• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Keystone Pipeline= 35 permanent jobs

bigdoublezero said:
Yeah, the Keystone oil actually can't be exported. It can only be used in the U.S. market by law due to our export ban. It's conceivable the ban could be lifted in the future, but that's a fight that's going to take a very long time to work out -- might not even be settled in our lifetime; it's that entrenched.
Click to expand...

No, but the refined products can be exported. Also, big oil has made lifting the crude export ban a top priority this year.
 
bigdoublezero said:
Yeah, the Keystone oil actually can't be exported. It can only be used in the U.S. market by law due to our export ban. It's conceivable the ban could be lifted in the future, but that's a fight that's going to take a very long time to work out -- might not even be settled in our lifetime; it's that entrenched.
Click to expand...

After refinement it can.
 
I don't know shit about this, but doesn't the pipeline take it to refineries? And aren't those refineries at or almost at capacity, and are older refineries that are less efficient than new ones? Why not instead of building a pipeline, just build refineries up north?
 
WakeandBake said:
I don't know shit about this, but doesn't the pipeline take it to refineries? And aren't those refineries at or almost at capacity, and are older refineries that are less efficient than new ones? Why not instead of building a pipeline, just build refineries up north?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that has a lot to do with the difficulties in getting the permits from the federal bureaucracy to build new refineries. I believe we are talking about decades IF it is approved at all.
 
ONW said:
I agree in theory, but

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303802904579334411874909686

"Greater diversity of supply helps shield the Chinese economy from political risks that threaten its stability. Chinese oil companies operate in parts of the world where political and social instability routinely puts flow of resources at risk."

"The release of Tuesday's data concludes a landmark year for Chinese oil companies abroad. In February, Cnooc Ltd. 0883.HK +0.16% , the listed unit of the country's primary offshore oil producer, closed on its $15.1 billion purchase of Canada's Nexen Inc.—the largest foreign acquisition of a company by a Chinese firm."

WO-AR039_CHINAO_NS_20140121184204.jpg


And we fought a war to see the Chinese not have to care about Canadian and US oil exports.
Click to expand...

I agree that their supply is diversified thus my choice of the words "part of their supply". The Chinese needs are only going to increase over time. Having control of a portion of that supply gives us some leverage albeit not nearly as great as the Russian leverage with natural gas. They clearly still care about Canadian and US oil exports.
 
WakeandBake said:
I don't know shit about this, but doesn't the pipeline take it to refineries? And aren't those refineries at or almost at capacity, and are older refineries that are less efficient than new ones? Why not instead of building a pipeline, just build refineries up north?
Click to expand...

We can't use this oil. It's way too dirty for cars or planes or any other use in the US. This pipeline is for the Chinese and maybe the leftovers for India. WE are strengthening their economies while putting our land and people at risk.

It's astonishing how much RWers want to give more power to communist leaders in China. That's what Keystone does.

Again, why won't any of you answer this question? If this pipeline is so valuable, why won't the Canadians build it across Canada to the Pacific and build their own refineries for the product?
 
The Mangler said:
I'm pretty sure that has a lot to do with the difficulties in getting the permits from the federal bureaucracy to build new refineries. I believe we are talking about decades IF it is approved at all.
Click to expand...

Yeah but politicians are easy to grease. I mean, aren't they greasing them to get the pipeline built? Why not just grease them for new refineries? I smell a rat..
 
RJKarl said:
We can't use this oil. It's way too dirty for cars or planes or any other use in the US. This pipeline is for the Chinese and maybe the leftovers for India. WE are strengthening their economies while putting our land and people at risk.

It's astonishing how much RWers want to give more power to communist leaders in China. That's what Keystone does.

Again, why won't any of you answer this question? If this pipeline is so valuable, why won't the Canadians build it across Canada to the Pacific and build their own refineries for the product?
Click to expand...

Only it really isn't that simple. For starters the pipeline already exists. What we are talking about doing is expanding it. And much of the oil will be used in the United States. Oil that flows through the pipeline is already used here. In fact, oil from the United States will flow in the pipeline in addition to oil from the Canadian tar sands. This is a good factual summary of all the issues associated with the pipeline expansion. And it isn't as if the Chinese, the Indians, etc. won't have access to oil from other sources besides the U.S.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline
 
I never said the Chinese and Indians wouldn't have access from other places. All I said was this would be their oil. It will not be sold in the US.
 
Baconwfu said:
I would be skeptical of anything from the Christian Science Monitor.
Click to expand...

The Christian Science Monitor is actually a very well regarded news organization - and is not related to the views of the organization. It carries a fair bit of weight worldwide.
 
The Mangler said:
I'm pretty sure that has a lot to do with the difficulties in getting the permits from the federal bureaucracy to build new refineries. I believe we are talking about decades IF it is approved at all.
Click to expand...

"There were a total of 143 operable petroleum refineries in the United States as of January 1, 2013.

The "newest" refinery in the United States began operating in 2008 in Douglas, Wyoming. However, the newest refinery with atmospheric distillation capacity greater than 100,000 barrels per day began operating in 1977 in Garyville, Louisiana.

Ground was broken in March 2013 for construction of a new refinery in North Dakota. The 20,000-barrel-per-day (bbl/d) Dakota Prairie facility is scheduled to be built in 20 months.

Capacity has also been added to existing refineries through upgrades or new construction."

http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=29&t=6
 
"1. The U.S. has become the world’s fueling station, sending more gasoline, diesel, and other refined petroleum products abroad than ever before. Exports of these fuels have almost tripled in 10 years.

2. In 2011, the U.S. became a net exporter of refined oil products for the first time since World War II.

3. Exports are forecast to keep rising as European refiners close, domestic crude production rises, and demand swells in emerging markets."

http://www.businessweek.com/article...e-u-dot-s-dot-crude-oil-refinery-to-the-world
 
I thought oil was fungible and couldn't be pegged to a particular country or use?
 
Certain kinds of oil are too dirty for US consumption....like Canadian oil sand products.
 
WFFaithful said:
No, but the refined products can be exported. Also, big oil has made lifting the crude export ban a top priority this year.
Click to expand...

It depends on what you call big oil. There are a lot of domestic producers that want nothing to do with the lifting of the ban. It's absurdly complicated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top