Could this be why the pipe line was rejected " Buffett's BNSF to transport crude" - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum
 
Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum  

Go Back   Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum > Miscellaneous > General Chit-Chat
Notices

Reply
 
Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-23-2012, 10:00 PM   #1 (permalink)
Rock God
 
bigun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Member # 29037
Location: Mountainair NM
Posts: 1,960
Could this be why the pipe line was rejected " Buffett's BNSF to transport crude"

Is this a payback for Buffett backing BHO?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...-pipeline.html



Buffett’s Burlington Northern Among Winners From Keystone Denial
By Jim Efstathiou Jr. - Jan 23, 2012

Warren Buffett’s Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that stand to benefit from the Obama administration’s decision to reject TransCanada Corp. (TRP)’s Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.

With modest expansion, railroads can handle all new oil produced in western Canada through 2030, according to an analysis of the Keystone proposal by the U.S. State Department.

“Whatever people bring to us, we’re ready to haul,” Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett’s Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A), said in an interview. If Keystone XL “doesn’t happen, we’re here to haul.”

The State Department denied TransCanada a permit on Jan. 18, saying there was not enough time to study the proposal by Feb. 21, a deadline Congress imposed on President Barack Obama. Calgary-based TransCanada has said it intends to re-apply with a route that avoids an environmentally sensitive region of Nebraska, something the Obama administration encouraged.

The rail option, though costlier, would lessen the environmental impact, such as a loss of wetlands and agricultural productivity, compared to the pipeline, according to the State Department analysis. Greenhouse gas emmissions, however, would be worse.

If completed, Keystone XL would deliver 700,000 barrels a day of crude from Alberta’s oil sands to refineries along the Gulf of Mexico, crossing 1,661 miles (2,673-kilometers) over Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas.
Tanker Car Bottleneck

Investors such as John Stephenson, who helps manage $2.7 billion for First Asset Management Inc. in Toronto said he anticipated the project would move forward next year. Pipeline shipping costs remain lower than rail, and a lack of readily available tanker cars may create a bottleneck.

The availability of tank cars may create a temporary “hiccup” in transport capacity, according to Tony Hatch, an independent railroad analyst in New York. Rail cars are “a pretty hot commodity,” as a result of demand from oil producers in North Dakota, he said.

Rail car production is already at a three-year high as manufacturers such as Greenbrier Cos Inc. (GBX) and American Railcar Industries Inc. (ARII) expand to meet demand for sand used in oil and gas exploration, according to Steve Barger, an analyst at Keybanc Capital Markets Inc. in Cleveland, citing Railway Supply Institute statistics.
‘Long-Term Solution’

Rail-car suppliers can add capacity, Hatch said.

“Railroads are not just a stopgap while we wait for a pipeline,” Hatch said in an interview. “They are potentially part of the long-term solution.”

Railroads are being used in North Dakota (STOND1), where oil producers have spurred a fivefold increase in output by using intensive drilling practices in the Bakken, a geologic formation that stretches from southern Alberta to the northern U.S. Great Plains. During 2011, rail capacity in the region tripled to almost 300,000 barrels a day as higher production exceeded what pipelines handle, according to the State Department report on Keystone XL.

Shipping oil using tank cars on rail costs about $3 more a barrel than pipeline transport, using prices in North Dakota, a differential “unlikely” to slow the development of oil sands crude if no pipeline is build, the State Department said. The gap is shrinking as larger storage terminals are built, the agency said.
‘Ready to Haul’

Burlington Northern carries about 25 percent of the oil from the Bakken, said Krista York-Wooley, the railroad spokeswoman. The company can carry higher volumes from North Dakota or Alberta, she said.

Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd. (CP)’s shipments from North Dakota climbed to more than 13,000 carloads last year from about 500 in 2009, Ed Greenberg, a spokesman, said in an e-mail. The Calgary- based company has a similar plan in western Canada.

“With an extensive rail network and proven expertise in moving energy, CP offers a flexible option for transporting crude oil and other energy-related products to and from key locations in North America,” Vice President Tracy Robinson said in an e-mail. “Rail is scalable, allowing CP to effectively keep pace with the shipping needs of producers.”
Oil Sands

Canadian National Railway Co. (CNR), the biggest Canadian railroad based on annual sales, considers Alberta’s oil sands a chance to expand its business, according to company filings.

“CN continues to work closely with customers in Alberta to capitalize on oil-and-gas related opportunities,” the Calgary- based company said. “CN sees potential for the outbound movement of oil sands products such as bitumen and synthetic crude to refineries in the U.S. Gulf Coast region, or eventually through West Coast ports to offshore markets.”

Imperial Oil Ltd. (IMO), a Calgary-based unit of Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM), will consider “various transportation options” for oil sands exports, according Pius Rohlheiser, a spokesman. Cenovus Energy Inc. (CVE) uses railroads to bring in dilutants needed to mix with heavy crude before it can be shipped by pipeline, and to export oil from the Bakken formation in Canada, according to Jessica Wilkinson, a spokeswoman.
Environmentalists’ Opposition

Environmental groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council have campaigned to stop Keystone XL because leaks could threaten drinking water supplies and processing Alberta crude produces more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional oil.

Railroads too present environmental issues. Moving crude on trains produces more global warming gases than a pipeline, the State Department said.

Union Pacific Corp. (UNP), based in Omaha, Nebraska, anticipated an increase in rail traffic with or without Keystone, Chief Executive Officer Jim Young said in an interview.

“We would have been involved with moving the pipe and a lot of the construction business in building it,” Young said. “On the other hand, if you don’t build any pipeline capacity, you’re going to be moving a lot of crude by train.”

It will take five to eight years before oil sands production outstrips existing export capacity, the State Department said.

Tank car utilization is at “record levels” fueled by demand from oil and natural gas producers, according to Doug Reece, director of marketing for Oakville, Ontario-based Procor Ltd., a rail-car leasing company. The soonest new cars will be available is 2013, he said.

“In western Canada, shippers and third parties are investing in the necessary infrastructure and we see strong growth ahead,” Reece said in an e-mail. “We are having regular dialogue with customers about their potential needs, as collaboration and fleet planning have become critical.”

Rail allows shippers to reach different markets and capture better prices at refineries, said John Mims, a transportation analyst at Friedman Billings Ramsey & Co. in Arlington, Virginia.

“It’s a good secular growth story for the railroads,” Mims said in an interview.“They’re playing an increasing role, especially as you see this push back from a regulatory standpoint on the pipelines.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Jim Efstathiou Jr. in New York at jefstathiou@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Jon Morgan at jmorgan97@bloomberg.net
®2012 BLOOMBERG L.P. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
__________________
“I will not be wronged, I will not be insulted and I will not be laid a hand on. John Wayne “The Shootist.”
bigun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 04:23 AM   #2 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Member # 196490
Location: Occupied Territory
Posts: 1,779
Allegedly it had to do with an arbitrary deadline to study the route and the State Dept recommended it be rejected. Trying to force Slobama(or anyone tbh) into making a decision by attaching the deadline to key legislation(the prez wanted the extension of the payroll tax cuts) then crying because he said "no" is dirty pool at best.

The pipeline isn't dead, it's delayed. Let's not forget reality here;

The majority of the "jobs" created will be dead when the pipeline is completed. I'd like to see the real breakdown of permanent jobs and the temporary, cheap labor jobs that make up most of those numbers claimed. TransCanada did this before(claimed huge job numbers) with the first pipeline. How many of those jobs still exist?

Job creation doesn't equal long term job retention.

Who is going to be the REAL recipient of the end product? If it stays in the US it's going to be taxed heavily. However, if the oil products are sold outside the US, there are much less taxes on them.

TransCanada embellished it's safety record claiming 1 leak in 7 years then ended up having 12 leaks in one year. During this time they were ordered to tear up sections of pipe after tests showed the manufacturer used shitty steel. TC intends to use the same supplier again.

TC habitually balks making repairs to infrastructure like roads it destroys in the building process forcing small counties into expensive litigation to force them into hold up their end, or they(the counties) end up paying for it themselves and trying to recoup their losses. These counties have a hell of a time making this money back because when it's all said and done the jobs and the spending from those jobs have long dried up.

I also call bullshit on TransCanada already threatening property owners with eminent domain before the route has been approved not that I like ED to begin with.

If a company and/or government has to resort to bullshit and trickery instead of integrity and honesty to do business I don't agree with it on any level.
__________________
My IDIot Build [url]http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=14157134[/url]

Last edited by Bustin Loose; 01-24-2012 at 04:26 AM.
Bustin Loose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 05:17 AM   #3 (permalink)
Blue Haired Troll
 
Screwzer2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Member # 38193
Location: Nevada City, CA under a bridge
Posts: 648
So, wouldn't more permanent jobs be created in the railroad sector than in the temporary ones for the pipeline? Furthermore, the RR sector is American, not canuck.

Hadn't thought about the railroad option with so much focus on the pipeline. A compelling option.... that could lead to a more diverse economy for the great white north, given RR cars can carry more than just tar.
__________________
“Preach the gospel, and if necessary, use words.”
St. Francis
Screwzer2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 05:40 AM   #4 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Member # 196490
Location: Occupied Territory
Posts: 1,779
The RR option is estimated to cost upwards of 3 times more in transport costs than using the pipeline. So in the long run the pipeline is the most cost effective solution.

There would be more permanent jobs created for rail, however, rails safety record isn't all that great, to the environment or the workers. Rail would cry foul and expense when their safety record came under scrutiny for something like this.

There's still been no answer as to who gets what that comes out of the Texas end of the line.

Canadian oil is still foreign oil. As much pain as it would cause America needs to learn how to stand on it's own and take responsibility for itself, again.

The only thing I agreed with Gingrinch on in last nights debate was when he brought up contests and prizes for invention. What he apparently was clueless to is that contests such as what he mentioned have always been out there but they haven't been supported by governments and large corporations like they were in the "old days". We can't continue to call America a "great" country as we fall behind in technology, health, space and environmental integrity while we become more dependent on other countries imports.
__________________
My IDIot Build [url]http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=14157134[/url]

Last edited by Bustin Loose; 01-24-2012 at 05:42 AM.
Bustin Loose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 05:49 AM   #5 (permalink)
Big Meanie
 
Haole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Member # 5859
Location: In a house.
Posts: 2,657
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Screwzer2 View Post
So, wouldn't more permanent jobs be created in the railroad sector than in the temporary ones for the pipeline? Furthermore, the RR sector is American, not canuck.

Hadn't thought about the railroad option with so much focus on the pipeline. A compelling option.... that could lead to a more diverse economy for the great white north, given RR cars can carry more than just tar.
Odd that Pelosi isn't up in arms about this. After all, the RR has a profit margin of 12%. That's six times the profit margin of the insurance industry.
__________________
Ka 'aina uluwehi, ko kakou
kuleana.


- The lush life-giving land, our personal responsibility.


Ventura County Axle Snappers - Nevada County Chapter
Haole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 05:51 AM   #6 (permalink)
Blue Haired Troll
 
Screwzer2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Member # 38193
Location: Nevada City, CA under a bridge
Posts: 648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bustin Loose View Post
The only thing I agreed with Gingrinch on in last nights debate was when he brought up contests and prizes for invention. What he apparently was clueless to is that contests such as what he mentioned have always been out there but they haven't been supported by governments and large corporations like they were in the "old days".
Oh, I dunno. DARPA has a pretty good program going. It could definately stand to be expanded and I like the idea of prizes vs. govt. back loans better. Not sure in and of itself that's enuf to stay ahead of the Chinese who will put the entire weight of their nation behind a project that fits their 5-year plan (currently, dominating solar panels).
__________________
“Preach the gospel, and if necessary, use words.”
St. Francis
Screwzer2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 05:55 AM   #7 (permalink)
A is A
 
Jamtoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Member # 146531
Location: Howland OH
Posts: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bustin Loose View Post
The RR option is estimated to cost upwards of 3 times more in transport costs than using the pipeline. So in the long run the pipeline is the most cost effective solution.

There would be more permanent jobs created for rail, however, rails safety record isn't all that great, to the environment or the workers. Rail would cry foul and expense when their safety record came under scrutiny for something like this.

There's still been no answer as to who gets what that comes out of the Texas end of the line.

Canadian oil is still foreign oil. As much pain as it would cause America needs to learn how to stand on it's own and take responsibility for itself, again.

The only thing I agreed with Gingrinch on in last nights debate was when he brought up contests and prizes for invention. What he apparently was clueless to is that contests such as what he mentioned have always been out there but they haven't been supported by governments and large corporations like they were in the "old days". We can't continue to call America a "great" country as we fall behind in technology, health, space and environmental integrity while we become more dependent on other countries imports.
We have to get away from the idea that domestic oil must stay domestic. Oil is a traded commodity as such the more on the market the lower the price. The idea behind getting domestic oil is to stop the effects of irrational international suppliers having control over the open market quantity. doesn't matter who buys it or where it goes as long as we assure it gets to market and breaks the price fixing OPEC currently enjoys. Much better to be an exporter than importer. We want it to go to our refineries so we can export it.

For instance the Marcellus shale gas will most likely be largely sold to China making us one of the largest exporters of natural gas.
__________________
"The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people."

Ronald Reagan -October 27, 1964

Date added for moron proofing.
Jamtoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 06:05 AM   #8 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Member # 196490
Location: Occupied Territory
Posts: 1,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Screwzer2 View Post
DARPA has a pretty good program going. It could definately stand to be expanded.. Not sure in and of itself that's enuf to stay ahead of the Chinese who will put the entire weight of their nation behind a project that fits their 5-year plan (currently, dominating solar panels).
Expanding something similar to DARPA and encouraging it into the private sector would be the cats meow. I'm all for reversing the dumbing down of this country and getting creative juices flowing again.

We NEED to put the entire weight of our nation behind pulling ourselves off the foreign teets. It's what attracted other nations to "buddy" up to the US to begin with. But as a tree hugger that hates companies that put profits over responsible production I really stress environmental responsibility. Not so much because of preserving nature to look at but for our future health and welfare. Our nation is getting fatter and sicker and we aren't going to reverse this trend with more modified food products, destruction of ecosystems due to mass production and even more pesticides. We must create a safe balance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamtoy View Post
Much better to be an exporter than importer. We want it to go to our refineries so we can export it.

For instance the Marcellus shale gas will most likely be largely sold to China making us one of the largest exporters of natural gas.
I'm not good at math but why would that be better and why does it necessarily have to be oil? If we somehow created the next big energy idea and didn't have to use foreign oil anymore why would we care about what price anyone charges for it?

Exporting our own sure is helping us. That's why Venezuela funds our fuel oil programs for the poor while we cut funding for it.

The only thing that's going to break price fixing and gouging is by cutting the speculators off at the knees and/or developing responsible energy sources so we don't have to rely on foreign oil purchase.

We should be on top of things like solar panels, not China. America being behind the curve on any technology is inexcusable.
__________________
My IDIot Build [url]http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=14157134[/url]

Last edited by Bustin Loose; 01-24-2012 at 06:17 AM.
Bustin Loose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 06:36 AM   #9 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Member # 117207
Location: I walk with Crom
Posts: 177
Quote:

What Mr. Obama and the left are engaged in is an ongoing war of aggression against the nation's Heartland and traditional America everywhere. The left's aim in stopping Keystone isn't primarily due to environmental concerns (easily refuted). Underlying the Keystone decision is politics and power.

Mr. Obama is pursuing subjugation economics to better serve the left's end, which is thorough political domination from sea to shining sea. Yes, Mr. Obama seeks to placate his party's environmentalist bloc for short term political need, but with Keystone, he's very deliberately picking winners and losers. Not incidentally, most of the losers are in red states or are part of the "old" economy (manufacturing, agriculture, heavy industries -- coal, oil, and natural gas included). There's some talk that Mr. Obama will approve a modified pipeline plan after the elections, but the claim is dubious.

Not surprisingly, Mr. Obama and the left favor the "new" economy -- the high tech and knowledge and information industries that populate the coasts, the college towns, and the nation's larger metropolises. Those regions and communities are where you'll find most of the Democratic Party's voter base.

But the left isn't laissez-faire when it comes to the new economy. The centerpiece of a radicalized America is government. Mr. Obama and the left want government to have the primary role in directing the new economy; it's a nonnegotiable condition of the left's support. In return, the new economy's enterprises receive favors in the way of subsidies, laws, and regulations beneficial to them. Let's not forget Mr. Obama's Solyndra scandal, which is an egregious example of favoritism.

New economy favoritism isn't entirely the case, you say? What about Mr. Obama's bailout of General Motors, which isn't exactly a Silicon Valley biotech concern? Three points. First, the bailout came on the condition that Uncle Sam exercise substantial control -- at least, initially -- of GM. That's a tradeoff the left is willing to make with any enterprise. Second, GM is one of Mr. Obama's useful idiots, having stepped up its emphasis on the star-crossed Chevy Volt. Hence, GM is helpful in advancing the left's environmental agenda. Third, Michigan has trended blue over the years; Detroit, a Democrat stronghold, is in GM's backyard.

Clearly, there's more on the president's and the left's agenda than economics. The left has long desired to radically alter the nation socially and culturally. Economics -- controlling the means of production -- is a leftist tenet and tool. When you control the means by which people create their livelihoods, you control them. No imperative for outright ownership of the means. Mid 20th century fascism certainly demonstrated what government control without ownership is all about. On a lesser scale, the EU is about the ceaseless governmental bureaucratization of European economies. Control is often preferable to ownership; the left gets to give the orders without the heavy lifting.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/...#ixzz1kO0kXvbg
...and Buffet gets to make money too.
petro812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 06:43 AM   #10 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Member # 117207
Location: I walk with Crom
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamtoy View Post
We have to get away from the idea that domestic oil must stay domestic. Oil is a traded commodity as such the more on the market the lower the price. The idea behind getting domestic oil is to stop the effects of irrational international suppliers having control over the open market quantity. doesn't matter who buys it or where it goes as long as we assure it gets to market and breaks the price fixing OPEC currently enjoys. Much better to be an exporter than importer. We want it to go to our refineries so we can export it.

For instance the Marcellus shale gas will most likely be largely sold to China making us one of the largest exporters of natural gas.
Are you suggesting that we might earn those greenbacks instead of borrowing them? The current plan is working so well though.
petro812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:12 AM   #11 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Member # 196490
Location: Occupied Territory
Posts: 1,779
What part of the left are your referring to petro? I ask since I am also part of the left.
__________________
My IDIot Build [url]http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=14157134[/url]
Bustin Loose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:17 AM   #12 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Member # 65100
Location: Dodge, NE
Posts: 5,198
Send a message via Yahoo to rustywagoneersdotcom
Ok, so - Bustin Loose voted for Obama.

Big question is - will you vote for him again?
__________________
800 dollar running driving 240D. Tried to link in sig, but I am a blackstar leach.
rustywagoneersdotcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:27 AM   #13 (permalink)
Blue Haired Troll
 
Screwzer2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Member # 38193
Location: Nevada City, CA under a bridge
Posts: 648
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustywagoneersdotcom View Post
Ok, so - Bustin Loose voted for Obama.

Big question is - will you vote for him again?
Most likely I will, but you never know. I've been intrigued by Newt. Romney not at all.
__________________
“Preach the gospel, and if necessary, use words.”
St. Francis
Screwzer2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:29 AM   #14 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Member # 117207
Location: I walk with Crom
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bustin Loose View Post
What part of the left are your referring to petro? I ask since I am also part of the left.
All of it. But mostly the marxists. Even if they want to disguise it as Pancasila or progressiveness.
petro812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:34 AM   #15 (permalink)
TEX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Member # 603
Location: Missouri, USA
Posts: 14,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamtoy View Post
We have to get away from the idea that domestic oil must stay domestic.
The only thing I'll say here is that it makes zero sense to for us export a product we are also importing.
__________________
www.probog.com
Thanks to:
www.heiseroil.com
Extreme Performance
www.kmelectronics.com
Bear Creek Auto Recyclers
www.svrehorsepower.com
TEX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:36 AM   #16 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Member # 65100
Location: Dodge, NE
Posts: 5,198
Send a message via Yahoo to rustywagoneersdotcom
Quote:
Originally Posted by Screwzer2 View Post
Most likely I will, but you never know. I've been intrigued by Newt. Romney not at all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=4qiF-OlmZpU

Worth a listen.
__________________
800 dollar running driving 240D. Tried to link in sig, but I am a blackstar leach.
rustywagoneersdotcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:51 AM   #17 (permalink)
AZ Undertakers
 
az-k5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Member # 32613
Location: Glendale AZ
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bustin Loose View Post

The pipeline isn't dead, it's delayed. Let's not forget reality here;

The majority of the "jobs" created will be dead when the pipeline is completed. I'd like to see the real breakdown of permanent jobs and the temporary, cheap labor jobs that make up most of those numbers claimed. TransCanada did this before(claimed huge job numbers) with the first pipeline. How many of those jobs still exist?
True, but technically every job ever created is temporary as they all depend on the next contract to continue. The clerk at the grocery store depends on each customer to purchase (a short contract transaction) to keep their job just as much as the iron worker depends on the next high rise/steel bridge get green lighted. Same for car sales and road work, it's all temporary and hopefully steady.

People constantly say "infrastructure spending" which is just A LOT of temporary jobs getting created, but they do spur growth. Once there is a workforce able to complete a task there can be a demand for those workers.

As for the pipeline, god forbid we train skilled workers to do high quality large piping projects or we might end up with a work force capable of building more nuclear power plants. Not to mention that inspections, repairs/maintenance jobs will stay with the pipeline for decades.
az-k5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:56 AM   #18 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Member # 6359
Location: Placer County, CA Where the Green Grass Grows
Posts: 1,901
It's crude

The reason the pipeline is headed to Texas is that's where the refineries are. And so there will be a lot more oil to refine. I don't think the intent is to deliver crude so that the crude can be shipped. So, there are other employment consierations to address when discussing long term job creation. Like, what is the effect of more petroleum hydrocarbons being available domestically ? Even if some of it is or is not shiped out for a profit ?

I think it is still better to have or poses the pipeline and the crude here, instead of it going over to Vancouver or such, and bypassing us entirely.
__________________
not surprized yer confused yer face was burried in the pillow pretty deep as gizim drunk as you were
Lil Uzi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 07:58 AM   #19 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Member # 117207
Location: I walk with Crom
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEX View Post
The only thing I'll say here is that it makes zero sense to for us export a product we are also importing.
It gets exported after it's refined.

It arrives a raw material, is refined, and more value (the actual creation of wealth) is added to it. Then, it is made available on an open market, to the highest bidder. Foreign or domestic.

That base material might vary somewhat in it's ability to produce a profitable end product, but that shouldn't really concern the powers that be. Unless of course they wanted to control it all.
petro812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 08:01 AM   #20 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Member # 65100
Location: Dodge, NE
Posts: 5,198
Send a message via Yahoo to rustywagoneersdotcom
Quote:
Originally Posted by petro812 View Post
... (the actual creation of wealth)...
Austrian Economics Porn, baby.
__________________
800 dollar running driving 240D. Tried to link in sig, but I am a blackstar leach.
rustywagoneersdotcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 08:14 AM   #21 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Member # 117207
Location: I walk with Crom
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustywagoneersdotcom View Post
Austrian Economics Porn, baby.
Little dudes with big assed mustaches shall lead the way!















Or truth, we could try that for a little while. Something tells me freedom's over-rated, that catchy slogans and the warm embrace of the nanny state's coddling is the preferred method. All that thinking and individual responsibility wears thin.
petro812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 08:27 AM   #22 (permalink)
A is A
 
Jamtoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Member # 146531
Location: Howland OH
Posts: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bustin Loose View Post
Expanding something similar to DARPA and encouraging it into the private sector would be the cats meow. I'm all for reversing the dumbing down of this country and getting creative juices flowing again.

We NEED to put the entire weight of our nation behind pulling ourselves off the foreign teets. It's what attracted other nations to "buddy" up to the US to begin with. But as a tree hugger that hates companies that put profits over responsible production I really stress environmental responsibility. Not so much because of preserving nature to look at but for our future health and welfare. Our nation is getting fatter and sicker and we aren't going to reverse this trend with more modified food products, destruction of ecosystems due to mass production and even more pesticides. We must create a safe balance.



I'm not good at math but why would that be better and why does it necessarily have to be oil? If we somehow created the next big energy idea and didn't have to use foreign oil anymore why would we care about what price anyone charges for it?

Exporting our own sure is helping us. That's why Venezuela funds our fuel oil programs for the poor while we cut funding for it.

The only thing that's going to break price fixing and gouging is by cutting the speculators off at the knees and/or developing responsible energy sources so we don't have to rely on foreign oil purchase.

We should be on top of things like solar panels, not China. America being behind the curve on any technology is inexcusable.
You need to better understand how markets work as well as understand that most alternative energies despite near 100 years of try and failure, are not nearly as cost effective as oil.
Quote:
Originally Posted by petro812 View Post
Are you suggesting that we might earn those greenbacks instead of borrowing them? The current plan is working so well though.
don't tell chairman Obama!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TEX View Post
The only thing I'll say here is that it makes zero sense to for us export a product we are also importing.
see below
Quote:
Originally Posted by petro812 View Post
It gets exported after it's refined.

It arrives a raw material, is refined, and more value (the actual creation of wealth) is added to it. Then, it is made available on an open market, to the highest bidder. Foreign or domestic.

That base material might vary somewhat in it's ability to produce a profitable end product, but that shouldn't really concern the powers that be. Unless of course they wanted to control it all.
__________________
"The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people."

Ronald Reagan -October 27, 1964

Date added for moron proofing.
Jamtoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 08:35 AM   #23 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Member # 85483
Posts: 382
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEX View Post
The only thing I'll say here is that it makes zero sense to for us export a product we are also importing.
We are already exporting shit tons of gas because others will pay more for it.
thumping is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2012, 03:42 AM   #24 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Member # 196490
Location: Occupied Territory
Posts: 1,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustywagoneersdotcom View Post
Ok, so - Bustin Loose voted for Obama.

Big question is - will you vote for him again?
I did not vote for Obama, I didn't vote at all in that election as I didn't like the choices. However, if that ethics bending, woman hating piece of shit Gingrinch is running against Slobama for POTUS you're damn right I'm voting for Obama. I was a hard core Republican until Reagan. Now I don't like most anyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by petro812 View Post
All of it. But mostly the marxists. Even if they want to disguise it as Pancasila or progressiveness.
So there is absolutely nothing the left believe that you might consider reasonable? I'm asking out of curiosity, not to provoke anything. There are some things I find reasonable from the right but maybe that's because I'm not a bleeding heart. I also ask because I hate getting pigeonholed. There are a ton of irresponsible and irrational people on both sides. I'm not one of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TEX View Post
The only thing I'll say here is that it makes zero sense to for us export a product we are also importing.
How simple, I never looked at it this way. It also doesn't make any sense to get oil from Venezuela to fund our low income oil heat programs when we have it right here. It's embarrassing to be getting aid from a foreign country like this. I don't care that others pay more for it. We need to take care of our own FIRST then sell the rest. It's not going to break anyone's bank for America to take care of America if they are willing to do it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamtoy View Post
You need to better understand how markets work as well as understand that most alternative energies despite near 100 years of try and failure, are not nearly as cost effective as oil.
I understand how markets work. I also understand that for many years what we did influenced those markets and our dollar presided over those markets. We are now more dependent on other countries goods and services than we have ever been which allows other countries more leeway into influencing our markets and worth. I don't like this kind of positioning. What if China suddenly cut us off(unlikely I know but guarantee me it would never happen), what would we do then? Or if that muscle flexer in Iran did shut down the straight(again unlikely but there are no guarantees), now what? I do not like that we are at the mercy of other countries, this weakens us considerably. If we as a country are so great, then why are we not on top of things like this anymore? We need to get this back and do it in a responsible way while doing so. It can be done, if we want it bad enough. I have never liked that we suck China's or the Middle East's dick and never will.

Oil at one time was not cost effective either but it's all we had. This is America not the Beverly Hillbillies. This is not a stupid country but we've sure made a lot of stupid decisions and two of them were to all but crush ingenuity and to shackle education. I do not ever believe that we can't come up with a better way to serve our energy needs, even if it's a new way to refine and use oil. What offends me is people who roll over and think we just have to continue like this. If our ancestors had that kind of attitude we wouldn't have oil and gas to use now. This is unacceptable.
__________________
My IDIot Build [url]http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=14157134[/url]

Last edited by Bustin Loose; 01-25-2012 at 04:16 AM.
Bustin Loose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2012, 05:37 AM   #25 (permalink)
Registered User
 
toyminator2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Member # 99025
Posts: 339
Obama wants the pipeline re-routed through the US to make it go through NON right to work states so the only jobs it creates are union jobs.
toyminator2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.