Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Padd three is the Gulf Coast refineries - do you not understand what the word "customer" means? THEY, those American owned refineries are the end customer for the crude. It's no longer Canadian owned crude before it goes into the pipe.
Can you not grasp the concept of U.S. companies servicing a market demand overseas using far cheaper Canadian crude oil and keeping their own lighter crude fuel stocks for domestic or higher priced sales?
The Canadian entities are desirous of the pipeline so that they can sell more crude to the U.S. buyer's servicing that growing Chinese and Indian demand.
The more they need, the more you sell to them. The more you sell to them the more you'll buy from Canada. It's not a difficult concept to understand.
How do you think America's oil independence was achieved?
You are recognizing that the crude oil intended to flow through the Keystone pipeline to Texas was earmarked for export to China. That is a start.
I will not split hairs about what company makes a profit because these companies are all now global.
The point is: the Keystone pipeline was intended to supply oil to Asian markets while our land incurred the risk.
Addendum to your last post: the pipeline most certainly is about our environment! Crude oil is notoriously corrosive on pipelines. Let Canada export to Asia from their lands.
That is a very globalist attitude. Americans facillitating the profits of a canadian company Not saying I am against it but when it it okay vs not okay?
Hold on now? "Facilitating the profits of a Canadian company" sounds like you're suggesting the sole reason for American demand for that crude is driven by an altruistic desire to assist a Canadian company.
You must know that is utter nonsense. Please remember what started all of this is an AMERICAN demand for that crude and as much of it as it can get.
Perhaps I'm not expressing myself as clearly as I'd like but the end result is still the same America wants the stuff and the more of it Canada sells to them the more revenue for Canada.
What I was trying to explain is the fact that America's energy independence comes in a large part through the ability to buy far cheaper crude oil from Canada, Venezuela and Mexico thereby saving their better quality crude for better profit making fuel stocks and domestic demand so they do not have to import from the mid east.
U.S. Oil companies spent billions of dollars refurbishing older Gulf Coast refineries to specifically refine higher sulphur content (dirty) crude. Why do you think they did that? To assist any Canadian company? Not likely.
Canada has the very cheap crude in abundance. America wants it. They also want to make as much profit selling it as possible so that means cutting transportation costs for each barrel in half or even better by pipelining it rather than training or barging it.
If you're suggesting I'm being globalist because I'm arguing against the proffered premise by the O/P it is Canada demanding or forcing the U.S. to buy it's crude and further, accept the piping of it across the U.S..
I'm not a proponent of the pipeline other than to say that if choosing between two fait accompli of oil being shipped through the U.S. either on top of the ground using trains and trucks or beneath it in a pipe, the pipe is the proven environmentally safer and cleaner option.
You are recognizing that the crude oil intended to flow through the Keystone pipeline to Texas was earmarked for export to China. That is a start.
I will not split hairs about what company makes a profit because these companies are all now global.
The point is: the Keystone pipeline was intended to supply oil to Asian markets while our land incurred the risk.
Addendum to your last post: the pipeline most certainly is about our environment! Crude oil is notoriously corrosive on pipelines. Let Canada export to Asia from their lands.
Have it your way. Now let's achieve something else, you've once again suggested Canada is exporting it to Asia when in fact it is not. It is exporting the crude to the U.S. The primary seller of that Canadian crude oil to those growing Asian markets is those American entities who purchased 98% of it at source. That is why it's listed as an American import as they are the 98% buyer and the ultimate seller overseas.
Hold on now? "Facilitating the profits of a Canadian company" sounds like you're suggesting the sole reason for American demand for that crude is driven by an altruistic desire to assist a Canadian company.
You must know that is utter nonsense. Please remember what started all of this is an AMERICAN demand for that crude and as much of it as it can get.
Perhaps I'm not expressing myself as clearly as I'd like but the end result is still the same America wants the stuff and the more of it Canada sells to them the more revenue for Canada.
What I was trying to explain is the fact that America's energy independence comes in a large part through the ability to buy far cheaper crude oil from Canada, Venezuela and Mexico thereby saving their better quality crude for better profit making fuel stocks and domestic demand so they do not have to import from the mid east.
U.S. Oil companies spent billions of dollars refurbishing older Gulf Coast refineries to specifically refine higher sulphur content (dirty) crude. Why do you think they did that? To assist any Canadian company? Not likely.
Canada has the very cheap crude in abundance. America wants it. They also want to make as much profit selling it as possible so that means cutting transportation costs for each barrel in half or even better by pipelining it rather than training or barging it.
If you're suggesting I'm being globalist because I'm arguing against the proffered premise by the O/P it is Canada demanding or forcing the U.S. to buy it's crude and further, accept the piping of it across the U.S..
I'm not a proponent of the pipeline other than to say that if choosing between two fait accompli of oil being shipped through the U.S. either on top of the ground using trains and trucks or beneath it in a pipe, the pipe is the proven environmentally safer and cleaner option.
Yeah, they wanted to sell it to the US but Obama said " No." So they sold it to China. I'm sure Usurper Joe will get a piece of that action.
No they did not,. Apparently you do not understand supply and demand. The canadian oil has always been uncompetitive in U.S. markets. The XL line was always about a global marklet. Sorry you got suckered.,
It is better for Canada to spill their oil in the US than in Canada. They can ship boatloads of grain, lumber, and ore out of Prince Rupert to China but can’t figure out how to ship crude oil?
Just curious... are these huge gulf-based crude tankers going through the Panama Canal or taking a longer route to China? Will they fit the canal?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Facilitating the profits of a Canadian company" sounds like you're suggesting the sole reason for American demand for that crude is driven by an altruistic desire to assist a Canadian company.
