XL pipeline from Alberta to Texas

Page 2 of 3  

wrote:

The refined fuel has been promised as export. That was in the orginal announcement when the pipeline was first proposed.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I would like to see your reference for that announcement, because I don't believe it exists.
I have seem the libs trying to block it, try to turn it into that, cobbling together their case from any scrap they can. Oil is a fungible commodity. It will ultimatley find it's way onto the word market one way or another. It's hard for me to believe someone building a pipeline stated that the oil will only be exported. Is it likely that after it's refined, some of it gets exported? Sure. But if that's the benchmark, then might as well stop a lot of the oil sources in the USA.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yep, last I heard the US is a net EXPORTER of oil. IOW words we are shipping more oil out than we are bringing in.
Harry K
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That isn't true. We are producing a lot more oil today then 10 years ago. And imports have dropped. But the USA still imports about 40% of it's oil. Part of that is when you have an economy that sucks, demand is reduced from what it otherwise would be. The bigger part is new production though.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The US recently became a net exporter of GASOLINE. It still takes oil to make the gas and that is imported (more than not).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

The US is not necessarily a NET exporter of Gasoline.
It is true that you export gasoline:
==================http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-29/u-s-was-net-oil-product-exporter-in-2011.html
Feb 29, 2012
Refiners are expanding on the Gulf Coast and in the Midwest, even as unprofitable plants along the East Coast were shut. Operable capacity in the U.S. climbed 0.8 percent to 17.7 million barrels a day in December from a year earlier.
U.S. refineries in the Gulf Coast, where about half of U.S. capacity is located, operated at 88.8 percent last year, up from 88.6 percent in 2010.
“It helps keep refinery utilization rates up in this country,” Bill Day, a spokesman for Valero Energy Corp. (VLO) in San Antonio, said in a telephone interview. “Otherwise we would see what we’re seeing on the East Coast, where refineries are shutting.”
In the fourth quarter, Valero, the largest U.S. independent refiner with 14 North American plants, exported about 5 percent of its gasoline output and 17 percent of its heating oil and diesel production, Day said.
Gasoline demand in the U.S. sank 2.9 percent to 8.736 million barrels a day last year as pump prices averaged $3.521 a gallon, the highest in records dating back to 1919.
“The reason we can export so much is demand in the U.S. is weak,” Cohan said. Since 2005, the U.S. has lost nearly 2 million barrels a day of total product consumption, he said. ================== But according to this, you are also importing gasoline:
====================http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=wgtimus2&f=4 ==================== Up to 1.6 million barrels of gasoline a day in 2006, declining to about 600k barrels as of a year ago, and 400k barrels today.
And by the way, your ability to export gasoline (from some of your PADD zones) is not because your domestic refinery situation has improved over the past 5-10 years. It's because your economy has gone into the toilet over the past 5 years (thanks to Bush's illegal wars).
Europe uses more diesel fuel in cars and other personal vehicles than is the case in North America, and vice-versa. Hence Europe has relatively more gasoline as a result of their refining operations that can be exported to North America, and that's also why more diesel vs gasoline is exported from the US.
I would guess that your gasoline imports happen primarily on the east cost, with some small amount on the west cost (and no gasoline imports into the gulf states). You don't seem to have an efficient way of getting Texas-refined gasoline to the Eastern Seaboard states, hence their reliance on either imported gasoline, or refining more expensive european brent in Baltimore, Philadelphia, and other east-cost refineries (at least those that are still operating).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
'David L. Martel[_2_ Wrote: > ;3013441']

> USA will be depending on Canada. Canada is a foreign country. Dave M. Well, so far, none of our Prime Ministers have gone to the General Assembly at the UN and called your President George W. Bush "the Devil'.
'2006 Chvez speech at the United Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia' (http://tinyurl.com/2bv2ewl )
Also, there aren't quite as many Canadians that have taken a solumn vow to martyr themselves waging holy war against the American infidel.
Canadians speak the same language as Americans.
We live under a similar democratic system of government as Americans.
We have much the same culture as America.
We inherited the same legal system, the British Common Law, from Britain.
We practice the same major religions as Americans.
The Canadian military and coast guard regularily train with the American military and coast guard and those of other member countries of NATO. Our police forces and spy agencies share information with each other as well.
And there are literally millions of personal, professional and business relationships between the people and businesses in our two countries.
I could go on, but you can see why a state of friendship would normally be expected to arise between countries with so much in common and so many ties between them.
--
nestork


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

These is not that much 'excess capacity' in the USA. The oil that XL will bring to the gulf coast is intended to be sold (if contracts are no already in place) as export which will reduce the available refinery capacity for those in the good old USA. This equates to an increase fuel cost.
BTW the folk who operate the XL pipe line have a very bad reputation for safety and have had something on the order of 13 'incidents' in the first year of recently new pipe lines that they have build.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
NotMe wrote:

I'm in Texas and keep up with this sort of thing. Within 200 miles of Houston, we have about 9% excess refining capacity. Nine percent is a HUGE number. At full capacity, Texas' 27 refineries can refine about five million barrels per day. About 10% of that is 500,000 bbls. The XL pipeline, can supply about 435,000 to 591,000 bbl/day.

So what? You can't build a house without making sawdust.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sawdust is not toxic. I paid for my engineering degree working in the oil patch and more times than I care to mention in the refineries around the Ship Channel. The one that has been mentioned most in the plans for the XL oil was (is) owned in part by BP and has a horrendous history of bean counter screw ups that have resulted in big fines and more than a few deaths.
Need I mention that refinery availability is a fungible number and often used to justify high fuel prices.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That pipeline will be another excuse. When gasoline prices spike 50 cents a gallon, Wall Street oil "analysts" will pontificate about how a break in the pipeline, or just a broken pump, has kept oil from the refineries. The same "not enough refinery capacity" refineries that exist right now without the supply from the pipeline.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Please show us where the companies involved stated this......
as export which will reduce the available refinery capacity for

It wouldn't if you libs would allow new refineries to be built.

Yeah, let's focus on the negatives. Forget all the high paying jobs building the pipeline. Forget that it gives the USA another source of friendly oil. Yeah, I know you claim all the oil is going to be exported. I'm waiting for proof of that. I would imagine SOME of it would be turned into diesel, for which there is currently a hot export market. Whatever there is today, the oil market is always in flux. By the time the pipeline is built, the situation could be different. But one thing is for sure. We would have a pipeline for a safe source of oil available in an emergency, like a mideast war. The govt could even divert the oil, if absolutely necessary.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

I believe the intention is to sell gasoline, kerosene, and other refined products, some (most?) overseas.
That scenario is no different than the idea of importing raw materials and exporting a finished product, which everybody champions.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't doubt that SOME of it may go overseas. What I don't believe is the companies involved stated that it was intended that all or most of the products would go overseas. I mean, why would they? Oil in fungible. And while right now it's profitable for some of certain products to go to fill oveseas demand, who knows what will happen by the time the pipeline is built. I agree it's like any other business.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

}Please show us where the companies involved stated }this......
That was part of the original business plan announcement which required a 'deep water port capable of handling refined products for export'.

}It wouldn't if you libs would allow new refineries to be built.
There have long been (unused) permits for refinery expansion. No EPA, no new enviormental studies, no new state permitting. The industry bean counter justification for not spending the money 'we don't have a need for additional capacity'.
I live in N. Texas and we have a lot of retired oil industy engineers living here. Some of whom I've either gone to school with or worked with. THEY KNOW what's going on and often were in on the orginal planning.

}}Yeah, let's focus on the negatives.
Focus on the negatives. Under our current circumstance water is more precious than oil. Just look at the cost of beef and vegetables. A flat of lettuce is selling wholesale FOB shipping point for 3 to 4X what it was a few years ago. The direct cause is LACK OF SUFFICENT WATER.
When there are spills the industy is proud of itself if they can recover 5%. The rest goes where?
}}Forget all the high paying jobs building the pipeline. Forget that it gives the USA another source of friendly oil. Yeah, I know you claim all the oil is going to be exported. I'm waiting for proof of that. I would imagine SOME of it would be turned into diesel, for which there is currently a hot export market. Whatever there is today, the oil market is always in flux. By the time the pipeline is built, the situation could be different. But one thing is for sure. We would have a pipeline for a safe source of oil available in an emergency, like a mideast war. The govt could even divert the oil, if absolutely necessary.{{
Thousands of new jobs? The original claim was 20K in the end the reality was < 10% and even those for less than two years. As to the refinery jobs discounting maintance trun a round if they ran three shifts that's less than 200 people. But those folk have jobs at the effected plants as it is. So no new jobs there.
I made a good living in, around anf from the oil patch for decads. I'm not on the outside looking in, I've been there and watched it happen.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

When you have a link, let us know....

Well, I guess they would know. And if they're wrong, why isn't Obama after them to build more capacity?

I didn't know they farm lettuce in TX. And whatever impact your droubt is having on lettuce, it hasn't shown up here in NJ. Iceberg is selling for $1.70 a head.
 The direct cause is LACK OF SUFFICENT WATER.

So, because TX is having a drought, we shouldn't build any new oil piplines. You're too funny.....

What reality? They haven't even built the critical part that all the bitching is over..... And with high unemployment ANY new jobs that are good paying is a plus. I thought you libs were the ones who care?
 As to the refinery jobs

Strange for someone who's so deadset against building a pipeline.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
" snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net" wrote:

Many people in the north american oil industry is apparently scratching their heads as to why oil inventories have been at their historic upper limits more-or-less continuously for the past few years.

Yes, you moron. You've just explained the concept of supply and demand.
As I've already explained, there is a huge difference between the WTI and Brent prices right now, and this price difference seems to have started about 3 or 4 years ago.
Why are there two different oil markets - each with their own price?
Because of logistics. The north-american supply is not designed to be exported, and because there is a buildup of supply, the WTI price is lower than Brent.
So you have the LIE that Obama is trying to curtail US oil production, when in fact you have historic high levels in storage, and you don't have enough distribution and refining capacity. What you have is a shortage of refining capacity, and that is leading to spot shortages of gasoline and diesel fuel in certain markets at certain times of the year, combined with a patchwork of state-level regulations about fuel formulations that makes it more difficult (AND EXPENSIVE) to keep those markets supplied with a comfortable margin.

Lots of oil from the north sea. And the middle east is also counted as part of the European (Brent) market.

That has nothing to do with the fact that we have more oil sitting in storage in North America, and the constant false claims that you're paying too much for gasoline in the US because Obama won't let you drill for oil on US territory. It's false because gas prices are high because of pipeline logistics and refinery issues (how many there are, operational status, type of crude they can refine, etc).

Look at the graphs and DOE reports of oil inventories. Lots of oil in storage at Cushing. Historic high levels.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Which apparently neither you nor your kook conspiracy website believe in. More supply in the USA, less imports, so the price here is lower than Europe.

It's not just logistics. The two classification differ in their physical characteristics too. But so what?

When he shuts down the whole Gulf because of an accident at one rig, what do you call that? BTW, that included rigs that were just starting to drill, that would have had no potential for an accident because the oil and gas were still 10,000 feet down. When he's cut back on drilling permits on public lands during his term, what do you call that? Are we drilling in ANWR?
The only reason US production is up is because of a LOT of new drilling on private land. Land where everyone knew there was oil, it was just that at $40 it wasn't profitable to go after it. At $90, it is.

Refinery capacity has grown steadily over the decades. One problem though is any time a company wants to do anything to increase supply, the usual alliance of libs and tree huggers is right there to block it. Witness the XL pipeline. They don't want anything built, be it a pipeline, refinery, new power plant, new power line, etc. Even windmills, they are all for it, until it comes time to actually build them. Then most of them become unacceptable. exactly that is going on here in NJ.
Still if it's true that we need more refinery capacity, then why aren't Obama and the libs focusing on THAT? How about finding out if it really is a problem and if so, figuring out how to build more refinery capacity? No, instead the only capacity they are interested in is ethanol and windmills. So, why would anyone be surprised that those areas are where the new capacity is going? It's exactly what Obama and the libs want and exactly what they are subsidizing.

Those state level regulations are actual regional mandates imposed by, you guessed it, the federal govt, via the EPA. And again, it's the diehard environmentalists that insist on keeping them in place. What do you propose?

Let's assume what you say is true. Obama has been there for 4+ years now. If that is the problem, why was he talking about more subsidies for green energy and not doing one thing to solve what you claim is the real problem? I mean he could figure out how to pour billions down rat holes like Solyndra easy enough. I suppose it's Bush's fault.....

Who cares. That's supposed to prove some world war planning, executive orders, etc behind it from a kook website?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I was in favor of the pipeline last year. This year, not so much. I am beginning to think it is solving a problem we don't have anymore. It well might be better to build pipelines to the North Dakota and south Texas shale oil fields, which are currently shipping oil out by rail. Truly domestic production, less damaging than extracting oil sand oil, with production growing daily and forecast to be huge. Also, no presidential approval required.
-- Doug
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Like Canada isn't going to develop and produce the tar sand oil anyway, just because the hippies in the USA refuse to allow it to come here? They will either use it themselves or it will make it's way to other buyers. And those same hippies stand in the way of not only this pipeline, but every other energy project as well.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.