• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

In 2009 Venezuela only exported 1.75 million barrels per day (bbl/d).. That isn't a lot... and exports have fallen since then.

In 2010, the United States imported 987,000 bbl/d of crude oil and petroleum products from Venezuela, just 8.3 percent of total American imports. Even factoring in 255,000 bbl/d of imports from the U.S. Virgin Islands, which are almost exclusively petroleum products refined from Venezuelan crude, the significance of Venezuela to the American energy sector is in decline (see chart).

In recent years, Venezuela has attempted to diversify its export destinations away from the United States. Besides the United States, other important destinations of Venezuelan petroleum exports include the Caribbean, Europe and Asia (see chart). One of the fastest growing destinations of Venezuelan crude oil exports has been China. In 2010, China imported 125,900 bbl/d of crude oil from Venezuela, up from only 39,000 bbl/d in 2005.

Source: http://www.eia.gov/emeu/cabs/Venezuela/pdf.pdf

The chart shows 2010 Venezuela exports to the following countries: United States 43%; Carribean 34%; Europe 7%; Other Asia 7%; China 6%; Other 3%

These exports exceed Venezuela crude production, therefore it has to be product from Iranian crude.

If someone has evidence of Iran getting gasoline all the way around the world from Venezuela, post it!
 
Source: http://www.eia.gov/emeu/cabs/Venezuela/pdf.pdf

The chart shows 2010 Venezuela exports to the following countries: United States 43%; Carribean 34%; Europe 7%; Other Asia 7%; China 6%; Other 3%

These exports exceed Venezuela crude production, therefore it has to be product from Iranian crude.

If someone has evidence of Iran getting gasoline all the way around the world from Venezuela, post it!

I will try to find it.. Iran has a small refining capacity..

They import $6 billion a year in gasoline and have been on gas rationing since 2007.
 
Venezuela will continue to supply Iran with gasoline despite the threat of international sanctions.

David Velasquez, Venezuela's ambassador to Tehran, said on Thursday that his government would not be "bullied" into halting gasoline shipments.


"We are at the service of Iran, and whenever Iran needs, we will supply it with gasoline," Velasquez said in an interview with the semi-official Fars news agency.

The United Nations in June imposed new economic sanctions on Iran because of concerns about its nuclear programme.

The United States and European Union have also approved their own measures, which go further than the UN resolution.

Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president, has defended Iran's nuclear programme as "peaceful" and condemned the UN sanctions resolution. His Iranian counterpart, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, thanked him for his support earlier this week, according to Iran's ISNA news agency.

Iran's falling imports

Venezuela's promise offers symbolic support for Iran, but its practical impact is likely to be limited.

Iran is the world's fifth-largest exporter of crude oil, but refining shortages force it to import much of its gasoline. The country's imports have plunged this summer, though, from 120,000 barrels per day in May to roughly 60,000 today. Energy analysts attribute the drop to international sanctions.


Caracas to continue Iran gas export - Business - Al Jazeera English
 
I will try to find it.. Iran has a small refining capacity..

They import $6 billion a year in gasoline and have been on gas rationing since 2007.

You didn't say it and I know Iran gets gasoline from Persian Gulf countries. I'm sure the EIA has a report.

I wouldn't want to ride half way around the world on a ship containing gasoline.
 
You didn't say it and I know Iran gets gasoline from Persian Gulf countries. I'm sure the EIA has a report.

I wouldn't want to ride half way around the world on a ship containing gasoline.

What? Who?

OPEC doesn't sell oil to Iran.
 
What? Who?

OPEC doesn't sell oil to Iran.

Gasoline isn't oil. Iran has limited refining capacity and has been getting gasoline from the Gulf Countries. It's been cut back, but not entirely.
 
Less than half of every gallon of oil becomes gasoline. For heavy crude, like that produced by Venezuela, the number seems to be less than 10%. If a barrel of Arabian or West Texas light sweet crude produces 19.5 gallons of gasoline .

That is offset somewhat, because the remaining 22 gallons may be used to make heating oil, diesel or plastics. http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/eng99/eng99288.ht...

Also depends on the efficiency of the refinery. Venezuela's refineries are not very efficient which is why the send a lot of their oil to the U.S. to be refined.
 
Gasoline isn't oil. Iran has limited refining capacity and has been getting gasoline from the Gulf Countries. It's been cut back, but not entirely.

Who? Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar don't sell them gasoline..

Iran is their enemy because of the threat to the Strait of Hormuz.

If the Israelis or the US bombs Iran, their first target with be the oil installations in Dhahran and Abqaiq.. That will take 10 million bpd off the market.
 
Who? Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar don't sell them gasoline..

Iran is their enemy because of the threat to the Strait of Hormuz.

If the Israelis or the US bombs Iran, their first target with be the oil installations in Dhahran and Abqaiq.. That will take 10 million bpd off the market.

Check right across the Strait of Hormuz and find the nearest refineries!
 
Check right across the Strait of Hormuz and find the nearest refineries!

What are you talking about?

In which country?

I should warn you.. I grew up in the Ghawar oilfields.
 
What are you talking about?

In which country?

I should warn you.. I grew up in the Ghawar oilfields.

The UAE is across the Strait of Hormuz and they still trade with Iran.
 
Wow, 69 pages... [...]
And this is mostly a rehash of a previous thread, where most of the talking points presented here had already been debunked.

As Koch Industries is heavily involved in the petroleum and pipeline business (and originated with refining, in fact), any info that they had a stake in Keystone would not be surprising.
 
I hope that was a rhetorical question

The question is rheotical in the sense that someone believes a nation will build the second largest refining capacity in North and South America, but it can't refine it's own oil. All the crude oil in Venezuela isn't heavy crude. Venezuela manages to export more barrels of gasoline than barrels of oil it produces.

CITGO Petroleum Corporation (or CITGO) is a United States-incorporated, Venezuela-owned refiner, transporter and marketer of transportation fuels, lubricants, petrochemicals and other industrial products. The company is owned by PDV America, Inc., an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A., the national oil company of Venezuela. The company has its headquarters in the Energy Corridor area of Houston, Texas.

Citgo has its headquarters in the Energy Corridor area of Houston, Texas, United States.[22]

Before it was headquartered in Houston, Citgo had its headquarters in Tulsa, Oklahoma. In 2003 Governor of Oklahoma Brad Henry met an executive of Citgo to discuss possible incentives that would keep the Citgo headquarters in Oklahoma.[23] For eight months the company debated whether to move its headquarters or to keep its headquarters in Oklahoma. In 2004 the company announced that its headquarters were moving to Houston.[24]

At that point the company had not decided which location in Houston would have the headquarters. The company wanted 300,000 square feet (28,000 m2) of office space to house 700 employees. Citgo considered the 1500 Louisiana building in Downtown Houston, the Williams Tower in Uptown Houston, the BMC Software headquarters complex in Westchase, and the Aspentech Building in the Energy Corridor.[25] In June of that year the company signed a lease in the five story Aspentech building so it could serve as a headquarters.[26][27][28] In September 2004 the company began moving its headquarters; on September 24 of that month 150 employees were in the Energy Corridor offices.[29]

Source: Citgo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

7-11_Citgo_message.jpg



Sign on a 7-Eleven gas station pump

This thread is about the Keystone oil sands pipeline being rejected, but the reality is, the Keystone pipeline has already been built, is operational and it's the Keystone XL project that hasn't been approved. I posted positive proof that the oil coming from the Keystone pipeline was used to supply refineries on the Great Plains that once used Gulf crude and imports. That has resulted in product from Gulf refiners not being needed to be transported up the Mississippi and they are exporting the gasoline to the Caribbean. One obvious market would be the U. S. Virgin Islands, that used to get all it's gasoline from Venezuela. It may not be in the news, but the United States is targeting the Venezuela market for petroleum products and why shouldn't they? Do you think oil companies are going to use that extra product from Canadian bitumen imports, in America, to drive down the price of gasoline? That wouldn't make good business sense. Once crude oil is made into a product, like gasoline, it's as fungible as money to a nation that imports oil. The molecules of gasoline we are exporting didn't come from Canada. The gasoline came from the Gulf, where we are stupid enough to give oil companies crude oil owned by the public for the price of a lease.
 
Wow, 69 pages... Has anyone mentioned the Koch Brothers envolvement with the Keystone Pipeline? The Koch Congress Pushing Keystone Pipeline

I dunno, did anyone mention this?

Warren Buffett cleans up after Keystone XL

The Sage of Omaha is one lucky guy.

by John Hayward 01/24/2012

Amusingly, a spokesman for the Sierra Club admitted “there is no question that [transporting] oil by rail or truck is much more dangerous than a pipeline,” but that didn’t stop the zero-growth eco-fanatics from calling in their chips with President Downgrade to kill that pipeline.

Those rail shipments are expected to “increase exponentially with increased oil production and the shortage of pipelines,” according to Justin Kringstad, director of the North Dakota Pipeline Authority. That’s going to be quite a windfall for the railroad companies, isn’t it?

As it happens, 75 percent of the oil currently shipped by rail out of North Dakota is handled by Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC… which just happens to be a unit of Warren Buffett’s company, Berkshire Hathaway Inc. What a coincidence!

Warren Buffet Cleans Up After Keystone XL - HUMAN EVENTS

Then I read this....

Caving to pressure from environmental groups, the Obama administration on Wednesday rejected the $7 billion-plus Keystone XL pipeline which would have carried 700,000 barrels of crude oil a day from the Alberta oil sands to refineries along the US Gulf coast.

No Keystone XL means Canadian crude will stay dirt cheap - MINING.com

What environmental groups? Even the spoksman for the Sierra Club admits that transporting oil by rail or truck is much more dangerous than by pipeline. Was it caving to environmental groups or his big business buddy Warren Buffett?


The Keystone pipeline was to carry 700,000 barrels of oil a day. A barrel of oil is 42 gallons. The average rail tank car carries about 30,000 gallons. 700,000 X 42 = 29,400,000 gallons of oil now dvide that by 30,000 and you get 980 oil tank cars a day. Sounds like Berkshire Hathaway Inc is going to be in for a massive profit from the cancelation of the XL Pipeline. Did I mention even the spoksman for the Sierra Club admits that transporting oil by rail or truck is much more dangerous than by pipeline.

So let's recap, Environmentalists choose the far more dangerous way of transporting oil over the safer pipeline way and the by product of that is Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc should benefit to the tune of 980 oil tank cars a day at the expense of the environment when the inevitable accidents happen. It all fits in with the agenda nicely. "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe." Obama's now hand picked Energy Secretary Steven Chu back in 2008. Looks like they found that way there Steven.
 
I dunno, did anyone mention this?



Then I read this....



What environmental groups? Even the spoksman for the Sierra Club admits that transporting oil by rail or truck is much more dangerous than by pipeline. Was it caving to environmental groups or his big business buddy Warren Buffett?


The Keystone pipeline was to carry 700,000 barrels of oil a day. A barrel of oil is 42 gallons. The average rail tank car carries about 30,000 gallons. 700,000 X 42 = 29,400,000 gallons of oil now dvide that by 30,000 and you get 980 oil tank cars a day. Sounds like Berkshire Hathaway Inc is going to be in for a massive profit from the cancelation of the XL Pipeline. Did I mention even the spoksman for the Sierra Club admits that transporting oil by rail or truck is much more dangerous than by pipeline.

So let's recap, Environmentalists choose the far more dangerous way of transporting oil over the safer pipeline way and the by product of that is Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc should benefit to the tune of 980 oil tank cars a day at the expense of the environment when the inevitable accidents happen. It all fits in with the agenda nicely. "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe." Obama's now hand picked Energy Secretary Steven Chu back in 2008. Looks like they found that way there Steven.

They aren't going to use railroads to ship bitumen from Canada as if they have 1,000 tanker cars laid off and looking for a job. Shipping by rail is expensive and that's why the oil companies build pipelines. The Keystone pipeline is built and has a maximum capacity of 590,000 barrels per day. The Keystone XL project has two projects. One is to connect the Keystone pipeline in Oklahoma to the Gulf refineries in Texas and Louisiana. This is going to happen, because there's a oil glut in Oklahoma. The other project is to connect the Gulf refineries to the bitumen. Instead of following the original path of the Keystone pipeline, through North Dakota, they want an direct path.
 
They aren't going to use railroads to ship bitumen from Canada as if they have 1,000 tanker cars laid off and looking for a job. Shipping by rail is expensive and that's why the oil companies build pipelines. The Keystone pipeline is built and has a maximum capacity of 590,000 barrels per day. The Keystone XL project has two projects. One is to connect the Keystone pipeline in Oklahoma to the Gulf refineries in Texas and Louisiana. This is going to happen, because there's a oil glut in Oklahoma. The other project is to connect the Gulf refineries to the bitumen. Instead of following the original path of the Keystone pipeline, through North Dakota, they want an direct path.

The direct path conveniently protects Warren Buffets business, thanks Gary!
 
The direct path conveniently protects Warren Buffets business, thanks Gary!

It won't be hauled in railroad cars, but if it were its not dangerous.. Its thicker than peanut butter can be cut into chunks like soft coal.

In order to transport it by pipeline it has to be diluted with imported crude of less viscosity and piped under pressure.
 
The direct path conveniently protects Warren Buffets business, thanks Gary!

Why don't you stop making up crap about trains going to the tar sands of Alberta? Part of the Keystone XL is to connect Cushing, OK with the Gulf refineries. There isn't an issue with that part of the project.

No one has a thousand unused tank cars to transport bitumen.
 
It won't be hauled in railroad cars, but if it were its not dangerous.. Its thicker than peanut butter can be cut into chunks like soft coal.

In order to transport it by pipeline it has to be diluted with imported crude of less viscosity and piped under pressure.

Amusingly, a spokesman for the Sierra Club admitted “there is no question that [transporting] oil by rail or truck is much more dangerous than a pipeline,” but that didn’t stop the zero-growth eco-fanatics from calling in their chips with President Downgrade to kill that pipeline.

Warren Buffet Cleans Up After Keystone XL - HUMAN EVENTS

Please show usa the link that proves this:

It won't be hauled in railroad cars, but if it were its not dangerous.. Its thicker than peanut butter can be cut into chunks like soft coal.

I'll wait.......
 
Why don't you stop making up crap about trains going to the tar sands of Alberta? Part of the Keystone XL is to connect Cushing, OK with the Gulf refineries. There isn't an issue with that part of the project.

No one has a thousand unused tank cars to transport bitumen.


Why don't you back up your assertions with some links to bonified news sources.
 
Dilbit is diluted bitumen. Per the Alberta Oil Sands Bitumen Valuation Methodology, "Dilbit Blends" means "Blends made from heavy crudes and/or bitumens and a diluent usually condensate, for the purpose of meeting pipeline viscosity and density specifications, where the density of the diluent included in the blend is less than 800 kg/m3."[1] If the diluent density is greater than or equal to 800 kg/m3, the diluent is typically synthetic crude and accordingly the blend is called synbit.

However, bitumen in its undiluted state is too viscous and dense to be transported by pipeline. To create a fluid capable of transportation by pipeline, bitumen must be mixed with a fluid that has much lower viscosity and will keep bitumen from precipitating out of the mixture. By 1985 and demonstrating the effectiveness of dilbit, Alberta Energy Company was operating dual pipelines to transport diluent from Edmonton to Cold Lake and dilbit from Cold Lake to Edmonton.[2]

[edit] How is bitumen diluted?

The most common diluent used to dilute bitumen is natural gas condensate (NGC), especially the naptha component. Due to insufficient quantity of natural gas condensate, bitumen shippers also use refined naptha and synthetic crude oil (SCO) as diluent. Although SCO requires a higher volume percentage to achieve the same viscosity, at least one study found that SCO provides better blend stability than NGC.[3] Shippers dilute bitumen before shipment in order to meet viscosity and density requirements found in common carrier pipeline tariff rules. By selecting different diluent types and blend ratios, bitumen shippers attempt to lower component costs, increase blend value, and maintain pipeline transportability. The blend ratio may consist of 25 to 55% diluent by volume, depending on characteristics of the bitumen and diluent, pipeline specifications, operating conditions, and refinery requirements.[2]

[edit] What happens to the dilbit?

Diluent can be removed from dilbit by distillation and reused as diluent. Alternatively, the entire dilbit can be refined. As dilbit contains hydrocarbons at extreme ends of the viscosity range, dilbit can be more difficult to process than typical crude oil. As such, dilbit is normally only a small portion of a refinery's total feedstock

Dilbit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
So what? What is the problem?
 
Back
Top Bottom