Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    4:29 AM

GasBuddy News Article

43
votes
Keystone isn't the only pipeline

CNNMoney -- NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- At least a dozen new oil pipeline projects are slated to move forward in the United States over the next few years, bringing controversial sources of new crude to market despite the holdup of a portion of the Keystone pipeline expansion.

Some of the projects reverse the flow of existing pipelines.

As early as next week the Seaway pipeline, which currently carries oil imported into the Texas Gulf Coast up to storage facilities in Cushing, Okla., will reverse its flow.

That will help alleviate the glut of crude in Cushing -- a glut that's been caused by a boom in oil production from shale oil formations in the United States and oil sands production from Canada's Alberta province.

Other pipelines will add additional capacity, such as the southern portion of the Keys


Read the Full Article

Submitted May 16, 2012 By: TruthMatters
Category: Daily News Article Discussions > Topics Add to favorite topics  
Author Topic: Keystone isn't the only pipeline Back to Topics
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
LetemEatCake
Champion Author Oklahoma City

Posts:5,705
Points:1,360,915
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: May 18, 2012 5:51:23 AM


Oh My My! Life would be easier without me...No?
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,357
Points:1,353,245
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: May 17, 2012 11:47:52 PM

:=) letemeatcake clearly isn't interested in facts! And certainly must keep reading both opinion and fact, there's always the ignore button you know. ;=)

Profile Pic
LetemEatCake
Champion Author Oklahoma City

Posts:5,705
Points:1,360,915
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: May 17, 2012 10:56:16 PM


You must think I care about your opinion!
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,357
Points:1,353,245
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: May 17, 2012 10:03:00 PM

LOL, the fact that both Canadian tar sands oils and Venezuelan tar sands oils are both bitumen is not opinion.

I am just humbly trying to help you be credible. :=)
Profile Pic
LetemEatCake
Champion Author Oklahoma City

Posts:5,705
Points:1,360,915
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: May 17, 2012 9:28:39 PM


You must think I care about your opinion!
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,357
Points:1,353,245
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: May 17, 2012 9:58:49 AM

From the EIA, "Venezuela contains billions of barrels in extra-heavy crude oil and BITUMEN deposits, most of which are situated in the Orinoco Belt in central Venezuela."

EIA on Venezualan Bitumous oil

You are missing the point entirely, Venezualan and Canadian tar sands oils are BOTH butiminous. That is contrary to your statement <"The Orinoco Belt in Venezuela is sometimes described as oil sands, but these deposits are non-bituminous">

If you are going to continue to plagiarize at least get the information right.
Profile Pic
LetemEatCake
Champion Author Oklahoma City

Posts:5,705
Points:1,360,915
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: May 17, 2012 12:54:30 AM



More Horse Feathers.....

Last para. Wikipedia.

>"LOL, flawed argument. Canadian oil no different from Venezuelan oils."<

There is a difference between the two, plus Canadian Bitumen being dirtier and more expensive to process, not to mention the environmental issues.

Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,357
Points:1,353,245
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: May 17, 2012 12:24:17 AM

Oh dear, the post below, without acknowledgement of source, must have been cut and pasted in a hurry. The posters critical eye claims that Canadian tar sands and "the Orinoco Belt in Venezuela is sometimes described as oil sands, but these deposits are non-bituminous..."

Now, either letemeatcake mistakenly wrote non-bituminous or the source used was in conflict with the following source:

"Located in eastern Venezuela, north of the Orinoco River, the Orinoco oil belt vies with the Canadian tar sand for largest known accumulation of bitumen in the world. Venezuela prefers to call its tar sands "extra heavy oil", and although the distinction is somewhat academic, the extra heavy crude oil deposit of the Orinoco Belt represent nearly 90% of the known global reserves of extra heavy crude oil. Bitumen and extra-heavy oil are closely related types of petroleum, differing only in the degree by which they have been degraded from the original crude oil by bacteria and erosion."
Source

Either way the oils are pretty well indistinct from each other verifying the fact that those protesting the Keystone have no validity to their argument of that tar sands oil from Canada is any 'worse' than having Venezualan tar sands oil shipped in at greater expense.
Profile Pic
LetemEatCake
Champion Author Oklahoma City

Posts:5,705
Points:1,360,915
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 9:55:52 PM


Clarification or you don't have to believe everything you read on this thread:

The difference between Athabascan and Venezuelan oil is pretty technical, so these comments are boiled down for the average reader.

The oil in Faja del Orinoco Venezuela is considerably more mobile than the Oil in the Heavy Oil Belt (Canada is part of it), and the reservoirs are thicker with higher permeability values.

Many sources call Canadian Alberta resources…. Bitumen or Extra Heavy Crude. The Venezuelan deposits are less degraded than the Canadian deposits and are at a higher temperature (over 50 degrees Celsius versus freezing for northern Canada), making them easier to extract by conventional techniques.

In contrast, extra heavy oil or bitumen is essentially solid (think road asphalt). To end up with a marketable product you require two steps, first you need to get it out of the ground and then you need to upgrade or dilute the bitumen to end up with something resembling conventional crude that can be transported via pipeline or ship.

Tar sands near the surface in Alberta are extracted by strip mining, basically digging the sand out of the ground with huge machines, and then steam is used to separate the bitumen from the sand. Deeper deposits are recovered in situ using steam assisted methods. The recovered tar/bitumen must then be upgraded, cracking up the very large molecules and removing the sulfur/heavy metals. The resulting synthetic crude is similar to light sweet crude and can be sent to refineries.

The Orinoco Belt in Venezuela is sometimes described as oil sands, but these deposits are non-bituminous, falling instead into the category of heavy or extra-heavy oil due to their lower viscosity. Natural bitumen and extra-heavy oil differ in the degree by which they have been degraded from the original crude oil by bacteria and erosion.
Profile Pic
bar1035
Champion Author Charlotte

Posts:12,843
Points:1,901,645
Joined:Aug 2006
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 1:29:31 PM

and there are thousands that already exist
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,357
Points:1,353,245
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 12:37:25 PM

67Lane asks- "Why is heavy Canadian crude attacked and the greenies never say anything about Hugo Chavez's dirtier heavy Venezuelan crude? Is it because they are both Socialists?"
=======================
They never want to go into those troubling little facts...it destroys their credibility.
Profile Pic
67Lane
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:3,464
Points:564,460
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 12:31:14 PM

I have that heavy Canadian crude flowing under my hometown of Niles Michigan. I welcome more heavy Canadian crude oil pipelines to bring more heavy Canadian crude to the new, enlarged Whiting Indiana and Detroit oil refineries.

Why is heavy Canadian crude attacked and the greenies never say anything about Hugo Chavez's dirtier heavy Venezuelan crude? Is it because they are both Socialists?
Profile Pic
leemun
Champion Author Utah

Posts:8,213
Points:1,636,630
Joined:May 2010
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 11:30:44 AM

Finally, a writer with something sensible to say. Environmentalists constantly resort to drama, fear, and hysteria to achieve their goals. Never mind the proven degree of safety, the importance of the project to the economy, or its importance to our national security.



[Edited by: leemun at 5/16/2012 11:31:48 AM EST]
Profile Pic
BurntOrange
Champion Author Austin

Posts:11,407
Points:2,158,325
Joined:Nov 2007
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 9:43:27 AM

Keystone really woke up people to pipelines.

Pipelines are far safer than the alternatives.
Profile Pic
Norm10
Champion Author British Columbia

Posts:5,138
Points:249,585
Joined:Dec 2010
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 9:15:29 AM

It sounds like the US is still in love with its Iran oil supply!
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,357
Points:1,353,245
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 8:45:13 AM

One says "Moving oil via a pipeline is not the issue. It's moving the highly polluting and highly corrosive Canadian Tar Sand oil that is the problem."
========================
LOL, flawed argument. Canadian oil no different from Venezuelan oils.
Profile Pic
GingoutMD
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:4,862
Points:1,035,755
Joined:Jan 2010
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 8:25:30 AM

Pipelines are needed. The alternative is trucking the oil and that, of course, is out of the question.

Build them safely, monitor them closely and fine the owners prohibitively if they screw up.
Profile Pic
memo81
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:5,028
Points:1,046,600
Joined:Feb 2012
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 8:16:39 AM

ok
Profile Pic
dgerst
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:4,192
Points:1,055,010
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 8:15:23 AM

Moving oil via a pipeline is not the issue. It's moving the highly polluting and highly corrosive Canadian Tar Sand oil that is the problem.
Profile Pic
Evilmaddog
Champion Author British Columbia

Posts:5,918
Points:1,558,265
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 8:14:47 AM

ok
Profile Pic
drpepperTX
Champion Author Texas

Posts:13,357
Points:1,353,245
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 8:13:17 AM

Decent article pointing out the many benefits of pipelines and the environmental extremism of those opposed.
Profile Pic
YaBassa
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:5,041
Points:1,121,750
Joined:Nov 2011
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 8:10:07 AM

So many pipelines and they all will leak sometime.
Profile Pic
rbrk02
Champion Author Rhode Island

Posts:8,626
Points:1,420,655
Joined:Jan 2011
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 8:03:05 AM

Bottom line is that pipelines are a necessity until such a time as there are other energy sources READY to replace them.

We have nothing at this time READY to replace oil/natural gas on the scale required to support daily American needs.

Profile Pic
gs7101
Champion Author San Antonio

Posts:8,026
Points:545,620
Joined:Jun 2009
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 7:57:50 AM

More pipe dreams?
Profile Pic
MImusicman
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,486
Points:1,011,100
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 7:57:28 AM

I'll believe it when I them being built AND used!
Profile Pic
doeslayersr
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:12,282
Points:1,474,980
Joined:Dec 2010
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 7:36:00 AM

Until it is built, it is not a pipeline.
Profile Pic
johntxx
Champion Author Texas

Posts:5,625
Points:1,216,120
Joined:Aug 2011
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 7:34:54 AM

From article:
"And Obama has directed his administration to fast track the southern part of the Keystone project."

More political BS. From another CNN Money article on 3/22/12, Keystone pipeline: Separating reality from rhetoric :
"Approval of this southern part of the pipeline is not really the Obama administration's call. The northern portion of the pipeline needs administration approval because it would cross the Canadian border."

The only reason Obama supports the southern leg is he can't stop it. And since it will be built anyway, he is trying to use it to help change perceptions of his anti-"fuel of the past" history.

[Edited by: johntxx at 5/16/2012 7:35:52 AM EST]
Profile Pic
humblepie
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:57,431
Points:2,975,995
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 7:31:33 AM

but the xl gauratees our energy security,
cant put a price on that.................
Profile Pic
Joeski1
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:13,336
Points:2,346,485
Joined:Dec 2004
Message Posted: May 16, 2012 7:25:57 AM

yup... so many pipelines that they can barely keep track of 'em let alone maintain 'em...

that's why when there's a leak.. so much fuel spills... some times it's petroleum.. some times it's un-natural gas.. some times in just plain old oil...

keeps lots of folks employed cleaning up... (once they figure out the line is leaking)

[Edited by: Joeski1 at 5/16/2012 7:26:41 AM EST]
Post a reply Back to Topics