The consequences of Senile Biden's war on US Energy

[eyecu2]

The oil that in the Canadian tar sands still makes it to the USA. It currently comes by pipelines, tanker trucks and by rail. We buy more oil from Canada than any other place now.

The problem with Canadian oil is it's a heavy crude and high in sulfer. So it takes a lot of refining to get to desired products. Light crude and light sweet crude is more desirable usually for gas and fuel products.

Texas oil is ok for that And so is Middle East oil. But the OPEC guys are assholes generally and fuck the USA when they want despite our providing them with military support and weapons. They shifty fuckers for sure.

There is an opec problem where other countries put in standing contract orders and locked in prices so the folks at OPEC done want to turn on reserves unless it benefits them. With oil on the rise, they are all fat and happy.

As for Russian oil, we bought from them in the past for the same reason that we told Germany to diversify their oil needs. Monopoly on oil consumption should not happen just for the reason of these political rifts, or in any business when you generally need to diversify your suppliers. If one goes out business or goes down you need to have a backup, that's why we have purchased in the past from them. I'm not really against the keystone Pipeline generally however there are many concerns about it passing through environmentally sensitive areas, and make no mistake about it, oil is a dirty business. Additionally as I've stated in the past, the people that make the most money, are the pipeline owners. The ongoing support of that pipeline would not provide the generous amount of jobs in the neighborhood of a thousands in the future but just during its installation. There are many more projects that could produce high paying wages and likely a better source for jobs. Oils just like another political football however.

[chizzy]

Originally Posted by eyecu2

The oil that in the Canadian tar sands still makes it to the USA. It currently comes by pipelines, tanker trucks and by rail. We buy more oil from Canada than any other place now.

The problem with Canadian oil is it's a heavy crude and high in sulfer. So it takes a lot of refining to get to desired products. Light crude and light sweet crude is more desirable usually for gas and fuel products.

Texas oil is ok for that And so is Middle East oil. But the OPEC guys are assholes generally and fuck the USA when they want despite our providing them with military support and weapons. They shifty fuckers for sure.

There is an opec problem where other countries put in standing contract orders and locked in prices so the folks at OPEC done want to turn on reserves unless it benefits them. With oil on the rise, they are all fat and happy.

As for Russian oil, we bought from them in the past for the same reason that we told Germany to diversify their oil needs. Monopoly on oil consumption should not happen just for the reason of these political rifts, or in any business when you generally need to diversify your suppliers. If one goes out business or goes down you need to have a backup, that's why we have purchased in the past from them. I'm not really against the keystone Pipeline generally however there are many concerns about it passing through environmentally sensitive areas, and make no mistake about it, oil is a dirty business. Additionally as I've stated in the past, the people that make the most money, are the pipeline owners. The ongoing support of that pipeline would not provide the generous amount of jobs in the neighborhood of a thousands in the future but just during its installation. There are many more projects that could produce high paying wages and likely a better source for jobs. Oils just like another political football however.

so trucking or rails is more enviromentally safe? I think not

[HDGristle]

No. But that's a damn swanky strawman my man.

[chizzy]

Originally Posted by HDGristle

No. But that's a damn swanky strawman my man.

Not at all... eyecu2 suggested a worry about the pipeline going thru environmental sensitive areas , so I commented

Now go save that black bear gristle

[HDGristle]

But it is, because that's not even the meat of his argument

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by HDGristle

Eye, I find you to be a serious person

That's gotta be worth a free cup of coffee at Starbucks!

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by chizzy

so trucking or rails is more enviromentally safe? I think not

You are correct Chizzy - transporting oil from the Alberta tar Sands via truck or rail is less environmentally friendly and less safe than by pipeline. It is also more expensive and less efficient.

And is it shocking that pipeline owners make money running their pipeline? After all, they invested the capital to build it and they spend money annually on employees and equipment to maintain their pipelines. But wait, who makes money transporting oil by truck or rail. The fucking trucking companies and railroads. Shocking I know. That is how business works.

[chizzy]

Originally Posted by HDGristle

But it is, because that's not even the meat of his argument

no it isnt a strawman, didnt distort didnt exaggerate his point

you obviously have a broader idea of strawman. he made several points in his rant, i commented on one of them

[HDGristle]

He never made an argument that truck or rail is more or less environmentally safe. Only that Keystone goes through environmentally sensitive areas and that oil is a dirty business. That pipeline goes through areas road and rail will not and all 3 options exist with their own sets of unique environmental concerns. So you're not attacking the meat of his actual argument. You're poking at point 4, part C and trying to make it about which is safer.

That's a strawman

[chizzy]

Originally Posted by HDGristle

He never made an argument that truck or rail is more or less environmentally safe. Only that Keystone goes through environmentally sensitive areas and that oil is a dirty business. That pipeline goes through areas road and rail will not and all 3 options exist with their own sets of unique environmental concerns. So you're not attacking the meat of his actual argument. You're poking at point 4, part C and trying to make it about which is safer.

That's a strawman

Honestly gristle, you are beginning g to remind d me of someone who must be proven right on all matters or they throw a hussy. If the pipeline e isnt there, it goes by rail or truck. My point was both are more dangerous environmentally. I'm sure I could go to dozens of your defense posts for the libs and make the identical claim of strawman

I dont have time nor the patience for that so I will leave this as we agree to disagree.....

[HDGristle]

Dig in. I 100% know you'll find some. I lace them in sometimes to strawman a strawman

[chizzy]

Originally Posted by HDGristle

Dig in. I 100% know you'll find some. I lace them in sometimes to strawman a strawman

No time, no need. I post to give an opinion knowing full well it's not changing anyone's mind. I try not to post on certain members threads such as dogs because from a hobby standpoint, we share info. Doesnt mean I agree with his views but that wont change.
This forum is entertainment at best, views will never change

I prefer the thread about the bear

[berryberry]

Two months Ago



Thirteen months ago

[berryberry]

The Senile Biden administration has been conducting a shadow war on US domestic oil production since the day he took office.

Cheap oil hurts Putin
Expensive oil enabled the invasion of Ukraine

[berryberry]

Senile Biden's position is to destroy the US energy industry while enriching the foreign energy industry. It's that simple.

Asked about expanding U.S. energy production to lower gas prices, Pete Buttigieg says Senile Biden supports “efforts to increase global oil production."

“We are in the middle of a long-term transformation”

https://twitter.com/i/status/1498428154444144641