I understand the oil is headed for export, and Canadian oil companies get the profits.

I understand it will also carry the oil from western ND and eastern MT. If that is so, that can't be even a little bit bad. US can't export oil if I remember.

Jobs and the safest method of oil transfer we have can't be all bad.....

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

According to Fox News, 1/3 of the oil Keystone delivers will be exported. The balance will be processed here.
Also, although the pipeline starts in Canada, a large portion of the North Dakota production will be piped south in it.

From what I have read/heard on the radio, baaken oil can be 10% of total capacity placed into this pipeline. I believe it was something the Governor of MT negotiated with the Keystone folks...

What's wrong with that?

But we get some benefits too, like jobs and lower cost of gasoline, diesel and fuel oil. Also pipeline transport of crude is much safer than rail. On a net/net basis, all that rail transport of crude does is unnecessarily take money out of consumer pockets and puts in into the coffers of the railroad companies. I have no objection to the railroads making a profit, but it shouldn't be driven by government fiat, in my opinion

Ha...you understand wrong. It is illegal for oil to be exported from the United States. Refined products...yes. Do you have a problem with things that are made here being sold abroad for profit?

It pisses off greenies and the CorksuckerIC and creates some wealth.

I'm in....

HNIC opened up the gates to illegals coming in and staying tonight, but still wants to shut down anything leaving this country?
Sounds par for his course......

Jobs, yes. The rest not so much.

Alaskan oil is exempt, exports to Canada are exempt, and export anywhere else isn't illegal - it just requires a special license.

I believe it will be transporting oil produced in Canada,a nd that the export restriction would not apply to that oil.

"The rest" are the main benefits. Jobs are secondary.

That must be a expensive license...Exxon/Mobil can't afford it. Why would anybody but us buy crude oil anyway? We have the only government in the world that makes it more expensive to produce domestically than to import.

I'd like some cites to authorities. Not saying anything posted here is wrong, but it is inconsistent.

I do appreciate the discussion here, since the MSM certainly does not give the full picture.

Not building the pipeline insures large campaign contributions

How about aiding a good neighbor/ally? Setting up the infrastructure when the SHTF to make more/better use of "our" (Canada and the US) resources.

Imagine if things go to heck and middle eastern exports shut down. If the pipeline is developed and all that tar sands oil comes through and to the US, we will have much more flexibility because we have more ready access to Canadian oil. Versus the opposite. If Canada is forced to ship westward and have a point of export on their western seaboard, our options are much more limited with regard to utilizing our neighbors' oil. Makes good sense to me given that scenario.

Once it hits the pipeline junction in Cushing Oklahoma, it's all just the same oil.

been several derailments close to here, only luck so far that it hasnt been any of the oil tankers but they have derailed in other places.....whole lot of the oil produced in the Bakken is leaving by rail, not pipelines....

You're dreaming.

Canada exports oil to other countries and the US imports oil for our use?

If so, that makes as much sense as me driving 75 miles to Houston for a Quarter Pounder after passing the McDonald's 2.5 miles from my house.

Could someone put a bullet in the head of the ethanol farce and get this friggin pipeline built? We can drop food prices and gas prices at the same time.

Keystone offers:
1. An opportunity to be a good neighbor, and help a stalwart ally access other foreign markets. As well as a proven and ready supply for the US should instability in other parts of the world put a pinch on foreign supply.
2. An opportunity to put ~10% of Baaken production into the pipeline instead of the rail lines, with the opportunity for expansion as well.
3. An opportunity to free up rail lines to help move other commodities. Many ag producers and/or their elevators/marketers are seeing significant lag times to move product and are either paying a premium to ship or are piling corn and beans on the ground because they just plain can't store it all. At present I sit not 300yds from a corn pile sitting on the ground (vs. in an elevator or bin) big enough to fill every corn flinger in TX enough times to feed every deer and exotic all winter long.
4. Jobs, yes many of them are temporary to the construction phase but there is also permanent/ongoing monitoring, maintenance, and repairs.
5. Once in place, and now I'm spitballing, perhaps another pipeline occupying the same geography could be added to move more nat'l gas and ultimately improve/stabilize our nat'l electrical power grid. Baaken oil is still flaring off 26% of the bi-product nat'l gas, like a giant bic lighter all day, all night. One would think that capturing that and using it to heat water, make steam, and turn turbines is a far better use than just wasting it.

As well as minimize the farce of short-supply diesel in corn country every spring and every fall. The petroleum marketers talk about how demand outstrips their best estimates every fall due to increased production acres. They need to buy some data from the crop ins. industry so that they know what to have and where to have it all fall long. 87 10% eth. gasoline is ~$2.70-$2.80 here and plain old #2 diesel is over $4. It's getting to the point that even the most stalwart supply and demand conservatives think the regionalized seasonal shortages story is BS. IMO, the oil Co's. are playing a dangerous game that's going to potentially cost them their ability to price the market on their own. Plant shut-downs/turnarounds during the 3 big summer travel weekends and fall harvest creating shortages of gasoline, diesel, and last winter propane ain't gonna fly too many more times no matter what party is in power in DC.

Let's get serious for a minute, the SOB's cost me an extra $250-$300 every hunting season with this "regionalized shortage" diesel BS.

luv2safari;
Top of the morning to you sir, thanks for supplying the interesting read for those of us who suffer from insomnia and such.

While I realize it's bucking a time honored 'Fire tradition, I have actually read the entire thread - twice now in fact - and thought that since it's still way too dark for me to head up the mountain behind our house to chase whitetail I'd type out a wee bit of Canuck perspective in case anyone is interested.

So first off I'm personally not aware of any oil company that is entirely owned by Canadians or perhaps better said where all the profits remain here. There appears to be joint ownership/partnering in all I've got investments with anyway and they are typically US partnerships so that money isn't travelling too, too far.

When you good folks had your election and whomever it was made the announcement about the Keystone vote, all the media up here immediately slithered over to Calgary to get a sound bite from someone high up in the Canadian oil industry.

Basically all of them said something like - "while that's nice to hear, we're not holding our breath for a quick resolution."

They all went on to say that Canadian oil exports into the US have been rising steadily in the time since all the Keystone talk began - whenever that was 5-6 years back now - and that while some of it is flowing south through other expanded pipelines most is traveling by rail now through the US heartland.

If anyone believes rail is safer than a pipeline, please read this link and then get back to us.

http://news.nationalpost.com/tag/lac-megantic-train-crash/

As I've said before on similar threads, we are going to continue working our oil patch - "pulling dragons from the ground" as Corb Lund would say. It's one of the main drivers of our economy up here so we have to - no question there for us.

Where it goes and who gets some residual benefit from it is honestly a secondary consideration for the oil producers.

Anyway I'll leave you with Corb's ode to our patch crew.



All the best to you folks sir.

Dwayne

As if that is a kick in the pants.

Apparently Keystone would be the cheapest way to transport the oil, so that helps keep the oil prices down too.

Transportation is a non-value adding cost that only makes the consumer poorer.

Oil train after train rumble by the farm and through town all the time.

It's difficult for the local elevators to get a train because of all the increased oil traffic.



What blows my mind is the fact that the enviro wannabees would rather see countless oil trains travel through Glacier Park rather than go down a pipeline.



Hmmm.



And Buffet invested how many hundred of millions of dollars in the last year or two in ND rail infrastructure? Not to menetion talk of building a double track across the hi-line.

Dwayne, Thanks for the video link. Enjoyed that. Looked like a bunch of guys working, paying taxes, and I imagine shareholders and companies making profits. Works for me. Now go kill a whitetail!

And my favorite; It pisses of the the democrats, so on that issue alone, we need to build it.

I sure wouldn't mind having a little better integrated relationship with our closest ally. Oil/prices are secondary in my mind.

We have a winner.

You nailed it homie, and the fact that these goofballs can spin a pipeline into an environmental hazard (Vs. road and rail)is unbelievable and just another testiment to the stupidity of liberals.

Oh, no, Sam O, the tofuniks here in Whitefish are screaming their lungs out about oil cans going by. While driving to the meetings where they scream, of course.
KXL makes sense because the oil is heavy and the Gulf Coast can handle heavy goo (Venezuela). The bonus is keeping jobs and running out the life on existing refineries in the South while smoothing out the market as noted above.
The oil cans are not going away, however. There is a flexibility aspect to crude haul by rail, as it can be diverted or re-routed or started up much more easily with less commitment that digging a trench. KXL will mitigate the rail crunch, but not break Warren. What WILL break Warren's butt is a nice big flaming wreck in the worst possible spot.
That said, Megantic was an anomaly. I doubt there's ever going to be another single-man oil can train tied off on top of a hill. Ed Burkhardt learned he can only cut costs so much....

Not at all, and there was no implication of that. I'm not up on the full implications of Keystone and was asking those closer to the oil industry just what it will accomplish in total.

Most of the concern/hype in the press is it's a vehicle for foreign oil through the USA.

Even if it were all going abroad, it would help us, since it would add product to the world's supply and keep prices in check. And, "profit" has never been a four-letter-word, IMO.

The jist of my question was what happens to the oil? I also realize we can't export our oil, but can we export refined products?

THAT is enough to justify it.

That explains a LOT!

i thougth the oil was already moving thur by rail ...... demoncrat owed rail....building a pipe to pizz them off alone ...sound good to me!

i'm late to the party.... oh well..... free beer!!!!

On a macro level, supply and demand. Alternative sources that can deliver volume keep prices down. Oil is bouncing around $75 rather than way over $100. Is it coincidence that the Saudis have the Cartel price down around the minimum economic price for tar sands oil? Don't forget the premium speculators threw in for political instability in the Middle East.

Actually the Saudi's were considering a price war in an attempt to drive oil price below the economic price level required for new US Fracking wells. If they do, we could see $2.00 gas again. In such a scenario we could hear the Ruskies and Iranian's squealing all the way over here.

no oil trains aint going to go away, as you say they have their place but we should not be shipping as much as we are out by train....when its phuggin with our food(elevators ability to get trains) there is a problem that needs addressing....been a fair number of derailings within a couple hundred miles either side of me within the last 24 months and its just luck they havent been oil cans

Don't ya love it!

Southern refineries are not the only ones that can use it. The Mobil and BP refineries around Chicago (and Citgo?) have made expensive modifications to be able to use oil from the shale and tar sands.

There is money there, but more importantly Keystone is an asset we can use to further reduce our oil imports from nations that we would prefer not to do business with.

Do we NEED Keystone? No, we really don't. Especially now that demand is way down, but more importantly US production is up markedly. So we may not NEED it, but it sure is a nice thing to have in our back pocket.

Venezuelan oil is tar sands oil, and we have always bought from them, but they hate us too. So why not cut them out altogether and just buy our tar sands oil from a nation we like to do business with?

It will create some jobs, it will make Canada a LOT of money (and I'm cool with that), and make the US a little money. But it becomes somewhat of a strategic financial asset...THAT is why I would like to see Keystone built.

Oil or bitumen? When I managed our upgrader project in Ft. Sask the the gvt was pushing hard to disallow bitumen (cheap chitte stuff from oil sands) to be sent south for upgrading and wanted all upgrading to be done in Canada.

while only sorta related to your post....one thing people forget is though we are fracking it out of shale type deposits, the oil coming out of the Bakken is VERY high quality light sweet crude...its pretty well identical to the benchmark West Texas Intermediate....WTI gravity is 40WPI, Bakken oil ranges from 36 to 44WPI....in other words unlike the stuff coming out of the tar sands it is very good chit that requires lil processing.....

Our domestic oil production has already lowered the price of SAUdi oil. The more we drill the lower the price. Remember "drill baby drill" she was right.

Yes she was...

If we, or "they," drill too much however, prices will bottom out and the boom dies and we're back to high prices again. Overall, there needs to be an equilibrium in the market where supply does not overwhelm demand.

In essence, the entire world needs to realize that we, the world, are not going to run out of oil any time in the next few hundred years, at a minimum, with the known deposits. Oil is truly a commodity, is not rare, and needs to be treated as such.

When the above sinks into the ethos of humans and their govts, organizations like OPEC will lose just about all coercion on the world stage.

Maybe it'll create some global warming. I could use some right now.

If we use it at a reasonable rate---we will never run out. The Earth manufactures oil at a steady rate that GOD deemed reasonable.

That there is a pipeline, I don't care way anyone else thinks it is. It's simply a big, fat, relatively short pipeline cut into even shorter lengths. How anyone can think a moving pipeline is safer than a stationary one, beats me. Trains are a very good thing IMO, and efficient. Clearly there are many ways they can be used to expedite transportation without them being tied up for delivering stuff that can be moved even more cheaply (and safely) via pipeline.

I would much rather pay our allies in Canada for oil than the thieving Marxist government of Venezuela. I remember Chavez threatening to cut off oil to the US back when he was in power.

If we can swap out Venezuellan oil for Canadian oil, I think that is just fine and dandy.

Warren Buffet getting $30 a barrel to move oil. That sure seems like a high price to move 42 gallons but when you have a monopoly on transportation you can charge that. Someone should notify AG Holder.

Not sure where the $30/barrel comes from but its not true.
Link to eia website...you can take the numbers for real.
Cost to move via pipeline $5
By train. .....$10-15.
http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=7270

Not arguing its not significant and rail should be freed up for other commodities. I wonder where rail infrastructure is manufactured...must be booming.

Sure...almost every thing manufactured in this country is made from oil in one way or another.

GE just opened a big engine plant in FW. They are booked up with sales. I think it said they turn out one engine a day.

Let the Chinese make drink umbrella's, this is where we need to focus our manufacturing efforts. The biggest, most complex, most technically advances products the world has ever scene.

TransCanada Keystone Pipeline's (KP) claims there will be 9,000 jobs created, but according to KP's filing with the State Department (the pipeline is an international endeavor and so requires the filing), about 50 permanent jobs (control operators) and about 3,500-4,500 temporary construction jobs will be created. Maintenance and repairs will be contracted out to existing companies, so few new jobs will be created, according to the filing. These numbers are contained in their filing.

Regardless, my big concern is that the legislation authorizing the KP in the US is that the KP is specifically exempt for any damages that a leak or blowout might cause. Since 1990, there have been approximately 5,800 incidents in which oil/ natural gas has been ejected from pipelines in the US alone. About 300 deaths have been attributed to these spills. Following one major spill in the early 1980�s, the owners refused to clean-up the spill, the clean-up costs (about $200 million) were paid by the US taxpayer and, the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund was created. For each barrel of oil shipped, the pipeline pays $0.08 (eight cents per 42 gallons of crude) into the fund. See: http://www.uscg.mil/npfc/About_NPFC/osltf.asp

Trans-Canada�s tar sands oil will not be required to contribute toward the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. See: http://mnpoliticalroundtable.com/20...ability-trust-fund/#sthash.ejlnsCkK.dpuf

Also, the tar sand oil is not free-flowing; it is a solid that must be melted (using steam produced by burning refined product) and diluted with benzene and other chemicals (that later be removed). Benzene is a carcinogen and if it spills onto land or waterways, is nasty to clean-up.

If a spill does occur and the KP has not paid into the fund, who will pick up the tab? For these reasons, I have major concerns with the Keystone Pipeline (regardless of their PR hype).

Cops??

Pipelines, while expensive to build, are the cheapest way to move liquid product. When I worked for Mobil Oil in supply and distribution (early-mid 1960's), I was amazed at how little it cost to move crude and refined product via pipeline, once the infrastructure was in.

Your source is clearly biased. First, I don't see a footnote or source regarding the alleged 300 deaths.

Next yes there may only be 50 new jobs for the pipeline operator, but those contractors will need to hire to accommodate their new demand. In addition your source ignores the refining jobs, shipping jobs, exports jobs, plus all the management and administrative job that go along with such endeavors. To suggest a net result of only 50 new jobs is a liberal myth.

I remembered enough to do a look-see...
October 2, 2008 Vice-Presidential debate:
Joe Biden stated that McCain thinks "the only answer is drill, drill, drill. Drill we must, but it will take 10 years for one drop of oil to come out of any of the wells that are going to be drilled."

Sarah Palin replied "The chant is 'drill, baby, drill.' And that's what we hear all across this country in our rallies because people are so hungry for those domestic sources of energy to be tapped into.�

I work inside the 2nd largest (maybe 3rd now) refinery a lot and I didn't realise how much crude is coming into a refinery via rail. Seems really ineffecient to me, but I dunno. Maybe because the one I do work with is connected to the pipeline infrastructure include the LOOP (pipeline connection offshore that they unload to) and has a dock on the MS river for tankers.

I love tankers. Apparently they like to run over stuff at the dock and smash into them on a regular basis. Good for my business lol. Not enough to damage the tanker but the dock structures just don't have a long lifespan lol.

Didn't read the thread but I'm sure the answer is money in politician's pockets.

As for the deaths and injuries, check Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pipeline_accidents#United_States )

As for the number of incidents, check:
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pipeline_accidents_in_the_United_States_in_the_21st_century )

As for other facts on pipelines, check: ( https://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov/pipelineforum/facts-and-stats/incidents-and-mileage-report/ )

True, there a a number of extra jobs that will be aided by the pipeline (e.g., retail sales, auto sales and mechanics, etc.), the fact remains that many of these jobs already exist and will not be newly created.

And, the fact remains that pipeline accident clean-up is expensive and should be paid by the pipeline, not the US taxpayer. If TransCanada, an international company, desires to walk away from a spill and not pay for the clean-up, it will be the taxpayer who pays. Certainly, paying eight cents per 42 gallon barrel into the Trust Fund is not too much to pay.

I know your here for damage control, and to parrot your president, but ask BP about anteing up after a spill.

As to jobs, I suppose a few is too many huh?

As I suspected you are proffering a dishonest argument. Keystone is a crude oil pipeline. To get the numbers you wanted, you had to conflate it with natural gas pipelines.

In addition you failed to address the real question, how many INCREMENTAL deaths are associated with pipelines. In other words, if you compared the deaths and damage associated with moving this product by pipeline, would that number be more or less then doing so by the next best method, as if so, by how much.

You seem to believe there is a better solution, so what is it?
Continue shipping by rail, stop all this oil at the border, or something else?

The Fort Worth plant is supposed to be able to turn out 3 locos a week headed to 5.The GEs biggest domestic customer BNSF..no surprise there... took delivery of 17 locos from FW last year none of which would run.
BNSF has demanded all future orders be built at the GE Transportation plant in Erie.Pa. Will see how long that lasts.The FW plant is state of the art.Apparently all the wets they have working for them have problems with high tech manufacturing.

The Erie plant was opened in 1906.Currently has about 3200 workers.Has its own power plant,water treatment plant,mini hospital,police force,and its own zip code.Right now there putting out about 14 locos a week.Thats both domestic and overseas orders.Best year I can remember was 2008 before the crash.We did 22 locos a week with help and 24/7 work load.

The Erie plant makes locos and all the guts for off Highway Vehicles.OHV has taken a big hit because of our raghead dear leaders war against mining.The GE had a layoff back in Dec.377 people lost there jobs.Pretty much because of OHV.The GE has hired all but 100 back and the 100 will be back by the end of Jan.Then because of orders and retirement we hear that they will be hiring more.I hope so.We should be good for the next 3 to 4 years.Pipeline or no.

So we are not booming.But we are busy.

I spent 30 years as a tool and die maker building very high precision plastic injection molds.
I made the chit.
The trade deals signed by chi-com echo sucking american politicians.Have pretty much ended high precision manufacturing in this country.
Nowadays I make the chit that transports the chit.


dave

Dave, I really appreciate your post. Especially this part:

It's illegal for a company to hire illegals, and they face huge fines when they get caught. But then again, GE is Obama's go-to company and any time they can move work to a blue State, they do. Bless your heart for having to put up with it.

The transportation plant is a fixture here.
If you live here you either know someone or are related to someone that works there.In the mid 70s there were 14000 workers.Back in the 50s there were 20000.
My dad always called it a one horse town. And he didnt work there.
Just a few years ago the average age of a GE worker was about 56.They have had waves of retirement here the last 10 years or so.And the GE has pretty much wiped out the machine, tool and die and autobody shops.Hiring new people. They actually have a higher skilled workforce now then 10 years ago.Its been tuff on the little guys though.

For years the place was never on my radar.I started in the tool and die trade at 15 and never expected to do anything else.Im more surprised than anyone that I actually work there..

dave

BP has antied up a lot of money in cleaning up the Gulf ($27-28 billion)

And the "White House says 75% of oil captured, burned off, evaporated or broken down as 'static kill' operaion shows signs of working" according to "The Guardian" newspaper (see: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/aug/04/bp-static-kill-successful ), but, 75% means that 25% still remains, after spending about $28 billions (see: http://www.bp.com/en/global/corpora...ill&gclid=CM6Fm8rUkcICFU4V7Aod-1QAfQ )

And, there is no "too few" jobs; all jobs are important. but, at what cost or potential cost. If a leak in the KP occurs, who will pay for it and will a limited number of jobs justify it? As an Alaska resident, perhaps y0ou can speak for the Alaska fishermen whose livelihoods were impacted by the Exxon Valdez a long time ago or, don't their jobs count?

So now you want to shut down all oil tanker shipments, as well as all pipelines?

Of course he does, he's a democrat...

Took the words out of my mouth. Other than that CRF problem you have, you are a really smart guy.

What CRF problem? I shoot Weatherbys, unless you mean the fail on fire safety, glued on bolt handle, and sheet metal extractor issues perhaps?