McKenna says Irving could refine western crude
New oil-sands upgraders belong on coasts: Irving president
Please stop talking through your...
Trudeau directly addresses protesters on pipeline
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
McKenna says Irving could refine western crude
New oil-sands upgraders belong on coasts: Irving president
Please stop talking through your...
your premise was that Eastern refinery processing of tar sludge would usurp current import of oil from "your boogeyman nations". You may surmise on some "eventual" refinery processing capability in that regard... as I'm aware, it doesn't exist today and no announcements to that end have been made to suggest existing refineries will be significantly invested in to support tar sludge processing. I await your countering information...
Oil from North Dakota? I said that, you ****ing dickhead. Still you have reading comprehension problems.
Oh go cite yourself. I actually have a life, and do not wish to spend it feeding pablum to morons.
They are ALREADY refining small amounts of Alberta crude.
They will take much more from the pipeline.
Keystone Be Darned: Canada Finds Oil Route Around Obama - Bloomberg
Now, explain to me the NEGATIVES of exporting energy and getting rich from a pipeline or two.
If I took you, and rammed your fat stupid head into a tanker car of Alberta crude you would STILL be too ignorant to understand what that means.
They are ALREADY agreeing to take significant amounts of oil from the pipeline for the refinery (see the Bloomberg article)
If it will make them money, Irving will do it.
little man, nothing you provided is a formal expressed intent/announcement... to do anything. Can you find any suggestion of (your own *** blowing) within the NEB submissions?
Do you know what heavy oil is or am I wasting my time asking a drywaller?
Oil and Pipelines 101 | Energy East Pipeline
aren't you the least bit embarassed that you can't actually discuss anything without throwing in your standard complement of insult/attack? Have you no respect... for yourself?
why should anyone discuss anything with you? You can't rise above your blowhard "drywall/drywaller" act. It's like your lil' safety blanket to avoid actual meaningful dialogue.
in the context of the much touted "West-to-East Canadian nation building pipeline", the focus on source is Alberta tarsands sludge. That equally was my context.
citation request.
Irving and TransCanada can't seem to get their "competing" interests in line... nothing in your linked Bloomberg article counters that. TransCanada et al are very cautious in presuming to allow Irving, as the end point, to effectively control "too much"... hence the reason TransCanada, as a part of their NEB submission is heavily committed to building its own export terminals. You can presume all you want on what you think Irving will... can... do.
No. Nope.
You aren't the least bit embarrassed that you have to cover up your lack of intellectual ability with arrogance?
Which is why you get treated with scorn.
No....I have self respect.
I simply have no respect for you.
Colpy aren't you going to cite Bakken kerogen being cooked by Irving for the drywaller?
40,000 bbl of imagined heavy oil a day....
Irving Oil Boosting Crude by Rail Capacity With Alberta Loading - Bloomberg
40,000 bbl of imagined heavy oil a day....
Irving Oil Boosting Crude by Rail Capacity With Alberta Loading - Bloomberg
And this lot of BS above has exactly WHAT to do with the debate over the advantages of the pipeline?
Do you also sink into irrelevancies when you have lost an argument?
Irving wants the oil.
Transcanada wants to build.
All else is simply the details.
is it not possible for you to discuss any position/statement that you interpret as counter to your understanding/belief... without resorting to throwing insult? It's clear to me this board is mostly an echo-chamber for a bunch of guys who shuck&jive, back-slap each other, talk nonsense, throw insults... while rarely actually discussing anything of significance between themselves, let alone actually attempting to discuss something with someone offering a view/statement/position that, apparently, beings much difficulty to the echo-chamber comfort level!
Considering your full withdrawal from the debate at hand, I guess we managed to educate you on the Energy East pipeline.
Surrender accepted.
Oh.
Ever wonder why you aren't treated with more respect?
Go back and read your posts.
you can't truthfully suggest there isn't a current divide between Irving and TransCanada et al. They may work through that; however, in the context of discussing, as you say, "advantages"... yours are presumptious and counter to the current public perception as well as the current state of the related NEB submission.
surrender? Is this a blood sport with you? The only thing I've withdrawn from is responding to the natterInChief in all his drywall/drywalling blowhardiness best! You keep speaking about "arrogrance"... I suggest you actually read a few of your own posts in that regard.
perhaps you could summarize what you've presumed to educate me on concerning Energy East... excluding your presumptions, of course!
Everything. Where do you think Energy East is going? You do know which way is east don't you?
where do you think... where do you know, the principal sourced tarsands sludge is (intended) to go?
Well since we don't have any tar sands it is unlikely any refineries will be wanting to make the necessary changes to process it anytime soon.
Now, explain to me the NEGATIVES of exporting energy and getting rich from a pipeline or two.
PICkME PICKME PICKME
Simple. Ontario will not benefit from it except perhaps as being a have not province they will get another handout from the workers of Canada.
you've already started repeating yourself timmy...your e-life expectancy doesn't look promising. :lol:
just your 7th little post with us:
post #1:
and all the other wee contributions:
if that's all ya got, best let the adults talk...carry on now. ;-)
Let's see:
The fact that the Irving Oil; refinery is ALREADY refining Alberta crude.
The fact that oil will come east by pipeline or by rail.
The fact that Irving desires pipeline (Alberta) crude for the refinery.
The fact there is a proposition to twin the pipeline and ship NG to Saint John for liquifaction and export.
The fact there is a proposition for an oil export terminal.
In other words, the fact that the proposed pipeline is a win-win-win-win situation with no downside.
Oh....and yes, I can be an arrogant ar$ehole. It is sometimes best to fight fire with fire.
I'm at least self-aware.
I am not one of the protesters and I support the East/West pipeline as much as I oppose
the North South Pipeline. My problem is not pipelines nor is it totally the environmental damage.
Pipelines are both safer and more dangerous. Safe in terms of environmental risk more of a
danger to our supply and wealth. If we put Canadians first and refine it and sell it to us and the
world as finished product I don't have a problem.
If we send raw material through a pipeline and sell it to the US and refine it in Texas where we
get less for it and they export for more money I have a problem with that. Or if we just send it
off shore without considering our own needs. If we get a good price and we use the best
environmental practices that is alright. The only exception is Enbridge, no matter how many
insincere lying commercials they put out the majority of BC residents don't believe them.
As for protesters not having jobs that is not true either many do and good jobs at that. Lumping
people into one group with an opposite voice does not provide for equal status in a debate.
A job or being rich or poor should not be part of the articulation of the validity of ones argument.
the North South Pipeline. My problem is not pipelines nor is it totally the environmental damage.
Pipelines are both safer and more dangerous. Safe in terms of environmental risk more of a
danger to our supply and wealth. If we put Canadians first and refine it and sell it to us and the
world as finished product I don't have a problem.
If we send raw material through a pipeline and sell it to the US and refine it in Texas where we
get less for it and they export for more money I have a problem with that. Or if we just send it
off shore without considering our own needs. If we get a good price and we use the best
environmental practices that is alright. The only exception is Enbridge, no matter how many
insincere lying commercials they put out the majority of BC residents don't believe them.
As for protesters not having jobs that is not true either many do and good jobs at that. Lumping
people into one group with an opposite voice does not provide for equal status in a debate.
A job or being rich or poor should not be part of the articulation of the validity of ones argument.