Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 56

Thread: Obama Losing Canada's Oil to China

  1. #1
    Staff Emeritus Julie's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Aug 03
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    10,744

    Obama Losing Canada's Oil to China

    The Obama administration is foot-dragging on approving a pipeline to deliver abundant Canadian oil to the United States at the same time the Chinese are investing in a pipeline that could send that oil to China.

    The House Energy and Commerce Committee last week passed a bill requiring President Barack Obama to speed up a decision on approving the pipeline. The bill was introduced by Nebraska Republican Rep. Lee Terry, who maintains that the Obama administration has been too slow in making a final decision, the Montreal Gazette reports.

    The Canadian province of Alberta has the world’s third-largest oil reserves after Saudi Arabia and Venezuela, and more than Russia or Iran. Daily production from oil sands is expected to rise from 1.5 million barrels today to 3.7 million in 2025.

    Delivering the oil will mean building two pipelines, one south to the refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast and the other west toward the Pacific, where it can be exported to China.

    If the United States doesn’t approve its pipeline promptly due to environmental concerns, “Canada might increasingly look to China, thinking America doesn’t want a big stake in what environmentalists call ‘dirty oil,’ which they say increases greenhouse gas emissions,” according to a report from The Associated Press.

    Sinopec, a Chinese-controlled company, has invested $5.5 billion in the planned pipeline to the Pacific coast.

    Sinopec has also paid $4.6 billion for a stake in Syncrude, Canada’s largest oil-sands project, and PetroChina, Asia’s largest oil and gas company, bought a $1.7 billion stake in Athabasca Oil Sands Corp.

    According to Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach, American government officials have expressed concerns about the Pacific pipeline delivering oil to China that might have otherwise gone to the United States.

    Rep. Fred Upton, a Michigan Republican who is chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, told Newsmax in an interview last week that the pipeline project could create 100,000 jobs and said: “Why is it that we’re not working with Canada, which will be producing more than 3 or 4 million barrels a day from oil sand, and we’ve stalled on the application to build a pipeline?

    “If we continue to say we may not be interested, Canada is going to turn around and build that pipeline not to the United States but instead to Vancouver, and they’re going to be selling it off to China.”

    Environmentalist groups have urged Obama to reject the pipeline project. They assert that extracting oil from oil sands requires huge amounts of energy and water, increases emissions and threatens rivers and forests.

    But Michael A. Levi, senior fellow for energy and the environment at the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, maintains that environmentalists are exaggerating the dangers of oil sand extraction.

    “A lot of people have been convinced that this is the cutting edge of the climate change fight,” he said. “In the end this is the equivalent to half a percent of U.S. Emissions.”

    And a report commissioned by the Obama administration suggests that the pipeline to Texas, along with a reduction in overall U.S. oil demand, “could essentially eliminate Middle East crude imports long term.”

    The State Department, which must approve the pipeline, has promised a decision by the end of the year, although Republicans wants it sooner.

    And Upton told Newsmax that the bill his committee passed last week “is expected on the House floor as early as next month.”

    David Goldwyn, a former State Department energy official who left this year to work as a consultant, said he believes the pipeline will ultimately be approved, according to the AP.

    “I think it would be a huge waste of a great opportunity to provide supply security,” he said. “We don’t often get the choice of where we can get our oil from. In this case we get to choose Canada. That’s an opportunity we shouldn’t miss.”

    And Russell Girling, CEO of TransCanada, the company that would build the pipeline, says opponents of the project are in fact set on targeting Canadian oil sands.

    “The real issue here is those opposed to the Canadian oil sands believe that by delaying or denying this permit somehow they will slow down the development of Canadian oil sands,” he told the Business News Network.

    “That’s an unrealistic expectation — the Canadian oil sands will get developed, irrespective of this pipeline.”
    Obama Losing Canada's Oil to China

  2. #2
    Senior Contributor bonehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 05
    Posts
    5,656
    Pipe line to Texas gulf coast? Good lord. Is there not anything closer? The Dakotas/Wyoming would make much more sense even if a couple of new refineries, God forbid, had to be built. Building the vast majority of our refineries along the gulf coast is stupid and now we have yet another good reason to build a few elsewhere. Letting China get a single drop of Canadian oil would be one of the biggest blunders we could make.

  3. #3
    Patron Nightowl's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Mar 11
    Location
    Hilversum, the Netherlands
    Posts
    155
    If you wanna make the US less dpeendant on middle-eastern oil than the pipeline would be a very good idea.

    The reason that the pipeline heads for texas is because asides from refineries, there's also a lot of other infrastructure and planning that goes into a new location for massive oil processing. The logistical networks and related industries are already in place in Texas.
    "Football is war."

    -Rinus Michels

  4. #4
    Senior Contributor bonehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 05
    Posts
    5,656
    North Dakota is currently experiencing what will be a long term boom as the extraction of the Bakken shale has begun in ernest. The infrastructure and related industries are being built and increased as we speak. Surrounding states will soon fall into line and since it is 1000 miles closer to the Canadian oil than Texas it makes more sense to pipe the Canadian oil there for refining. There are no hurricanes in North Dakota either so a devastating hurricane wont be so detrimental to the supply. Spreading out the refineries across the nation makes the supply vastly safer in case of any threat, natural or man made, to refineries in any one locality. North Dakota, Spurred by Energy and Ag Boom, Has 3.2 Percent Unemployment - Yahoo! Finance

  5. #5
    Patron Nightowl's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Mar 11
    Location
    Hilversum, the Netherlands
    Posts
    155
    I see.

    Well, given that situation, I would opt for Dakota as well.

    But maybe still building a pipeline to connect the Dakota and Texas oil industries would be beneficial?
    "Football is war."

    -Rinus Michels

  6. #6
    S2
    S2 is online now

    Military Professional
    Military Professional S2's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 06
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    10,297
    You can bet Texans are looking at job creation along with currently excess refining capacity. Why send those jobs to perfectly efficient Dakotan Swedes and Norwegians when the gulf coast and all its issues can be served?
    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

  7. #7
    Senior Contributor bonehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 05
    Posts
    5,656
    Quote Originally Posted by S2 View Post
    You can bet Texans are looking at job creation along with currently excess refining capacity. Why send those jobs to perfectly efficient Dakotan Swedes and Norwegians when the gulf coast and all its issues can be served?
    Dakotan Swedes? What tribe is that? Besides, once we cede Texas, California Arizona and New Mexico to Mexico, we are going to need that refining capacity.
    Seriously though, the Dakotas have the space and are much more centralized geographically for distribution. They could also use the people, er, the hard working kind that are looking for a job.

  8. #8
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    11,574
    You can argue about the length of the pipeline if there is some oil left by the time feds agree to build it.
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  9. #9
    DOR
    DOR is online now
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    1,175
    Quote Originally Posted by Julie View Post
    Wow.

    I had no idea Canada's oil was Obama's to lose!

    And here I thought Canada was an independent country, capable of making its own decisions.

    Silly me.

  10. #10
    Staff Emeritus Julie's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Aug 03
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    10,744
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Wow.

    I had no idea Canada's oil was Obama's to lose!

    And here I thought Canada was an independent country, capable of making its own decisions.

    Silly me.
    I feel it is in our best interest to be purchasing as much oil from our neighbor than the Middle East.

  11. #11
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Chogy's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Apr 09
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,752
    Obama Losing Canada's Oil to China
    I read that as "Obama is mismanaging our foreign crude oil purchases, and losing Canada as a seller to the Chinese."

    Nowhere in there do I see an insinuation that we own Canadian oil.
    Last edited by Chogy; 08 Jul 11, at 13:47. Reason: spelling

  12. #12
    Staff Emeritus Julie's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Aug 03
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    10,744
    Yall do know that Canada is the #1 supplier of oil to the US? We need to keep it that way. If Canada pipelines a vast amount of it's oil to China, we will have to look to the Middle East as our #1 supplier. Do we want to do that?

  13. #13
    S2
    S2 is online now

    Military Professional
    Military Professional S2's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 06
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    10,297

    DOR Reply

    "Wow.

    I had no idea Canada's oil was Obama's to lose!

    And here I thought Canada was an independent country, capable of making its own decisions.

    Silly me."


    Silly isn't the correct word. You're flaming. Deliberate distortion and obfuscation are frowned upon. Clean up your act.
    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

  14. #14
    DOR
    DOR is online now
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    1,175
    Sorry.

    Apparently sarcasm isn't as easily identified as I thought.

  15. #15
    S2
    S2 is online now

    Military Professional
    Military Professional S2's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 06
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    10,297

    DOR Reply

    "...Apparently sarcasm isn't as easily identified as I thought."

    THAT's an excuse? Trust that it was easily-identified. You're a smart guy. You absolutely knew the context of your comment. It was a provocation without a shred of meaningful content and intended to flame.

    Tighten the screws and start delivering on that superb education you once received.

    This topic holds a hefty range of interesting angles. None were broached by you.
    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Famed Obama 'Hope' poster artist losing hope
    By gunnut in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30 Sep 10,, 20:39
  2. Obama love-in,in Canada
    By Exarecr in forum International Politics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 20 Feb 09,, 17:25
  3. Obama makes Canada his first international visit as President.
    By Canmoore in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 19 Jan 09,, 09:48
  4. Sudan's crimes, China, and losing the moral high ground
    By Ray in forum International Politics
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03 Sep 08,, 09:12
  5. Russia + China invasion of Canada
    By Canmoore in forum Ground Warfare
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 16 Aug 06,, 22:27

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •