Gonna Get Grubered Again?

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by pettyfog, Nov 18, 2014.

  1. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Keystone XL pipeline is coming up for a vote in the senate. Mainly because La Sen Mary Landrieu would rather be Senator than a lobbyist, for now, and she's 15 points down. she's always been sorta squishy on it but right now she is 100% for it and always has been, of course.

    So who benefits from the pipeline? {Besides all of us}
    If you listen to Harry Reid, it's the Kochs!!!!! And Low Information People {Gruber's kinda guys!} will believe it. Hell, just look at this:
    WaPo: The biggest foreign lease holder in Canada’s oil sands isn’t Exxon Mobil or Chevron. It’s the Koch brothers.
    Well, that settles it, right?!!! And YET!!!! When you read down into the bowels of the article...
    "Last October, IFG said that Koch owned two million acres in the oil sands; now it says the true figure – based on the Alberta provincial government’s mineral lease records that it links to -- is smaller but still an impressive, industry-leading 1.1 million acres."
    "The link between Koch and Keystone XL is, however, indirect at best. Koch’s oil production in northern Alberta is “negligible,” according to industry sources and quarterly publications of the provincial government. Moreover, Koch has not reserved any space in the Keystone XL pipeline, a process that usually takes place before a pipeline is built. The pipeline also does not run anywhere near Koch’s refining facilities. And TransCanada, owner of the Keystone routes, says Koch is not expected to be one of the pipeline’s customers."
    Suzanne Bayley, a biological sciences professor at the University of Alberta who studies the oil sands, said she was surprised to learn of the Kochs’ holdings, calling them "significant” given the fact that the total leased area in the region amounted to 35 million acres.
    So... 1/17 th about 7.5% of total leases, even when they are not producing, makes a 'Windfall' for the Kochs and thus must not be allowed? Hmmm... 'Biological Sciences' professor!

    Okay.. so who LOSES if KXL is built? How about Burlington Northern RR, Owned by Warren Buffet? It wont help Berkshire Hathaway but wont hurt it a whole lot. According to this, anyway:

    Buffet doesnt want pipeline

    Well, I dont trust the numbers stated there, either. KXL would have to hurt rail revenues
    But speaking of Koch Brothers.... guess who comes to mind EVERY TIME Dirty Harry cries 'Koch'? Billionaire Dirty Coal Baron Tom Steyer, the DNC's primary single Sugar Daddy.

    Here's what he says about it:

    How do you help poor people? YEAH.. you raise the price of energy so that more basic lifestyle {you know, keeping warm, or cool, or traveling} needs to be subsidized by the government.
    Yep... he's gonna make a buck if we get Grubered again. Hell, look what Gore's done in 10 years.

    And of course Nancy Pelosi* says KXL wont make a damn bit of difference because 'all that oil would be exported anyway.'

    Yeah, that makes sense... for stupid people. Here's a hint. The cost of oil is a global instrument: cost of production plus cost of transport plus refining cost plus margin = energy price. That is why OPEC price affects the cost of Brent Crude.

    * who recently said she didnt recall dealing with Jon Gruber, and on record as saying 'we have to pass it to find out what's in it' AND was just re-elected Dem house leader by 'acclamation'.
    How very '3rd worldly'!
    BTW: While on this subject, I highly recommend streaming 'Boss' from Netflix. House of Cards and Alpha House from Netflix and Amazon are great too.
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2014
  2. HatterDon

    HatterDon Moderator

    Mar 18, 2006
    Peoples Republic of South Texas
    We don't benefit as a nation from the Keystone Pipeline.
    1. After the pipeline is built, there's an estimated 50 permanent jobs for US workers.
    2. None of the oil will be used in the USA. It's too low-grade to be used here. It'll all be shipped overseas.
    3. Regardless of where the pipeline goes, it will have ZERO effect on our demand for foreign oil or prices of domestic oil.
    The only people who benefit from the pipeline -- aside from the Canadians -- are American investors. The American public gets nothing. It's a gigantic scam, but according to the popular press it's only alternative is America continuing to slide into Socialist Islam.

    The reality is that over the last 6 years there's never been more new fossil fuel development in the US for a good 50 years. There's more domestic oil being drilled for, found, refined, and used than there was before Barack Obama took office.

    But who needs reality?
  3. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    {edit for kindler gentler}
    I addressed that. Why dont you show us the tracking price of Brent Crude v OPEC over the last six months! WHY has the floor dropped out? Because demand has dropped? NO! It's to discourage the pipeline and fracking industry. And didnt start with the North Sea producers. During the same time, US has become the largest producer again. So OPEC is playing market games.

    The price of oil anywhere ultimately affects the price of energy everywhere. And who says none will be used here.
    And it's sorta moot but related: Technology never stands still.

    More Better Smarter Cleaner is always in demand
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2014
  4. HatterDon

    HatterDon Moderator

    Mar 18, 2006
    Peoples Republic of South Texas
    I did see an article in one of the "serious" journals suggesting that the world price of oil results from a back room deal between the USA and Saudi Arabia. Lower oil prices keep Iranian and Russian profits down and make them -- it is supposedly hoped -- more cautious about international adventures and nuclear enrichment.

    It's those "serious" journals that don't carry news about Hawaiian shirts and don't use the word "feminazi."
  5. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Well, the 'SERIOUS' journal I read suggest that the Saudi price cut is aimed at the US market, in order to depress futures and hedges on field exploration . Since afaik we dont buy much from Russia or Iran, that leaves the global spot market price somewhat higher.
    However. this article's statement that low oil price means higher gas prices abroad due to strength of dollar is obviously wrong. See UK fuel price June v October

    IEA shows World Demand IS soft at the moment with year on year demand growth slightly into the negative. but you dont invest in wells or pipeline based on spot prices. If the price stays low for another year or so it may begin to have an effect
Similar Threads: Gonna Grubered
Forum Title Date
Miscellaneous Jobs is gonna hate this Mar 22, 2008
Miscellaneous Gonna be another one of those.. squared! Nov 7, 2006

Share This Page