Have Kenny or Scheer signed any contracts to fill the TMX pipeline with crappy crude?
No!
Gee, imagine my surprise.
So the marketing plan is build the pipeline and then people will line up to buy crappy crude. The political plan is to utter treacherous whimperings of ‘independence’ and blame Trudeau when it doesn’t work.
I predict that the pipeline will be built and stay empty, except for PR purchases.
The world doesn’t need Mayan heavy crude, nor Venezuelan, Iraqi, Iranian, Libyan, or Syrian crude.
Why else did Trump is start a war with Iran? Why else were all these other wars, ‘police actions’, and ‘colour revolutions’ so tasty to Western governments?
Because US oligarchs want to pump up the price of Tex-ass crude. Otherwise the price of crude would drop to $5 a barrel, IF all the aforementioned countries were still pumping into what might be described as a free market.
I have this image of Kenny and Scheer standing on the dock, around a battered shopping cart, dirty and disheveled, holding a large cardboard sign.
Will ship crappy crude
ANYWHERE
for FUCK ALL
Canada won’t ever sell any crude to China. And to no one else who watches Harper, Scheer and Kenney kiss Trump’s USA butt. The whole world knows Canada isn’t a reliable supplier. The whole world knows Canada’s oil industry is being killed the same way coal and nukes are being driven out of the market, by low-cost wind and solar powers’ rapidly dropping prices.
Something like 80% of TMX capacity is under long term contract and shipper requests for the existing pipeline have run somewhere between 115% and 140% of capacity over the last few years.
Bottom’s dropping out of the market. Ninety-five bucks a barrel to break even after the pipeline is paid for. What’s tar sands crude running for right now, forty-five? Are they gonna’ pump oil at a loss?
Breakeven for the majors is about $40. That probably doesn’t factor things like upgrader cost, but the economics are a lot different from five years ago.
Anyone who thinks social cost-benefit analysis will govern investment in extracting and distributing oil has not been paying attention. The whole fracking boom, even on its own financial terms, has been a big money loser, not even considering the externalities. Still, it has gone merrily ahead, perhaps because it keeps a huge sunk-cost infrastructure built around fossil fuels going and the use of that infrastructure, long paid for, is profitable (technically, earns an economic rent).
.
To a large extent, the upward redistribution of income in the U.S. is structured around disinvestment, running the whole country in to the ground, as it were a “tear-down” in real-estate jargon.
And now for something completely different. Anyone else notice in the last few days that even major Establishment types like Charlie Pierce and Andrew Sullivan have charged Pelosi with dereliction of her office for failing to start an impeachment inquiry into Trump? Pelosi made an infamous remark back in 2006 I think it was with regard to critics then that “We [i.e. Pelosi] are leaders. They are advocates.” I actually heard a WaPo reporter repeat this almost verbatim in her defense. I always thought somebody should tell Pelosi that’s it’s not leadership if you’re “leading” from the back of the crowd. Anyway it seems something that Establishment bigwigs are tumbling to the fact that Pelosi’s brand of “do nothing, stand for nothing, fight for nothing” isn’t selling with many Americans and it can’t be defended on its own merits. If the rather obvious argument can be made that Trump has failed miserably to discharge his duties, then how can anyone give Pelosi a pass when she fails to discharge hers which include holding Trump to account?
What a maroon! This is not only an important issue, taken in isolation, but scientific corruption IN GENERAL is a larger issue that, it seems, will certainly not get addressed, either. (Not that this seemed to be on Trump’s radar, at all. However, it’s a natural extension of the climate science boogie woogie, and somebody like Dr. Happer has to know about it, and be concerned about it.) It’s also hardly a stretch to assume that taking a hard look at predictions of near term global cooling, and invoking the precautionary principle to store up food to avoid mass starvation, won’t happen, either. (On this score, solar physicist Valentina Zharkova has a new paper to be published, in Nature, on her work regarding solar cycles. She is predicting food shortages in 2028 to 2032. See https://watchers.news/2019/07/01/valentina-zharkova-on-the-upcoming-grand-solar-minimum/ )
What’s particularly galling about this is that exposing the fraud and distortions in the climate science field would be good politics for Trump, who could lose his next election just due to the a climate change vote, which is a morally-driven vote. Which means that, no matter how good the economy is, these particular voters won’t care.
Trump is so politically incompetent, that even his narcissism can’t save him!
The globalists and plutocrats, who will eventually want to saddle all of us with regressive carbon taxes, must be very pleased.
ricardo2000
Have Kenny or Scheer signed any contracts to fill the TMX pipeline with crappy crude?
No!
Gee, imagine my surprise.
So the marketing plan is build the pipeline and then people will line up to buy crappy crude. The political plan is to utter treacherous whimperings of ‘independence’ and blame Trudeau when it doesn’t work.
I predict that the pipeline will be built and stay empty, except for PR purchases.
The world doesn’t need Mayan heavy crude, nor Venezuelan, Iraqi, Iranian, Libyan, or Syrian crude.
Why else did Trump is start a war with Iran? Why else were all these other wars, ‘police actions’, and ‘colour revolutions’ so tasty to Western governments?
Because US oligarchs want to pump up the price of Tex-ass crude. Otherwise the price of crude would drop to $5 a barrel, IF all the aforementioned countries were still pumping into what might be described as a free market.
I have this image of Kenny and Scheer standing on the dock, around a battered shopping cart, dirty and disheveled, holding a large cardboard sign.
Will ship crappy crude
ANYWHERE
for FUCK ALL
Canada won’t ever sell any crude to China. And to no one else who watches Harper, Scheer and Kenney kiss Trump’s USA butt. The whole world knows Canada isn’t a reliable supplier. The whole world knows Canada’s oil industry is being killed the same way coal and nukes are being driven out of the market, by low-cost wind and solar powers’ rapidly dropping prices.
Andy Sprott
Something like 80% of TMX capacity is under long term contract and shipper requests for the existing pipeline have run somewhere between 115% and 140% of capacity over the last few years.
Ten Bears
Bottom’s dropping out of the market. Ninety-five bucks a barrel to break even after the pipeline is paid for. What’s tar sands crude running for right now, forty-five? Are they gonna’ pump oil at a loss?
Andy Sprott
Breakeven for the majors is about $40. That probably doesn’t factor things like upgrader cost, but the economics are a lot different from five years ago.
bruce wilder
Anyone who thinks social cost-benefit analysis will govern investment in extracting and distributing oil has not been paying attention. The whole fracking boom, even on its own financial terms, has been a big money loser, not even considering the externalities. Still, it has gone merrily ahead, perhaps because it keeps a huge sunk-cost infrastructure built around fossil fuels going and the use of that infrastructure, long paid for, is profitable (technically, earns an economic rent).
.
To a large extent, the upward redistribution of income in the U.S. is structured around disinvestment, running the whole country in to the ground, as it were a “tear-down” in real-estate jargon.
Hugh
And now for something completely different. Anyone else notice in the last few days that even major Establishment types like Charlie Pierce and Andrew Sullivan have charged Pelosi with dereliction of her office for failing to start an impeachment inquiry into Trump? Pelosi made an infamous remark back in 2006 I think it was with regard to critics then that “We [i.e. Pelosi] are leaders. They are advocates.” I actually heard a WaPo reporter repeat this almost verbatim in her defense. I always thought somebody should tell Pelosi that’s it’s not leadership if you’re “leading” from the back of the crowd. Anyway it seems something that Establishment bigwigs are tumbling to the fact that Pelosi’s brand of “do nothing, stand for nothing, fight for nothing” isn’t selling with many Americans and it can’t be defended on its own merits. If the rather obvious argument can be made that Trump has failed miserably to discharge his duties, then how can anyone give Pelosi a pass when she fails to discharge hers which include holding Trump to account?
metamars
Trump caves on a Presidential Commission on climate change.
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald_GoodAndBad/comments/ccjekq/bad_trump_trump_caves_on_climate_change/
What a maroon! This is not only an important issue, taken in isolation, but scientific corruption IN GENERAL is a larger issue that, it seems, will certainly not get addressed, either. (Not that this seemed to be on Trump’s radar, at all. However, it’s a natural extension of the climate science boogie woogie, and somebody like Dr. Happer has to know about it, and be concerned about it.) It’s also hardly a stretch to assume that taking a hard look at predictions of near term global cooling, and invoking the precautionary principle to store up food to avoid mass starvation, won’t happen, either. (On this score, solar physicist Valentina Zharkova has a new paper to be published, in Nature, on her work regarding solar cycles. She is predicting food shortages in 2028 to 2032. See https://watchers.news/2019/07/01/valentina-zharkova-on-the-upcoming-grand-solar-minimum/ )
What’s particularly galling about this is that exposing the fraud and distortions in the climate science field would be good politics for Trump, who could lose his next election just due to the a climate change vote, which is a morally-driven vote. Which means that, no matter how good the economy is, these particular voters won’t care.
Trump is so politically incompetent, that even his narcissism can’t save him!
The globalists and plutocrats, who will eventually want to saddle all of us with regressive carbon taxes, must be very pleased.
Hugh
Meanwhile back in the real world . . .