smooth negotiator, but his expertise and influence ultimately combined to steer the bill successfully through Parliament. The pipeline was finally approved in June 1956.
Building commenced on a monumental scale in 1957. By December 1, the Toronto-to-Montreal segment had been completed. The entire project was finished in October 1958, as originally scheduled. More than 2,200 miles long, it was the longest pipeline in the world, and was expanded almost continuously.
In 1958 Tanner resigned as CEO and president; his replacement was James Kerr. Kerr was new to the pipeline business. He had worked for Canadian Westinghouse since 1937, becoming a divisional vice-president of Westinghouse in 1956; like others on the board of directors of TCPL, Kerr was a Canadian nationalist, who accepted the offer to become head of TCPL out of a sense of patriotism. At this time, TCPL's deficit was the company's biggest problem, one that it would not overcome until 1961.
In the 1960s the company entered the computer age, developing a highly sophisticated computer system that could measure and control the flow of gas precisely, the first such system devised for pipelines. The company diversified into the chemical industry during this decade, establishing the first of numerous gas-extraction plants in Empress, Alberta. In 1967 TCPL was permitted to extend its pipeline along the Great Lakes in the United States, an extension that was completed that same year. One year later, TCPL celebrated the tenth anniversary of its pipeline operations. Between 1958 and 1968, operating revenue had multiplied nearly sevenfold, from CAD 30 million to CAD 200 million, and net income had risen from a deficit of CAD 8.5 million to a surplus of CAD 17.5 million, while the proportion of Canadian shareholders had grown to 94 percent.
By the 1970s TCPL was a world leader in pipeline technology. Vast subterranean natural gas pockets lay untouched in northern and western Canada, and exploiting this natural wealth was the goal of the company in the 1970s. The publicly traded company was majority owned by Dome Petroleum Limited from 1979 to 1983, when Canada's largest and most profitable conglomerate, Bell Canada Enterprises Inc. (BCE), purchased a 44 percent interest in TCPL. The new shareholder gave TCPL the extra financial support it needed to focus on geographic expansion, rather than diversification, as annual growth in Canadian demand for natural gas slowed to about 2 percent in the late 1980s. Beginning in late 1985, deregulation of the Canadian natural gas industry led to price competition. By 1988, prices for TransCanada's gas, which had previously been locked in with long-term contracts, ran about 80 percent higher than many competitors' prices. At the same time, growing demand in the United States that was unmet by U.S. energy companies helped draw TransCanada into that market.
Expansions and New Projects
In 1990 TCPL proposed the biggest pipeline construction project in Canadian history: a CAD 2.4 billion expansion of its system. The expansion called for the erection of about 1,600 kilometers of pipeline, a 15 percent increase in TransCanada's total system capacity. Unlike the vast majority of its previous growth, about 75 percent of the gas transported by this pipeline was designated for the Iroquois Gas Transmission System (of which TCPL would own a 29 percent interest), and eventual use in U.S. residences and businesses in coastal New England.
Not surprisingly, the primary stumbling block to this international expansion was the question of who would pay for it. TCPL's Canadian customers (especially industrial gas users) resisted footing the bill, saying that the U.S. customers who would benefit from the "megaproject" should pick up the accompanying "megacheck." In spite of this opposition, TCPL won approval from the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to deliver western Canadian gas to the northeastern United States. Other FERC and Canadian National Energy Board rulings gave TCPL permission to expand its Great Lakes gas transmission system and mainline systems, respectively, which allowed Canadian natural gas to be carried through TCPL's mainline system to Iroquois, Ontario, across the St. Lawrence River to New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey in th eUnited States. The Iroquois extension was completed in late 1992.
The company also obtained a contract to sell to the California market and received a license to export natural gas to Michigan in 1990. These authorizations not only gave TransCanada one of the world's largest pipeline construction projects and entrée into the competitive U.S. natural gas market, but also helped siphon off a glut of gas in Alberta and thereby boost gas prices deflated by post-deregulation competition. In April 1992 TCPL sought approval of another construction project, a CAD 500 million expansion of domestic services in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Ontario.
The company appeared to have been unaffected by the recession of the early 1990s, with the president and CEO, Gerald Maier, expecting an annual earnings growth rate of from 10 percent to 15 percent in the 1990s. Like most established utilities, TCPL was accustomed to making slow but steady increases in profits. Net income in 1990 rose a surprising 14.9 percent from 1989, while the company pursued streamlining, divesting itself of unprofitable businesses, such as its interests in Les Mines Selbaie and the Montreal Pipeline Ltd. in Quebec province. Then, in the first half of 1992, the company's overall profit jumped 30 percent, making TransCanada one of Canada's "10 most popular stocks." The company took advantage of its popularity with new stock and debenture issues. In the spring of 1993, BCE divested the last of its TCPL holdings, "selling high."
Venturing into Power Generation and Overseas
By the early 1990s, TCPL had also developed interests in electric power generation projects. The company had full ownership of the 36-megawatt Nipigon Power Plant in Nipigon, Ontario, which used waste heat from an adjacent compressor station on TransCanada's mainline pipeline. The company also held a 40 percent stake in the 500-megawatt Ocean State Power Plant in Rhode Island. In June 1997 TCPL transferred its three Ontario power plants--the Nipigon facility along with two 40-megawatt plants in Kapuskasing and North Bay that had been completed in 1996--to a limited partnership called TransCanada Power, L.P. The company sold 50 percent of the shares in this entity to the public and retained the other half.
In the fall of 1994, meantime, TCPL bought into its first major venture outside North America with an investment in a $2.5 billion Colombian pipeline project. TCPL was a primary participant in the undertaking, sharing about 40 percent of the investment and responsibility with fellow Canadian company IPL Energy Inc. Other partners included British Petroleum Co. PLC; Total S.A. of France; Triton Energy Corp. of Dallas, Texas; and Ecopetrol, a state-owned Colombian oil company. The project proposed to develop one of the world's largest oil discoveries, the Cusiana oilfield. It was estimated that the area contained 1.5 billion barrels of oil. Completed in 1997, the $2.3 billion venture was considered TransCanada's shot at "international credibility." At this same time, TransCanada was also participating in a $320 million gas-to-electricity power plant project in Tanzania. Maier, who had advanced to chairman and was succeeded as CEO by George Watson in 1994, hoped that these international efforts would serve as a launchpad to accelerated earnings growth and elevation into the ranks of "world-class" pipeline companies.
In March 1996 TransCanada ventured further into the midstream portion of the natural gas industry by acquiring the 50.5 percent of Alberta Natural Gas Company Ltd. (ANG) it did not already own. Among its Alberta-centered assets, ANG gathered, marketed, and distributed natural gas and also processed it into natural gas liquids, ethane, and carbon dioxide. ANG also owned a key pipeline that transmitted natural gas from the Alberta border through British Columbia to connect with the Pacific Gas Transmission System, which served markets in the U.S. Pacific Northwest, California, and Nevada. Another ANG unit was ANGUS Chemical Company, a leading producer of specialty chemicals derived from nitroparaffins with plants in Louisiana and Germany.
TCPL in 1997 announced plans for a new pipeline to carry natural gas from Emerson, Manitoba, to the Chicago region. The CAD 1.7 billion joint project with Minneapolis-based utility Northern States Power Company was abandoned a year later after the partners failed to garner enough support from natural gas producers. Competition from the nascent Alliance Pipeline L.P., a consortium led by Enbridge Inc., played a key role in this project's demise. By late 2000 Alliance Pipeline had succeeded in beginning operation of a 3,000-kilometer (1,860-mile) pipeline transmitting natural gas from northeastern British Columbia to the outskirts of Chicago.
1998 Merger with NOVA
In an environment featuring increasing competition from Alliance, Enbridge, and other players as well as a drive for consolidation fueled by deregulatory initiatives in both the United States and Canada, TransCanada engineered a dramatic merger. In July 1998 TCPL merged with NOVA Corporation, also based in Calgary, in a CAD 15.6 billion deal that at the time ranked as the largest merger in Canadian corporate history. The marriage brought together TransCanada's primary pipelines carrying natural gas out of Alberta to central Canada and the United States with NOVA's Alberta System, a network of 22,400 kilometers (13,900 miles) of pipeline used to gather natural gas within the province and deliver it to provincial boundary points for connection with other pipelines, including the TCPL mainline. The merger was thus highly complementary: the Alberta System supplied roughly 90 percent of the gas volume carried by TransCanada's primary lines.
The merged entity, which ranked as one of the largest energy-services companies in North America, retained the TransCanada PipeLines name. Upon completion of the merger, NOVA's commodity chemicals business was split off into an independent public company, NOVA Chemicals Corporation. Via the merger, TCPL also gained NOVA's interests in various international energy projects, mainly natural gas pipelines and related operations in South America. TCPL further bolstered its international profile in July 1998 by purchasing the Netherlands division of Occidental Petroleum Corporation for $275 million. This division held stakes in offshore natural-gas production operations in the Dutch North Sea and in the natural gas pipeline system servicing the area.
Major Restructuring
The TransCanada-NOVA merger quickly turned sour and eventually prompted a major overhaul that created a company highly focused on a couple of key areas. The amalgamation required hundreds of employee layoffs as duplications in various company functions were eliminated. Merger-related charges of CAD 390 million cut net income for 1998 to CAD 361 million, almost half the total for the previous year. As the company's difficulties mounted in 1999, Watson resigned abruptly midyear and was replaced as CEO by Douglas Baldwin, a 40-year-plus veteran of Imperial Oil Limited, who had retired from that firm at the end of 1998.
By the time Baldwin took over, TCPL was contending with a CAD 11.6 billion debt load bloated by the merger with NOVA. Flirting with bankruptcy because of this debt, the company was also in danger of being taken over because of a dramatic drop in the price of its stock. Late in 1999 Baldwin and the company board slashed the annual dividend to conserve cash, prompting investors to further pummel its stock, and also embarked on a major divestment program that ultimately jettisoned CAD 3.5 billion worth of noncore businesses. The restructuring refocused TransCanada on two main businesses (natural gas transmission and related gas marketing operations and power generation) with a geographic footprint restricted to Canada and the northern tier of the United States. Because the pipeline industry was highly regulated in Canada, and therefore offered few opportunities for growth, TCPL placed its hopes for future expansion on its power generation business.
After selling ANGUS Chemical to the Dow Chemical Company late in 1999, the larger of the divestments included a sale of the company's natural gas liquids and extraction facilities in Alberta and British Columbia, which were sold to the Williams Companies, Inc. By 2001 TransCanada's various international businesses and interests had been sold through a number of piecemeal transactions. The company was able to wrap up the planned divestments in 2001, although a sale of Cancarb announced in September 2000 later fell through. By the end of 2001, TCPL had reduced its debt to a more manageable CAD 9.35 billion, while cash flow was growing significantly and shareholder return was improving as well.
A Growing Power Generation Business
As this overhaul progressed, TCPL moved boldly to significantly expand its position in its chosen growth arena, power generation. In 2000 the company purchased full ownership of the Ocean State Power Plant in Rhode Island, the capacity of which had been bumped up to 560 megawatts. TransCanada also built several cogeneration facilities, power plants that capture the heat generated by conventional natural gas-fueled electricity generation to create a second energy source. In 2001 construction was completed on two cogeneration facilities in Alberta, an 80-megawatt plant near Carseland and a 40-megawatt plant near Redwater. Construction began that same year on two more Alberta cogeneration facilities, an 80-megawatt plant near Grande Prairie and a 165-megawatt near Fort McMurray, both of which began operation in 2003.
Baldwin, initially appointed CEO on an interim basis, remained in the post longer than expected but finally retired in mid-2001 when the restructuring had largely been completed. Promoted to CEO was Harold "Hal" Kvisle (pronounced QUIZ-lee), who had joined TransCanada in 1999 after ten years of executive leadership at international subsidiaries of the New Zealand firm Fletcher Challenge Ltd. Kvisle had played a key role in TransCanada's turnaround efforts and in the buildup of its power generation business.
In 2003 the firm changed to a holding company structure, setting up TransCanada Corporation as the parent for TransCanada PipeLines and other subsidiaries. That February, TransCanada took another big step into power generation by spending CAD 451 million for a minority stake in the Bruce Power nuclear facility, located near Port Elgin, Ontario, on Lake Huron. The Bruce facility included eight nuclear reactors, six of which were operating by early 2004 with an aggregate capacity of 4,660 megawatts. Bruce Power also operated a small, nine-megawatt adjacent wind farm, the first commercial wind farm in the province.
Also in 2003 TransCanada began construction of two more power plants, both located in eastern Canada. A 550-megawatt natural gas-fired cogeneration power plant located near Trois-Rivières, Quebec, went into operation in September 2006, with its entire output going to Hydro-Québec. In 2005 TransCanada began operating a 90-megawatt natural gas-fired cogeneration facility on the site of the Irving Oil Limited refinery in Saint John, New Brunswick. In April 2005 the company purchased from USGen New England, Inc., a series of hydroelectric facilities on the Connecticut and Deerfield Rivers in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts. These operations had a total generating capacity of 567 megawatts. The purchase price was roughly $503 million.
TransCanada also ventured further into wind power. It held an initial 50 percent stake (later raised to 62 percent) in Cartier Wind Energy Inc., which began constructing a 740-megawatt wind project in the Gaspé region of Quebec. The first portion of this project, with a capacity of 110 megawatts, began generating energy for Hydro-Québec in November 2006. In September 2005 TransCanada sold its minority stake in TransCanada Power, L.P., to EPCOR Utilities Inc. for CAD 529 million. At the time, TransCanada Power was operating 11 plants in the United States and Canada with a total capacity of 774 megawatts. TransCanada Corporation elected to divest this interest in order to concentrate on its larger, directly owned power businesses in Canada and the United States.
Two more such projects were soon under construction: a 550-megawatt natural gas-fired plant located in downtown Toronto, slated for start-up in mid-2008, and a 683-megawatt natural gas-fired plant sited near Halton Hills, Ontario, slated for completion in 2010. By 2007 revenues from TransCanada's power generation approached that of the flagship pipeline operations. With the company's diverse and growing array of power plants reaching a collective total of 7,700 megawatts, net income from this business had skyrocketed from just CAD 40 million in 1999 to CAD 514 million in 2007.
Pipeline Acquisitions and New Endeavors
TransCanada was quite active on the pipeline front as well during this same period. In November 2004 TransCanada acquired the Gas Transmission Northwest System (formerly the Pacific Gas Transmission System) for $1.7 billion. This 2,174-kilometer (1,348-mile) pipeline essentially served to expand the company's pipeline system in British Columbia and Alberta, enabling TransCanada to ship natural gas from Alberta to the U.S. Pacific Northwest and down to California and Nevada. In February 2007 the company significantly bolstered its natural gas pipeline and storage assets by purchasing American Natural Resources Company and ANR Storage Company from El Paso Corporation. The total purchase price of $3.4 billion included $457 million of assumed debt. TransCanada gained 17,000 kilometers (10,500 miles) of pipeline linking natural gas production fields in Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas, and the Gulf of Mexico to the midwestern states of Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan. The deal also nearly tripled the company's gas storage capacity with the addition of underground gas storage facilities in Michigan with an aggregate capacity of around 230 billion cubic feet.
In addition to growing through acquisition, TransCanada was pursuing no fewer than three major pipeline projects. With oil prices skyrocketing, and discoveries of new fields dwindling, the Albertan oil sands had become an increasingly vital source of crude oil. TransCanada proposed a new crude oil pipeline designed to transport heavy oil-sands crude from Hardisty, Alberta, to refineries in southern Illinois and Cushing, Oklahoma. This project, dubbed Keystone, involved the conversion of 1,240 kilometers (770 miles) of existing Canadian pipeline from natural gas to crude oil transmission plus the construction of 2,200 kilometers (1,360 miles) of new pipeline and pump stations in the United States. By late in 2007 the estimated cost of Keystone had grown to $5.2 billion. By that time, ConocoPhillips had committed to shipping crude oil on the pipeline, and in early 2008 the U.S. oil giant acquired a 50 percent stake in the project. Designed to carry 590,000 barrels of oil a day, Keystone needed U.S. and Canadian regulatory approval before moving forward, but TransCanada hoped to have the pipeline in operation by late 2009.
TransCanada was also part of a consortium working to develop the Mackenzie Gas Project, a proposal for a 1,220-kilometer (755-mile) natural gas pipeline along the Mackenzie Valley of Canada's Northwest Territories. The pipeline would run from onshore gas fields in the northern Northwest Territories to the border with Alberta, where it would interconnect with TransCanada's Alberta System. The consortium, led by ExxonMobil Canada Ltd., hoped to have this CAD 16.2 billion project up and running by 2010.
Most ambitious of all was TransCanada's Alaska Pipeline Project, a 2,700-kilometer (1,670-mile) pipeline designed to carry natural gas from Prudhoe Bay in Alaska to northwestern Alberta. The company's proposal called for the pipeline to follow the route of the existing trans-Alaska oil pipeline and the Alaska Highway, continue through northern British Columbia, and finally connect with the Alberta System. TransCanada faced numerous hurdles before construction could even begin on this massive project, projected to cost $26.5 billion. In addition to regulatory approval, the company had to secure a license from the state of Alaska and gain long-term commitments from potential shippers, particularly BP p.l.c., ConocoPhillips, and Exxon Mobil Corporation. By early 2008 the projected completion date was 2017.
Principal Subsidiaries
TransCanada PipeLines Limited; NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd.; TransCanada PipeLine USA Ltd.; TransCanada Energy Ltd; Cancarb Limited.
Principal Competitors
Enbridge Inc.; Fortis Inc.; U.S. Gas Transmission; The Williams Companies, Inc.; Dynegy Inc.; Petro-Canada.
Further Reading
Brethour, Patrick, "TransCanada Pipeline Proposal Fires Up Tension with Enbridge," Globe and Mail, February 10, 2005, p. B2.
Byfield, Mike, "Birth of an Oil-Patch Titan: TransCanada's Gerry Maier Wrestles U.S. Giants in a Billion-Dollar Pipeline Duel," Alberta Report, October 28, 1991, pp. 42-46.
Carlisle, Tamsin, "TransCanada, Nova Agree to Merge Their Operations," Wall Street Journal, January 27, 1998, p. B4.
Chase, Steven, "TCPL: Penny Wise, Pound Foolish?" Globe and Mail, December 10, 1999, p. B12.
------, "TCPL Sells Chemical Arm," Globe and Mail, August 3, 1999, p. B1.
------, "TCPL's George Watson Resigns," Globe and Mail, July 17, 1999, p. B1.
Chu, Showwei, "TransCanada Plugs into Power," Globe and Mail, August 7, 2003, p. B12.
Cook, James, "Back from the Dead," Forbes, April 3, 1989, pp. 90+.
Ebner, Dave, "Conoco Signs On to Oil Sands Pipeline," Globe and Mail, November 4, 2005, p. B1.
------, "TransCanada Alone in Bid for Alaska Contract," Globe and Mail, January 5, 2008, p. B6.
------, "TransCanada Bulks Up for Winter: Buys Pipelines, Storage Facilities from El Paso in $3.4-Billion Deal," Globe and Mail, December 23, 2006, p. B5.
------, "TransCanada Set to Boost Keystone Pipeline," Globe and Mail, January 31, 2007, p. B7.
------, "TransCanada's Keystone Line to Ship Oil Sands Crude," Globe and Mail, February 1, 2006, p. B5.
Fagan, Drew, and Christopher Donville, "$2.4-Billion TCPL Project Approved," Globe and Mail, May 10, 1991, p. B1.
Fleming, James, "Bell Pursues a Startled Quarry," Maclean's, December 19, 1983, pp. 28+.
Goad, G. Pierre, "BCE Agrees to Sell Stake in TransCanada," Wall Street Journal, September 11, 1990, p. A3.
Ip, Greg, "TransCanada Launches Bid for ANG," Globe and Mail, January 20, 1996, p. B1.
Jang, Brent, "Nova, TCPL Tying the Knot," Globe and Mail, January 26, 1998, p. B1.
Kilbourn, William, Pipeline: TransCanada and the Great Debate, a History of Business and Politics, Toronto: Clarke, Irwin, 1970, 222 p.
McGee, Suzanne, and Gary Lamphier, "Recession-Resistant TransCanada PipeLines Is Poised to Realize Strong Growth Potential," Wall Street Journal, November 6, 1990, p. C2.
McGee, Suzanne, and Sonia L. Nazario, "TransCanada PipeLines Plans to Buy Canada-to-California Link from PG&E," Wall Street Journal, September 6, 1991, p. A4.
Newman, Peter C., Promise of the Pipeline, Calgary: TransCanada PipeLines, 1993, 70 p.
------, "Tending Canada's Only Megaproject," Maclean's, March 2, 1992, p. 32.
Nguyen, Lily, "TCPL Head Injects Some Balance to Balance Sheet," Globe and Mail, October 9, 2000, p. B10.
------, "TCPL Investors Cheer $1.15-Billion Asset Sale," Globe and Mail, August 4, 2000, p. B1.
------, "TCPL Picks CEO from Own Ranks," Globe and Mail, March 22, 2001, p. B1.
------, "TCPL Sells Netherlands Assets," Globe and Mail, August 24, 2000, p. B3.
Share, Jeff, "After Successful Turnaround TransCanada CEO Ready for Bright Future in Natural Gas, Power," Pipeline and Gas Journal, January 2003, pp. 18-24, 26-27.
Sheppard, Robert, "Pressured TransCanada Starting to Cut New Deals," Globe and Mail, June 20, 1988, p. B1.
------, "TCPL Plans to Sell $200 Million in Energy Assets to Lighten Debt," Globe and Mail, September 17, 1988, p. B3.
"Tall Order," Oilweek, May 4, 1998, pp. 24+.
"TransCanada Buying ANR Pipeline, Storage from El Paso," Pipeline and Gas Journal, January 2007, p. 4.
— Sina Dubovoj; Updated by David E. Salamie
