Author Topic: Legal setback for Keystone pipeline  (Read 292 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 258,904
Legal setback for Keystone pipeline
« on: February 20, 2014, 10:11:29 AM »

Support the USO

Offline SouthTexas

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,667
Re: Legal setback for Keystone pipeline
« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2014, 05:06:36 PM »
You don't need to go through Nebraska to get to Texas.

Much more of this and Alberta will turn that pipeline west and send the oil to China.  Probably get better prices too.

Offline Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 12,838
Re: Legal setback for Keystone pipeline
« Reply #2 on: February 20, 2014, 08:12:11 PM »
[[ Much more of this and Alberta will turn that pipeline west and send the oil to China.  Probably get better prices too. ]]

I guess this is a dumb question, but even if Canada chose to build the pipeline to the Pacific, why not load the crude into tankers, and then sail it over to the Gulf Coast?

Far less transportation cost than shipping it over to China.

One thing should be obvious by now.
The Keystone pipeline -may- be completed someday, but it is NOT going to go forward so long as Obama is president.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2014, 08:12:57 PM by Fishrrman »

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
Re: Legal setback for Keystone pipeline
« Reply #3 on: February 20, 2014, 08:16:40 PM »
They would have to go through Panama and until the canal widening is completed a lot of the tankers can't get through there (according to what I've read).  The biggest reason Canada hasn't changed to send the oil to the Pacific is they have to cross some truly pristine areas and a lot of rugged mountains to do so, Keystone is much easier all the way around if the damned environmentalists would get out of the way.

Offline SouthTexas

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,667
Re: Legal setback for Keystone pipeline
« Reply #4 on: February 21, 2014, 12:13:47 PM »
[[ Much more of this and Alberta will turn that pipeline west and send the oil to China.  Probably get better prices too. ]]

I guess this is a dumb question, but even if Canada chose to build the pipeline to the Pacific, why not load the crude into tankers, and then sail it over to the Gulf Coast?

Far less transportation cost than shipping it over to China.

One thing should be obvious by now.
The Keystone pipeline -may- be completed someday, but it is NOT going to go forward so long as Obama is president.

Other than the normal knee jerk reaction of gth-I'll sell it somewhere else and the draft issue through the canal, I really think China would pay better.  Sure, they'd like to work with an ally, even though the ally has thrown them under the bus, the reality of economics plays it's hand. 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf