U.S. to re-route Keystone XL due to environmental concerns
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
If the oil is pumped out of the ground in Canada it should be refined in Canada. We
should not be shipping raw anything out of this country and giving foreign interests
jobs. I am not for the US oil deal at all. That pipeline will give the majority of the jobs
to Americans. In addition the more we supply the Americans the more we have to
send south. Canada should keep its options open and refine and prepare the material
here. In addition there should be a national Canadian price and a higher price for the
rest of the world. I say advantage Canada. The world needs it and nations know the
Middle East is going to become more and more unstable, that means we have an
advantage. I am happy they said no to the present deal. The deal for the west coast
is not that good either it allows for the shipment of raw materials out of the country.
should not be shipping raw anything out of this country and giving foreign interests
jobs. I am not for the US oil deal at all. That pipeline will give the majority of the jobs
to Americans. In addition the more we supply the Americans the more we have to
send south. Canada should keep its options open and refine and prepare the material
here. In addition there should be a national Canadian price and a higher price for the
rest of the world. I say advantage Canada. The world needs it and nations know the
Middle East is going to become more and more unstable, that means we have an
advantage. I am happy they said no to the present deal. The deal for the west coast
is not that good either it allows for the shipment of raw materials out of the country.
Fuel trucks leak far more than a pipeline ever would even if it was damaged and refined oil products are more toxic to environment than raw crude not to mention it's not economical to truck finished product around the globe.
I suppose the next market is Asia, but it means going though sensitive Canadian waterways ... if the US isn't interested in piping this glunck to Texas, I guess Canada should build it's own crude sythesizing plants to export the clean glunck to Asia. Maybe the solution is a ship that will synthesize the crude oil offshore and deposit the junk in the ocean - delivering clean oil in Japan ... international waters rules would govern the off-stuff from crude oil cleaning in the ocean ... eh. Maybe a crude oil synthesizing plant should be built in BC with Asian financing ... and then the clean oil could be shipped through that sensitive environmental area with the hope that there are no spills or accidents ... and end up in Asia.
I say go for the Asian markets if the US isn't interested. They had first dibbs, delayed ... let them flounder with their double A credit rating.
I say go for the Asian markets if the US isn't interested. They had first dibbs, delayed ... let them flounder with their double A credit rating.
Re: Keystone pipeline delayed until 2013
Pipelines are safer and more cost effective for moving large volumes. But refining here would be a good idea. Good luck getting all the permits though.
Pipelines are safer and more cost effective for moving large volumes. But refining here would be a good idea. Good luck getting all the permits though.
Re: Keystone pipeline delayed until 2013
You simply can't pipe finished petroleum products this is why crude is piped around.
What I don't understand is why we can't refine the bituman here. No one has explained that as far as I can tell.
I agree we should refine the stuff here and then ship it to wherever thus creating good jobs here. As for Canada having refineries, we don't have enough to handle the capacity which is why we need to build additional ones. Here in Edmonton, when something happens to the refinery here, there's a shortage almost immediately as we don't have another one around to pick up the slack.
JMO
I agree we should refine the stuff here and then ship it to wherever thus creating good jobs here. As for Canada having refineries, we don't have enough to handle the capacity which is why we need to build additional ones. Here in Edmonton, when something happens to the refinery here, there's a shortage almost immediately as we don't have another one around to pick up the slack.
JMO
Why can't you refine it there? You can, and you do.
Need more capacity to refine more, that's all.
Is upgrading just from oil sands products or does it apply to pumped crude as well? Still not sure why we can't pipe refined or at least semi refined products around. As in refining gas and diesel in say Alberta and piping them to Kitimat to ship around the world. Is volatility an issue with that much pipe?
No, not just oil sands. AB and especially SK are sitting on massive deposits of heavy crude which needs to be upgraded the same way bitumen is post seperation process.
If you are wondering why finished product can't be piped, just think of the diesel engine. Compression and friction are not the friends of fuels. They tend to make very large explosions when compressed.
How bout we scrap pipelining altogether, refine it ourselves, make gasoline affordable for Canadians, and export plastics? Why does Canada always feel it necessary to export raw materials and import finished products?
Edit: What they said!
OK next time I'll actually read the thread before posting!
Edit: What they said!
OK next time I'll actually read the thread before posting!
My query would go to the gov't of Alberta and the fed's forming a joint venture to build a refinery or refineries on the land rendered useless after scooping off the tar sands. Guaranteed payback to both governments in the form of cents per barrel sold and they get to jointly set the market price to be sold at.
We would all benefit from this and Alberta would be selling finished product instead of watching crude being piped to Texas to be refined by them and sold overseas at profit.
Why assist the Americans in any job creation endeavours as they neither recognize it nor apprecitate it anyway. We would be using our resources to create sustainable Canadian jobs and selling the finished product to the WORLD rather than having all of our eggs in that market below us.
Our economy is going to be a recource driven one moreso in the future as we don't have the manufacturing base nor the sustainable birth rate to maintain a competitive foothold in the manufacturing sector. Our population density and maintenance is sadly reliant on immigration and tradesmen from Europe aren't what we're getting via that route now but rather truck drivers and service sector folks we already have too many of now.
We would all benefit from this and Alberta would be selling finished product instead of watching crude being piped to Texas to be refined by them and sold overseas at profit.
Why assist the Americans in any job creation endeavours as they neither recognize it nor apprecitate it anyway. We would be using our resources to create sustainable Canadian jobs and selling the finished product to the WORLD rather than having all of our eggs in that market below us.
Our economy is going to be a recource driven one moreso in the future as we don't have the manufacturing base nor the sustainable birth rate to maintain a competitive foothold in the manufacturing sector. Our population density and maintenance is sadly reliant on immigration and tradesmen from Europe aren't what we're getting via that route now but rather truck drivers and service sector folks we already have too many of now.
And they cost a hell of a lot to ship by truck. Never mind the risk involved in shipping by train and boat.
Gotta keep those Sand Hills pristine...............yeah right, Nebraska.
"There are currently 21,000 miles of pipelines crossing Nebraska, including 3,000 miles of hazardous liquid pipelines. Many of these pipelines co-exist within the Ogallala aquifer. Six thousand barrels of oil are produced daily in Nebraska and hundreds of thousands of barrels are produced in adjacent states through the Ogallala aquifer. In Nebraska, 17 of 18 oil producing counties sit atop the aquifer. Moreover, one of the leading hydrogeologists from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Jim Goeke said in a recent Nebraska TV interview that the aquifer would not be at risk if there was a leak in Keystone XL."
Keystone XL Route Through Nebraska Safest Choice
"There are currently 21,000 miles of pipelines crossing Nebraska, including 3,000 miles of hazardous liquid pipelines. Many of these pipelines co-exist within the Ogallala aquifer. Six thousand barrels of oil are produced daily in Nebraska and hundreds of thousands of barrels are produced in adjacent states through the Ogallala aquifer. In Nebraska, 17 of 18 oil producing counties sit atop the aquifer. Moreover, one of the leading hydrogeologists from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Jim Goeke said in a recent Nebraska TV interview that the aquifer would not be at risk if there was a leak in Keystone XL."
Keystone XL Route Through Nebraska Safest Choice
There is no economics for Upgrading and refining this crude in Canada now. The crack spreads are just too low. The refineries in the US can accept our heavy oil crude and it just makes more economic sense to ship it there. If we had to refine it here, then there would be no economics to extract the crude from the oil sands in the first place. This would cause the oil sands development to slow down or expansion would just stop.
Plus, everybody says they want it refined here until you tell them you'll build the refinery in their back yard, then it's a different story!!
Plus, everybody says they want it refined here until you tell them you'll build the refinery in their back yard, then it's a different story!!
...and it sounds like both have a shortage of hydrogen, so there's currently a
diesel shortage...and some are also say'n the fire in Regina is contributing to
that, even though that happened in an area that I believe was shut down.