QuickSilver
SF VIP
- Location
- Midwest
President rejects Keystone.
- Thread starter QuickSilver
- Start date
Don M.
SF VIP
- Location
- central Missouri
With the present oil glut, there is little need for any extra oil passing through our borders. Now that the present Canadian Prime Minister has ruled out building a pipeline to BC, to sell the Canadian oil to China, the reasoning behind the Keystone pipeline has pretty much been removed. The Big losers in this decision will probably be the Canadian oil workers and companies.
QuickSilver
SF VIP
- Location
- Midwest
IMO this issue was turned into more of a political football used to hammer the opposing party than it needed to be.
Debby
Well-known Member
- Location
- East coast of Canada
Part of his reasoning I think is the concern that if that pipeline had been passed, it would have made transport of the product so much cheaper that the companies that are digging the stuff out of the ground would have expanded their operations, thereby causing more destruction and damage to the environment. I think the Koch brothers had already purchased or leased lots more land up there and the Alberta government is still opening up the woodland caribou calving grounds to development.
I was listening to a discussion and one of the panelists was an environmentalist and that was the major reason that they are against it. People focus on the safety of transport issue and seem to disregard the aforementioned prospect of expanded development. I feel bad that the whole oil situation has happened because it has affected me personally I think. The Nova Scotia real estate market is historically a very slow one, but the oil situation has killed it and we would like to sell our property and move back to BC to be close to my old mom and this year, I think we had 6 showings and not a hint of an offer despite the fact that the house is new, with an attached garage and a barn/garage and twelve acres.
But at the same time, I'm also inclined to think that our country needs to learn to diversify and quit relying on just resources. It's a difficult issue.
I was listening to a discussion and one of the panelists was an environmentalist and that was the major reason that they are against it. People focus on the safety of transport issue and seem to disregard the aforementioned prospect of expanded development. I feel bad that the whole oil situation has happened because it has affected me personally I think. The Nova Scotia real estate market is historically a very slow one, but the oil situation has killed it and we would like to sell our property and move back to BC to be close to my old mom and this year, I think we had 6 showings and not a hint of an offer despite the fact that the house is new, with an attached garage and a barn/garage and twelve acres.
But at the same time, I'm also inclined to think that our country needs to learn to diversify and quit relying on just resources. It's a difficult issue.
In time it may come again. We cannot keep buying oil from the mid east countries at extra high prices. We are working ND as best we can. Wait till a couple serious truck or train crashes occur and people die. Some of the political minded ones might changed their ideas. Jobs created will only be temporary. That is OK as all construction jobs are temporary and right now lots of those people would love a couple or three years of income.
We will have a new government after Jan 1st of 2017. New leadership might take a different view and get this idea reactivated. For 7 years this country lied to and did dishonest things to our northern neighbors. If needing to end up with this discussion it should have happened many years back.
For cleaner air, this action is a joke. We still need to heat our homes, drive our cars, fuel the aircraft, keep our trucks running, keep the farm equipment running, keep our industries going, keep on living as best we can. This decision should never have come the way it did.
We will have a new government after Jan 1st of 2017. New leadership might take a different view and get this idea reactivated. For 7 years this country lied to and did dishonest things to our northern neighbors. If needing to end up with this discussion it should have happened many years back.
For cleaner air, this action is a joke. We still need to heat our homes, drive our cars, fuel the aircraft, keep our trucks running, keep the farm equipment running, keep our industries going, keep on living as best we can. This decision should never have come the way it did.
QuickSilver
SF VIP
- Location
- Midwest
We don't buy very much oil from the Middle East Bob. Where did you get that idea?
We don't buy very much oil from the Middle East Bob. Where did you get that idea?
True for now, but back a few years ago we bought much if not most from the middle east. Now we buy a lot from Canada, our own improved wells, and some South America locations like Venezuela.
We just don't want to go back to what we had for so many years. One term is 'fracking' that helped the US dig out of its oil short situation that worried us a few years back.
QuickSilver
SF VIP
- Location
- Midwest
Also... Oil prices are SET on the global market.... and the ME cannot fool our incompetent and foolish President into paying more than we should. How do you come up with this stuff bob? Or rather... where do you pull it out of? lol!!
There are a number of published indices around the world that the oil industry uses. The first of these is the West Texas Intermediate price set at the New York Mercantile Exchange. The second is the Brent Crude Index, which is set at the Intercontinental Exchange in London and the third is the OPEC Basket, which is an average of the prices achieved in all OPEC countries and is managed from OPEC's headquarters in Vienna.
http://www.oil-price.net/en/articles/what-sets-oil-prices.php
There are a number of published indices around the world that the oil industry uses. The first of these is the West Texas Intermediate price set at the New York Mercantile Exchange. The second is the Brent Crude Index, which is set at the Intercontinental Exchange in London and the third is the OPEC Basket, which is an average of the prices achieved in all OPEC countries and is managed from OPEC's headquarters in Vienna.
http://www.oil-price.net/en/articles/what-sets-oil-prices.php
AZ Jim
R.I.P. With Us In Spirit Only
- Location
- SURPRISE, ARIZONA
Also the oil that would have been transported across the US would have been 100% for export (mostly to China) not for domestic consumption, it would have been refined in Texas the shipped out.
It seems that you are the confused one QuickSilver, I never mentioned cost, just availability. We are doing pretty good right now compared to a few years past. Oil drilled and produced right here in the US is ours to price as we wish. Just as Venezuela does for their people. When we buy Venezuelan oil we pay the going price for their oil while they make oil for their people at penny's compared to market prices.
QuickSilver
SF VIP
- Location
- Midwest
"I think we had 6 showings and not a hint of an offer despite the fact that the house is new, with an attached garage and a barn/garage and twelve acres"
Debby, if you don't find me rather brash, what would such a place appraise for, approximately? I would like to compare real property valuation there with here. imp
Debby, if you don't find me rather brash, what would such a place appraise for, approximately? I would like to compare real property valuation there with here. imp
Not sure I agree with that assumption. What I heard in the discussions was that about 60% would be used in the US and the rest was for export.
AZ Jim
R.I.P. With Us In Spirit Only
- Location
- SURPRISE, ARIZONA
It's not an assumption, it's a fact. It was just to get Canadian oil refined and then shipped. That is why they wanted it in a port city. It's a moot point now anyhow and even Canada has cooled on the idea.
I agree with myself. We don't want to keep paying those higher prices for not having our own oil. If we do get up to independent levels of production then the local producers can charge what they wish and the far east can do their own thing without us. And I used Venezuela as an example of do it for yourself or sell on the markets.
Been listening to a lot of pros and cons for a long time now, and admit I don't know everything about this business, but I think the pipeline should have been approved, as I've said in the past. Not sure about what is really fact and myth anymore about the exports, jobs, gas prices, etc. But we are still dependent on oil, and although I'm in favor of more environmentally friendly sources of energy, it won't happen overnight and the transition will be and is slow going. I still think it's safer than rail also. Here are some other thoughts on the pipeline. http://dailysignal.com/2015/11/06/9-reasons-why-obama-just-made-wrong-decision-on-keystone-pipeline/
it is not a moot point now. Those refineries will now not be doing as much work as they have been set up to do. Lost work means lost wages. Not good for the US.
And for your idea that it is all to be shipped, I will try to find different numbers. Wait till next year and with a new government in DC, the application may once again be made available. Yes, Canada is probably a bit unhappy with the way our government toyed with them for 7 years and then said no. I do believe that Canada would like to bring more money into their people and government if given the chance. Saying no was a big wrong from our non leader President.
Just returned from scanning the available inputs on the pipeline. All I could find were the 2010, 2011, 2012 years and all hateful of the idea of having a pipeline built. So I have not yet found anything but hateful articles. There was money to be made from the construction and lease/transport payments to the states the pipeline would go through. This is a bad decision by our non leader President and it will go down on his productivity accomplishments as a big negative for sure.
Shalimar
SF VIP
- Location
- Vancouver Island Canada
Regarding Canadian opinion on the nixing of the Pipeline. Understandably, opinion is divided between those who favour the pipeline and the jobs and prosperity associated with it, and those primarily concerned with the deleterious effects it would have
on the environment. Had it gone through, civil disobedience is a foregone conclusion. Certainly the First people would have been in the forefront of the protests. Now that our scientists are no longer muzzled by our former Prime Minister, the
environmental impact of the Alberta Tar Sands will truly become apparent. People are dying!!
on the environment. Had it gone through, civil disobedience is a foregone conclusion. Certainly the First people would have been in the forefront of the protests. Now that our scientists are no longer muzzled by our former Prime Minister, the
environmental impact of the Alberta Tar Sands will truly become apparent. People are dying!!
Debby
Well-known Member
- Location
- East coast of Canada