17 Replies to “We Don’t Need No Stinking Giant Fans”
Last thing the green parasites want is clean. cheap oil.
This is your dumbest argument of all. It completely ignores that WE are bound by trade agreements to sell our oil at the same market rate to others, such as the US. It also supposes that in the case we broke these agreements, we’d some how not be impacted by having oil when the rest of the world doesn’t. Nevermind the fact that we import a huge portion of our goods from over seas.
Danny Re: It completely ignores that WE are bound by trade agreements to sell our oil at the same market rate to others.
Ok, so we sell the oil at market rate and since this new technology allowed for the oil to be extracted cheaper, then the company(s) increase there profits, which increases the stock value, which increase most everyones pension in one way or another, which etc, etc, etc.
Please tell me where the problem is.
There’s yet another point being missed by you, Danny. If the cost of extraction is lowered, then it’s reasonable to expect that oil extraction from lower grade deposits becomes economic. This means that Canada’s oil reserves are likely to further increase.
The point of Kate’s headline is that we will still be producing and exporting oil when nearly everything else, except Saudi Arabia and Iran, has run dry.
We, will not exist as a country when Saudi, Iran, and other ME countries have run dry.
The point is that we shouldn’t be destroying the wealth created through oil production by subsidizing fraudulent alternative energy.
Something else in the article bugged me. They talk about refining the tar sands oil for transport as if that was a -bad- thing.
Call me crazy, but wouldn’t we be further ahead (by a light year) if we were shipping finished product to the USA and the Chicoms et al? Gasoline, diesel, bunker, all of it is far more profitable than plain old crude, right?
Is there some reason why Alberta and Sask can’t be the new oil refining capital of the world? Other than the usual watermelon hand wringing, I mean.
As usual, Kate nails it.
Phantom, a large part of the reason is the US laws on additives. Gasoline standards are set by the states and they vary from one to the other. To sell gasoline to the US we would have to produce a couple of dozen varieties of standard grade gasoline. You can’t just flick a switch and have a refinery producing a different product. The US variation on gasoline mixtures is a large part of the reason why every time a refinery goes out of production for a time the US has a gasoline shortage.
You are correct in presuming that most of the value of oil is in the refining side of the business. If you want, you can call it a US non-tariff trade barrier.
Kate, agreed, but the trillions that will come in from oil now made economic by new technology are far more important than the billions being temporarily pi$$ed away on renewable boondoggles.
The technology outlined is just one of several that will economically unlock vast amounts new oil reserves in the coming decades. Thus we will have near limitless inexpensive oil AND gas supplies in the not too distant future. Meanwhile the machines that consume these energy sources are becoming evermore cleaner.
This is a doomsday scenario for those wishing to rule the world through global green mandated governance. Cheap clean fossil energy negates the need for such universal draconia. Thus those vested in such a system will fight by all means possible – including terrorism – to prevent such cheap fossil energy systems from developing. They will lose as have all Luddites before them.
“We, will not exist as a country when Saudi, Iran, and other ME countries have run dry.”
oh…we will….we’ll just be called Canadastan under sharia law
“Phantom, a large part of the reason is the US laws on additives. Gasoline standards are set by the states and they vary from one to the other. To sell gasoline to the US we would have to produce a couple of dozen varieties of standard grade gasoline. You can’t just flick a switch and have a refinery producing a different product. The US variation on gasoline mixtures is a large part of the reason why every time a refinery goes out of production for a time the US has a gasoline shortage.”
So, if they can do it why can’t we?
“The point is that we shouldn’t be destroying the wealth created through oil production by subsidizing fraudulent alternative energy.”
Huh? The article mentions a $10 million grant from the federal government funded the study of this (unproven) process. Besides, it sounds exactly like the decades old process for heavy oil extraction.
? That’s not a grant. It’s a tax refund.
A process that has a Cost/benefit increases efficiency and increased efficiency reduces the rate of consumption/conversion of Energy on the planet..It’s called conserving Energy
The Communist alternative Energy sources are all wealth destroyers, totally inefficient without any identifiable benefit. You are shredding & flushing very dollar…If we all just flush 2K we won’t have to build those worthless windmills, wasting all those limited resources, and the Communists get to destroy the economy..
HT, because then we’d have to have pipelines for each separate product instead of just crude oil. Which would make them uneconomic because of low volumes. And sending it by truck from Alberta would make it uneconomic compared to refinery production on the Gulf Coast.
Last thing the green parasites want is clean. cheap oil.
This is your dumbest argument of all. It completely ignores that WE are bound by trade agreements to sell our oil at the same market rate to others, such as the US. It also supposes that in the case we broke these agreements, we’d some how not be impacted by having oil when the rest of the world doesn’t. Nevermind the fact that we import a huge portion of our goods from over seas.
Danny Re: It completely ignores that WE are bound by trade agreements to sell our oil at the same market rate to others.
Ok, so we sell the oil at market rate and since this new technology allowed for the oil to be extracted cheaper, then the company(s) increase there profits, which increases the stock value, which increase most everyones pension in one way or another, which etc, etc, etc.
Please tell me where the problem is.
There’s yet another point being missed by you, Danny. If the cost of extraction is lowered, then it’s reasonable to expect that oil extraction from lower grade deposits becomes economic. This means that Canada’s oil reserves are likely to further increase.
The point of Kate’s headline is that we will still be producing and exporting oil when nearly everything else, except Saudi Arabia and Iran, has run dry.
We, will not exist as a country when Saudi, Iran, and other ME countries have run dry.
The point is that we shouldn’t be destroying the wealth created through oil production by subsidizing fraudulent alternative energy.
Something else in the article bugged me. They talk about refining the tar sands oil for transport as if that was a -bad- thing.
Call me crazy, but wouldn’t we be further ahead (by a light year) if we were shipping finished product to the USA and the Chicoms et al? Gasoline, diesel, bunker, all of it is far more profitable than plain old crude, right?
Is there some reason why Alberta and Sask can’t be the new oil refining capital of the world? Other than the usual watermelon hand wringing, I mean.
As usual, Kate nails it.
Phantom, a large part of the reason is the US laws on additives. Gasoline standards are set by the states and they vary from one to the other. To sell gasoline to the US we would have to produce a couple of dozen varieties of standard grade gasoline. You can’t just flick a switch and have a refinery producing a different product. The US variation on gasoline mixtures is a large part of the reason why every time a refinery goes out of production for a time the US has a gasoline shortage.
You are correct in presuming that most of the value of oil is in the refining side of the business. If you want, you can call it a US non-tariff trade barrier.
Kate, agreed, but the trillions that will come in from oil now made economic by new technology are far more important than the billions being temporarily pi$$ed away on renewable boondoggles.
The technology outlined is just one of several that will economically unlock vast amounts new oil reserves in the coming decades. Thus we will have near limitless inexpensive oil AND gas supplies in the not too distant future. Meanwhile the machines that consume these energy sources are becoming evermore cleaner.
This is a doomsday scenario for those wishing to rule the world through global green mandated governance. Cheap clean fossil energy negates the need for such universal draconia. Thus those vested in such a system will fight by all means possible – including terrorism – to prevent such cheap fossil energy systems from developing. They will lose as have all Luddites before them.
“We, will not exist as a country when Saudi, Iran, and other ME countries have run dry.”
oh…we will….we’ll just be called Canadastan under sharia law
“Phantom, a large part of the reason is the US laws on additives. Gasoline standards are set by the states and they vary from one to the other. To sell gasoline to the US we would have to produce a couple of dozen varieties of standard grade gasoline. You can’t just flick a switch and have a refinery producing a different product. The US variation on gasoline mixtures is a large part of the reason why every time a refinery goes out of production for a time the US has a gasoline shortage.”
So, if they can do it why can’t we?
“The point is that we shouldn’t be destroying the wealth created through oil production by subsidizing fraudulent alternative energy.”
Huh? The article mentions a $10 million grant from the federal government funded the study of this (unproven) process. Besides, it sounds exactly like the decades old process for heavy oil extraction.
? That’s not a grant. It’s a tax refund.
A process that has a Cost/benefit increases efficiency and increased efficiency reduces the rate of consumption/conversion of Energy on the planet..It’s called conserving Energy
The Communist alternative Energy sources are all wealth destroyers, totally inefficient without any identifiable benefit. You are shredding & flushing very dollar…If we all just flush 2K we won’t have to build those worthless windmills, wasting all those limited resources, and the Communists get to destroy the economy..
HT, because then we’d have to have pipelines for each separate product instead of just crude oil. Which would make them uneconomic because of low volumes. And sending it by truck from Alberta would make it uneconomic compared to refinery production on the Gulf Coast.