[paraclete]

Now let's consider the fallout

Could it be a certain pipeline might not be needed?

Could it be inflation will be lower and give the economy a boost?

Gas guzzling will be back in fashion?

Could it be the Russian economy will tank along with several other "oil" producers Iran, Saudi, the Gulf, suddenly the terrorists financed by oil will be out of business?


I see a lot of good in this, airlines will become profitable again, fares will become cheaper

[joypulv]

Saudi Arabia will tank? No, they are playing a waiting game, with tons of cash in the bank. Russia, Iran? Maybe.

There is good for the consumer (I could care less about the airlines) but there is a point at which our oil producers shut down too many operations, as do others in the world, with the Saudi being by far the cheapest oil to extract. So while the consumer spends happily away (and trade in their Priuses for SUVs), gov'ts and currencies and international corporations and stocks and other commodities will go nuts.

[paraclete]

Yes the stock market has gone a little mad so bargains there, I think it is good high cost extraction operations like shale shut down, they are big polluters anyway and if Saudi take a bath for a while that's good too, less fantacy buildings, I think it is ironic my government upped the exise on petroleum products recently, what did they know?

[tickle]

Dropping oil prices, in Ontariio at 90 cents a litre, and US are coming across the border to buy gas here. It is scary. Any lower and the economy on the north American continent is going to suffer.

[CravenMorhead]

The keystone pipeline will still be needed, regardless of what the Enviro-Idiots say. Just because a lobby group is overly vocal doesn't mean their message is right, scientifically, economically, or logically.

This is the Saudis trying to put some of their competition out of business. It is just a business decision on their part. They're still doing MASSIVE amounts of explorations and aren't looking to stop this year or next. There is no push to put terrorist organizations out of business or boost any economy besides their own. This is just like if Ford cut their prices MASSIVELY to put GMC and Chrysler out of business.

[tomder55]

lower gas prices are good .....period. The only negatives in the US will be that some of the frackers will have to tighen their belts and live with reduced profit margins.

I wish the Repubics would go even further in their energy bill besides the XL . They should push for exploration on Federal lands ,and getting rid of restrictions on export bans. The emperor's minions are touting the economy expansion without mentioning that it is the reduced cost of energy that is primarily responsible for the surge. If he takes credit for lower prices will he also accept the blame for the price when it hovered over $100/bbl ? Of course not . Back then it was 'greedy ' oil companies . Now that the prices are low ,are they no longer greedy ?

Pipelines are a better alternative to using Warren Buffet's freight transportation. It's safer and more enviromentally sound ;on top of being the economical way to transport oil and LNG .

[talaniman]

All good except for running it through Indian lands, and ranches, and natural aquafires. (Cannot substantiate the rumor of a new route at this time) Does imminent domain apply to foreign companies or should it? Why doesn't Canada have its own refineries or direct route pipelines?

As for oil prices, the president was blasted for high prices so fair enough to get credit for low ones, even if its all BS in the first place. The Saudis break even price is 10 bucks a barrel, so those Arab CAPITALISTS are calling the shots in the FREE MARKET!

Here's how the price of oil could fall to just $20 a barrel | Financial Post

The links in this article are great.

The greedy oil corps CAN"T be more greedy is closer to the point!

[CravenMorhead]

Canada does have refineries, just not enough to handle what we have coming out. It is cheaper to send it south to be refined and sold. We're looking at sending a pipline to the east and west coasts. The enviro-idiots are protesting and making it hard to do that as well. We are working on reversing flow and increasing the size of a pipe headed east. The western pipe would go to a deep port to ship to china. There is just too much being produced and how we get our best price is to ship it across the border.

[paraclete]

Tal do you read the ops you post? That article doesn't demonstrate anything expect the journo is niaive. We all remember the days of cheap oil and would like to see them again just as we would like to see the days of cheap gold, watch that one. When you have a product under pressure you can sell lower or make more, but demand for oil isn't as elastic as it used to be and there are more producers today. Everyone wants a piece of the action and if Iran is allowed to come in from the cold we could see the price fall again.

The G20 wanted a boost to growth, here it is but we should be concerned about the Russian economy tanking, we don't want any nuclear armed nation backed to the wall. As to the XL pipeline, all it needs is a better route, if they want more capacity follow the existing route

[talaniman]

They would rather build a new one and forget the old one Clete. It's easier to think it's the enviro nuts against the new pipeline rather than see them as landowners and dwellers in the way of corporate interests. Naw, they can't slow down the trains, or buy new ones, or builder bigger and better refineries.

Capitalism always works in its own interests Clete, and tells you how much better YOU would be if you let them grab for their own gold. Do you really think a sweetheart deal between American refineries, and Canadian sludge oil producers benefits the little guys in the middle? If it does, its minuscule and incidental. The Saudis are drying up the revenue streams quite effectively, and Russia can get with the program any time it pleases. So can China. No sympathy for the self interests, whether they have NUKES, or not.

[tomder55]

why isn't pipeline 'infrastructure' ? The XL is nice ,but it doesn't come close to what I have in mind. Your concern about the risk of a single pipeline is comical compared to the risk of using rail to transport energy . My vision includes running LNG piplines direct to service stations so consumers have the choice of using petroleum or natural gas fueled autos. As an enviro-nut you should favor that since it does run cleaner .

Let me tell you how the enviro-wacko movement is killing my state . Upstate NY has been in a virtual economic depression for far longer than even the 2008 global recession. Now we sit on one of the largest shale oil/gas deposits in the country. So first our Governor il Duce Cuomo said he'd wait on the endless environmental studies before he would permit fracking . Then after all the studies came out saying it was safe ,he stalled some more until after he won reelection. Then he caved in to the nut job elitists like Yoko Ono and RFK Jr . and decided to continue the ban. So while states on the border like Pennsylvania have enjoyed the economic boom ; upstate NY still is in economic depression.
Their plan to turn it around .????? Casinos !!! Cuomo's a f-n idiot !

[paraclete]

You can have too much infrastructure Tom, LNG pipelines criss-crossing the country is a recipe for disaster when you add them to all the other assets that already exist, don't you already have gas pipelines. You should get with the science, fracking is bad news, it pollutes ground water and may be a long term disaster, extraction from shale has been an environmental disaster, the water courses used to run with volitiles when it was done here. Maybe you should look elsewhere for that idiot

[talaniman]

Companies are responsible for pipeline infrastructure, NOT taxpayers. So until they get it together, slow the trains down to a safe speed, and buy new rail cars, maintain the railroad tracks. How about roads, and bridges for citizens, or a more efficient POWER grid?

[tomder55]

NYS State Dept did an exhaustive study and found fracking is safe if done properly . Banning it is and unscientific political response. The United States has seen dramatic reductions in national carbon dioxide emissions largely as a result of hydraulic fracking BECAUSE it enables us to extract the cleanest and most abundant energy source the US produces ...natural gas. Even former Obama Adm EPA boss Lisa Jackson says it is safe .
.: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :.
So have other former Obama Czars .
Ken Salazar, Steven Chu praise fracking as 'safe' | WashingtonExaminer.com

If you are looking for a bridge from carbon based to renewables then LNG is your answer .

[paraclete]

Firstly Tom I'm not looking for a bridge to renewables, all that takes is will power and in any case it already exists in nuclear. Secondly, fracking has been suspended in large parts of my homeland because of ground water contamination and environmental issues, it has become a question of which industry you support; agriculture or gas production? Fracking has only been found safe for those in bed with big business

I think it possible you might have read this report
Is Fracking Safe? The Top 10 Myths About Natural Gas Drilling - Popular Mechanics

However I think the downside is too easily dismissed in the euphoria
let's debunk some popular myths

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...-wind-solar-10

[tomder55]

Again ,Lisa Jackson, former EPA head for the emperor and no friend of big business or fossil fuels , has testified to Congress that she is “not aware of any proven case where the fracking process itself has affected water. ” Obama's EPA has extensively investigated it and concluded that “1.2 million wells have been hydraulically fractured without a single confirmed case of groundwater contamination.”

[talaniman]

We have studies here too Tom, and earthquakes... water contamination? Sure do!

How Fracking Disposal Wells Are Causing Earthquakes in Dallas-Fort Worth | StateImpact Texas

Small Earthquake Strikes Near Fort Worth | StateImpact Texas

Groundwater Contamination Higher Near North Texas Gas Wells - The Texas Observer

Nine earthquakes rattle North Texas in under 24 hours | Fox News

Maybe Cuomo is looking at more than just money.

[paraclete]

What Tom doesn't realise, or perhaps admit, is that the downside of extractive industries aren't always immediately apparent and we can point to numerous examples the best known of which is asbestos, which not only contaminated landscapes but the contamination in buildings exists even today. You have to look beyond the money.

I wouldn't expect Obama and his administration to be squeaky clean so I wouldn't swallow everything they say, he is looking for legacy so why wouldn't he embrace the new industry which gives promise of reduced carbon and energy sufficiency. We need to be very careful about decisions based on carbon

[tomder55]

The emperor doesn't embrace it . He opposes anything carbon based because he is an ideologue. As far as earthquakes go ;there is more seismic activity in Texas due to Chris Christie's excessive celebrations following a Cowboy victory . You're really trying to sell the bs that a small hole dug into rock is going to cause seismic shifts ?

[paraclete]

Tom don't come the raw prawn with me, a hole in the ground doesn't cause earthquakes, however injecting water under pressure so that you alter the existing balance may give rise to shifts just as emptying the chambers of oil, etc has caused problems. Some faults are delicately balanced and besides there are now thousands of these fracking wells, so we are not dealing with one hole, or are we?