justthefacts
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2010
- Messages
- 13,644
- Reaction score
- 4,274
- Points
- 113
History's greatest monster
Transports oil at about 1/2 the cost of doing it via rail.What exactly is it that you think the Keystone pipeline does?
Transports oil at about 1/2 the cost of doing it via rail.
Somehow I feel you are playing a game here.How does it decrease our dependence on foreign oil?
Somehow I feel you are playing a game here.
Cheaper oil from the pipeline means less imported oil.
Less imported oil means less dependence on it for our needs.
I'm done playing.
Aww - you are going with Canadian oil is foreign oil. See, I knew you were playing a game.All the oil from the pipeline is imported.
So it is bad, but we need it so we should just keep heading toward the cliff? There are other energy technologies we can develop. Believe it or not, there are plenty of jobs to be created in renewable energy.
It is almost as if culture in this country has chosen to try and freeze itself in 1980. America used to be all about innovation and pushing forward. Now it is just too much of a hassle. Good grief.
Yes it’s low grade petroleum, but I assume they will use every last drop of it in some capacity all the way down to the tar that’s is used on shingles and flat roofs.To be fair though, isn't the oil from Canada extra difficult to refine into gasoline? It's "tar sands" or something like that. Obviously it's worth something to someone, to build a pipeline for it to shipping.
At the moment, it's just not possible, because they're so damn physically large and heavy (and fully integrated into the chasis for safety and keeping optimal temperature), but the thing to do would be to swap the battery packs out.That’s great you let me know how fun it is to have an electric car and want to make a drive from Minneapolis to Chicago without stopping to refuel the batteries for several hours. Plus where do you think that power is coming from to refuel the batteries, a coal fired power plant somewhere. Until the us decides to build more nuclear power plants electric cars are not the answer. Also I’m not so sure the making of batteries is all the environmentally or socially friendly either.
Loading…
www.wired.co.uk
Aww - you are going with Canadian oil is foreign oil. See, I knew you were playing a game.
You got me JTF. I was refering to oil we get shipped to the Gulf and should have been more precise with what I meant by "foreign", because - sure enough - Canada is not America.
Of course, you knew what I meant, but..... To. The. Core.
I see we’re back to hating Israel again. Wtg let’s start stirring shit up in the Middle East again day 1.
Loading…
thehill.com
Apparently the border wall is one of the things that took a hit. Another moronic move.
I'm sure the optics look good, but I've heard from several people that for a number of the projects it will cost more to shut them down then it would to just finish the God damn work. But hey, Joe thinks it LOOKS good to the blind masses, and we'll never see the costs associated with just finishing the work, not to mention another bunch of 10's of thousands of folks on the unemployment line.
Getting off to a great start, for sure...
I doubt that's what it was.If nothing else, this should be a humorous- what 6 to 10 months?
I hope that’s not what happened. This guy needs to make it through the next 4 years.If nothing else, this should be a humorous- what 6 to 10 months?
Aww - you are going with Canadian oil is foreign oil. See, I knew you were playing a game.
You got me JTF. I was refering to oil we get shipped to the Gulf and should have been more precise with what I meant by "foreign", because - sure enough - Canada is not America.
Of course, you knew what I meant, but..... To. The. Core.
LOLOLOL.Aww - you are going with Canadian oil is foreign oil.
Link?Apparently the border wall is one of the things that took a hit...I've heard from several people that for a number of the projects it will cost more to shut them down then it would to just finish the God damn work.
If nothing else, this should be a humorous- what 6 to 10 months?
So, dumb question: why do they even want the pipeline on American soil? Is it because Duluth has necessary shipping infrastructure that isn't built in, say, Thunder Bay? And the next closest equivalent port (US or Canadian) would add hundreds of miles to the pipeline?
I don't consider any to be "the bad stuff" - I consider it to be more expensive.A) Yes, clearly it's all my fault that I consider Canadian oil to be foreign oil.
B) The US is a next exporter of oil. We're not dependent on foreign oil.
C) I'm not sure which foreign oil exactly you consider to be the bad stuff, but it may surprise you to know that of the ~230M barrels we do import every month, ~120M barrels are already coming from Canada. In fact, we only get ~20M barrels from OPEC states. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm
D) According to the company that wants to build the pipeline, TC Energy, Keystone would bring in 830k barrels per day. Let's say those barrels' transpo costs are reduced by 1/2, and let's say that 1/2 of oil costs are transpo costs (both of those seem very high.) In that case that means we'll reduce the overall cost of our Canadian oil by 0.5*0.5*(830,000 / (120,000,000 / 30)) = 5%. Not sure that's going to move the needle on foreign energy independence.
Loading…
www.tcenergy.com
I figured most people knew what I meant by "foreign oil" considering the whole coversation was about the Keystone pipeline. If I would have been asked to guess who couldn't have even figured that out - you would have been at the top of my list. JTF knew - he just isn't an honest person.Canada, The 51st state in Spoofs world...
![]()
Deal. Let's install their 2 Senators immediately.Canada, The 51st state in Spoofs world...
![]()
Doh. I was thinking of Line 3.They want the pipeline to go to Nebraska directly from Alberta, rather than via the current pipeline path to Manitoba then South. The hypotenuse rather than than the two legs.
I don't consider any to be "the bad stuff" - I consider it to be more expensive.
Even that stuff coming from Canada is twice as expensive if coming by rail than thru the pipeline.
So is getting 830,000 barrels a day for less money helpful or not?
Why does your equation not account for additional oil we could get from Canada?
You don't care about cheaper oil or US jobs. That is your right.