Re: The Dakota Access Pipeline Protest
- Thread starter Marshal Jim Duncan
- Start date
Isn't it also true this pipeline practically sits on top of an already existing pipeline?
Yes it does. This protest is fueled by anti-oil environmental extremists using the native american tribe as a guise for their actions.
Yep. I have an uncle that works for Energy Transfer Partners. He's said all along that this protest is an attempt by radical anti-oil groups to cost them out of building it. He says the same thing will happen if the Keystone Pipeline gets approved under Trump. When legislative and regulatory attempts fail, they attack with frivolous lawsuits and protests to delay and disrupt knowing that costs tons of time and money.
That in turn ends up being paid for by the middle class that depends upon the energy to keep this country moving ahead.
In the end, the working class always ends up footing the bill.
At what price will they need 1.3 Million barrels of pipeline and refining capacity?
And it will take a long time to get it all out at 250 b/d/well in the first month and 50 b/d/well the first year.
The easier it is to get the raw product to the refineries the lower the cost point needed to justify production which in turn means lower cost for the end users.
I remember a few years ago when a poster named hollywood pooh-poohed the idea that any appreciable amount of oil would ever be extracted from the Bakken.
I'm not certain what the price needs to be. It can be about $10 cheaper/bbl than currently if the oil doesn't have to be shipped via rail car.
I'm not certain what the price needs to be. It can be about $10 cheaper/bbl than currently if the oil doesn't have to be shipped via rail car.
I bet they get to 2 billion barrels produced, but I bet they never exceed 1.5mbpd.
Probably closer to $4/bbl since the pipeline won't be free.
That's odd in light of discounts averaging from $11-18 (occasionally significant higher) on Bakken crude relative to WTI before the bust. Bakken crude is considered to be of the hghest quality, basically equivalent to WTI.
Gulf coast refineries are mostly set up for lower quality heavy crude. There was a glut of sweet light crude due to all the shale plays.
Yeah, you have a point there, particularly Citgo. I still think the savings is (or would generally be) more than $3 though.
I imagine the total all in cost difference between a pipeline and railroad is quite a bit more than $3, but the pipeline has pricing power and gets to keep most of that difference as a profit.
Probably not. But thanks for trying. Your last post hit the nail on the head though. Have you ever looked into the safety of super bulk pipeline transport vs rail and truck?Those protesters could be saving ETP from throwing away good money after bad.
I don't know WhoTF you're responding to
, but pipelines are the new "straw man" to deflect attention from the fact that the US/Canada have more available/producible oil and OPEC/etc. can just suck it. We no longer need the freakin' imports; and -drum roll for a repeat - OPEC/etc. can just suck it.
Wasn't the general strategy started under Bush that we would continue to buy from OPEC in order to conserve our own reserves for the future?
Last edited:
