If we utilized train tankers daily for our oil we would require 4200/day, and transport trucks would be 15000 pic.twitter.com/WteRUNpcaf
— A_OZ (@_MetisRelations) October 19, 2013
If we utilized train tankers daily for our oil we would require 4200/day, and transport trucks would be 15000 pic.twitter.com/WteRUNpcaf
— A_OZ (@_MetisRelations) October 19, 2013
That’s no problem for the watermelons. The gas and oil stays in the ground. That was made obvious yesterday in the media coverage of the latest train derailment.
The problem is Warren Buffet does not own any pipeline companies. If Trans Canada really wants Keystone they should just give Warren controlling interest. Be approved on Monday.
Idiots might just be dumb enough to fall for a “72 hour no-heat challenge!” or something similar, perhaps an ‘environmentalist’ could organize something like that by mid-February?
That would teach those oil companies a lesson!
I heard Warren Buffett say in 2010 at his AGM that he was investing in rail because it was a vote of confidence in the US economy. Shortly afterward, Buffett makes the news with his contributions to and support of the Obama midterm campaigns. Democrats hold the senate and Obama kills the XL pipeline and 20,000 jobs. Not even a year after Buffett declared his patriotism, in April 2011, the price of our oil vs. the price of US oil, or the Western Canadian Select vs. West Texas Intermediate price hits a $35 differential. $80 vs. $115.
Once the oil gets to Cushing Oklahoma, it is worth $35 more. The rail lines are making that differential.
At least we know that by giving Buffett 1/3 the value of the oil it ensures that the oil is moving safely and efficiently instead of through those complicated and dangerous pipelines.
Buffett also said prior to the 2010 elections the rich have not paid there share of tax. Likely part of the payment to Obama for 1/3 of western canada’s oil. I just wonder when Buffett and Obama came up with the plan to steal our oil and kill jobs if it was scotch or Hennessy that was laughed through a nose.
So Called Canadian “First Nations”are presented as an aggrieved lot of Aboriginal Bands in Canada.
Sadly, unless First Nations Bands accept enlightened leaders like Osoyoos BC Band Chief Clarence Louie as leaders and “role models” and spokesmen rather than whiners like Grand Chief Shawn Atleo, First Nations people’s lot will remain confrontational, degraded and disruptive to their own well being and progression forever!
Speak UP Osoyoos BC Chief Louie!
Canadians turn their “eyes” to you as inspiration of what First Nations Bands can do as “builders” as opposed to “welfare takers”.
brad, those pipelines tend to get a lot of flat tires and busted wheels, and so are very dangerous/sarc
The “first nations” are bought-and-paid-for by the watermelons, so much for being “nations”.
It would appear the metis have not yet succumbed to watermelon bribery.
meanwhile the usual suspects are lobbying for school, university and hospital closures http://www.burnabynewsleader.com/news/228045961.html
The first nations in Canada could be rich beyond their wildest dreams of avarice (some of them already are)if they just embraced the oil, gas and mining companies. Instead, they buy into the green bullshit and live in moldy shacks, albeit with wide screen tv’s and Cadillac Escalades. They’re not oppressed, they’re just stupid.
i tried being unemployed, not by choice. it was fun for awhile. then reality struck. bad for the soul to not be “useful”.
Several media commentators had indicated that the opposition to Keystone is largely symbolic — there seems to be no explanation for why this particular project is the one where enviros have chosen to draw their red line. These articles concluded by just accepting this — if this is the environmental issue they have chosen then we just have to accept that. I say — bulls. I want to know why exactly they have chosen this project. Tom Stayer is a big funder of anti-Kestone lobbying. What’s in it for him? I do not for a minute think his position on this is totally altruistic. There are a lot of other money interests backing anti-Keystone. I am pretty sure all the big name (Darryl Hanna, etc.) get paid to protest — probably thinking they are standing up for something good. Clearly there is an agenda here. My speculation was that they (those surreptitiously paying for all this crap) my be doing so to defend Saudi Oil interests. Any other ideas?
Well, LindaL, if Keystone XL is an Obama “red line” then we’re golden…
Yep if ya go over all logical/rational motives to oppose Keystone only one remains……defending Saudi interests.
For Saudi Arabia it is indeed a big deal.
Oil Exports are all they got….a national security issue…survival even…. More supply depresses their price and leverage.
Same for Venezuela and Nigeria.
Brad;
Sorry but the railroads and Warren are not making the differential of $35/b. The issue is not the spread between Canadian heavy crude and WTI but more the spread between WTI and Brent a international price. There are at least a dozen different prices for North American crudes based on location and crude qualities and refinery capacity based on those crude qualities.
As Sasquatch suggests above the issue for Canada is the rationale for why the USA is saying no to increased crude shipments. Canada shipping 5-6 mbpd of oil threatens the internal security of numerous ME countries. They are currently spending all their oil revenues. Canadians should be asking what impact exporting oil at that rate (5-6 mbpd) would have in relations with the USA and Russia. The eco protestors are simply pawns being used by these countries to prevent a richer and thusly more influential Canada. Russia and the USA do not want Canada to have the capacity to protect and relatively unexploited Artic. The USA does not want a richer Canada that will say no to water exports. This is the real elephant in the closet IMHO.
Bottom line, there are rail cars ready to go now. They are bridging the political gap until the pipeline does get built. Count blessings.
Mazzuchelli;
Standards for rail cars can be changed as well. If the purpose is to stop oil shipments it can be done easily enough.
Not to disagree with the comments above, but one motive for all American attempts to reduce oil and gas imports from Canada is the interests of American energy producers whose profit margins would be reduced by the increased supply. Gas companies in Montana paid Senator Max Baucus to oppose gas pipelines from Alberta in the 1980s. That was the sort of thing that impelled the Mulroney-era free trade deal — avoiding being blocked out by American competitors for the same markets in energy, wood, et cetera. BTW, regional interests inside the United States also try to game the political system against competing American companies. It doesn’t have to be direct competition either — for example, natural gas lobbies will try to sabotage coal companies
Special bonus example: Alaska salmon fishery lobbyists funded enviros to attack BC fish farms.town
I too wondered why Hewlett, Packard, Rockefeller Foundations are surreptitiously funding Natives, Eco-Nuts, Unions, and any other anti-oil types they can find. Originally I figured they just want it (the oil)to come out on their terms in their time frame. Hold it back for a few decades, use up Venezuela, Iran, Saudia Arabia, whatever other sources, the oil sands can sit there for 20, 30 years, the oil is not going anywhere,when they want it launch a massive campaign a-la Brave New World, about how great it is and voila no shortage of oil.
Then I realized something of huge economic impact right now. They only pay about 70 % (citation needed)of what it is worth right now, primarily because we as exporters have no choice. So by creating negative sentiment about the oils sands they get it cheaper. By delaying the north south pipeline they get it cheaper. OK so we’ll build a pipeline to BC and ship it to Asia. Who’s paying the protesters to hold up that line? Same crowd, same reasons. OK we’ll double the existing Kinder Morgan to Vancouver. Same protesters, same financial backers. Trans Canada Pipelines just last month announced it would reverse the flow of the existing pipeline from Montreal to Sarnia (or somewhere). This pipeline sent OPEC oil from tankers in Montreal(or somewhere) to Ontario. Reverse it and send Alberta & Sask oil to refineries in the Atlantic Provinces. Same protesters showed up, funded by the same foreign money (American). The protesters don’t even have the decency to learn what it is they are protesting, just “Oil Is Bad”. Then they jump in their cars and buses, head for the airport and jet off to the next protest, taking a long deserved rest at their centrally heated, electrified homes until needed again.
Can’t leave my mistake stand even if nobody reads it. I said a-la Brave New World. Mixed up my books, should have been a-la 1984. You know where one minute we are at war with Eurasia & Eastasia is our ally. Next day it is reversed. Today Oil Sands = Bad, when the powers that be want it, we will be told how good it is.