Just Saw Diesel @ $6/gallon!!! WTF!!

Keystone has no effect on this. Companies stopped drilling when demand dropped from Covid and never ramped back up because it’s easier to just continue price gouging.
It sure wouldnt hurt when finished. I think Steve Forbes pretty much laid it out.
 
Keystone was a pipeline to transport Canadian oil (tar sands) to the Gulf of Mexico. Canada's oil to sell, we still would have had to buy it from them. That pipeline was originally slated to go through British Columbia. B.C. told them to F'off after they learned keystones leaky record.
 
Keystone was a pipeline to transport Canadian oil (tar sands) to the Gulf of Mexico. Canada's oil to sell, we still would have had to buy it from them. That pipeline was originally slated to go through British Columbia. B.C. told them to F'off after they learned keystones leaky record.
TransCanada Keystone Pipeline GP Ltd,[14] abbreviated here as Keystone, operates four phases of the project. In 2013, the first two phases had the capacity to deliver up to 590,000 barrels (94,000 m3) per day of oil into the Midwest refineries.[15] Phase III has capacity to deliver up to 700,000 barrels (110,000 m3) per day to the Texas refineries.[16] By comparison, production of petroleum in the United States averaged 9.4 million barrels (1.5 million cubic meters) per day in first-half 2015, with gross exports of 500,000 barrels (79,000 m3) per day through July 2015.[17]

The proposed Phase IV, Keystone XL (sometimes abbreviated KXL, with XL standing for "export limited"[18]) Pipeline, would have connected the Phase I-pipeline terminals in Hardisty, Alberta, and Steele City, Nebraska, by a shorter route and a larger-diameter pipe.[19] It would have run through Baker, Montana, where American-produced light crude oil from the Williston Basin (Bakken formation) of Montana and North Dakota would have been added[12] to the Keystone's throughput of synthetic crude oil (syncrude) and diluted bitumen (dilbit) from the oil sands of Canada.

North American energy is a much better deal any way you look at it than importing energy from the other side of the world.
 
Last edited:
Yes. Burisma is in bed with the Russian, Ukrainian and Chinese Oligarchs to surge oil prices and line their pockets. Follow the money. This has been something they've been planning for at least ten years. It would have happened sooner if not for a little blip in 2016.
 
North American energy is a much better deal any way you look at it than importing energy from the other side of the world.
I agree, on its face. But I've wondered if there's a more long-term thinking behind this. Say the "decision makers," or people way smarter than me, realize that we're (the world) expanding our energy use so fast, and that technologies that could potentially replace fossil fuels just won't close the gap, so they want to use up foreign supplies first...?
Idk. There's probably several components of that thinking I don't understand, like if that's true, we are we exporting so much, for example? It's just something I've wondered about...
 
I agree, on its face. But I've wondered if there's a more long-term thinking behind this. Say the "decision makers," or people way smarter than me, realize that we're (the world) expanding our energy use so fast, and that technologies that could potentially replace fossil fuels just won't close the gap, so they want to use up foreign supplies first...?
Idk. There's probably several components of that thinking I don't understand, like if that's true, we are we exporting so much, for example? It's just something I've wondered about...
I've wondered the same thing....but then they repeatedly tap into the nation's strategic reserve. That leads me to believe that most actions are reactive rather than proactive and they are asleep at the helm.
 
TransCanada Keystone Pipeline GP Ltd,[14] abbreviated here as Keystone, operates four phases of the project. In 2013, the first two phases had the capacity to deliver up to 590,000 barrels (94,000 m3) per day of oil into the Midwest refineries.[15] Phase III has capacity to deliver up to 700,000 barrels (110,000 m3) per day to the Texas refineries.[16] By comparison, production of petroleum in the United States averaged 9.4 million barrels (1.5 million cubic meters) per day in first-half 2015, with gross exports of 500,000 barrels (79,000 m3) per day through July 2015.[17]

The proposed Phase IV, Keystone XL (sometimes abbreviated KXL, with XL standing for "export limited"[18]) Pipeline, would have connected the Phase I-pipeline terminals in Hardisty, Alberta, and Steele City, Nebraska, by a shorter route and a larger-diameter pipe.[19] It would have run through Baker, Montana, where American-produced light crude oil from the Williston Basin (Bakken formation) of Montana and North Dakota would have been added[12] to the Keystone's throughput of synthetic crude oil (syncrude) and diluted bitumen (dilbit) from the oil sands of Canada.

North American energy is a much better deal any way you look at it than importing energy from the other side of the world.
Yes, but once it's refined it goes on the market to the highest bidder. Petroleum corp. refineries would make money. More than likely it would end up in China.
 
Yes, but once it's refined it goes on the market to the highest bidder. Petroleum corp. refineries would make money. More than likely it would end up in China.
China only gets around 4% of their oil from the US. Most of their oil imports come from the middle east and Russia...makes sense due to the cost to transport halfway around the world. Regardless...the more petroleum that can be produced domestically or from our close allies the better it will be strategically and financially for us.
 
China only gets around 4% of their oil from the US. Most of their oil imports come from the middle east and Russia...makes sense due to the cost to transport halfway around the world. Regardless...the more petroleum that can be produced domestically or from our close allies the better it will be strategically and financially for us.
I'm getting the distinct impression these companies don't give one flying F*** about what's good for "us", but what's good for them. Which is usually fine, except when the consumer's hands are so tied as to what they can do about it.
 
I'm getting the distinct impression these companies don't give one flying F*** about what's good for "us", but what's good for them. Which is usually fine, except when the consumer's hands are so tied as to what they can do about it.
Unfortunately I accepted long ago my hands are tied and I'm just along for the ride...it just sucks how expensive this damn ride is getting. 😂
 
In the UK diesel is around £1.79 per litre. That’s £6.78 per US gallon. At today’s exchange rate that’s $8.37 US
 
While all for lower gas prices, I'm also environmentally-conscious and don't travel unless necessary, in order to reduce pollution. We could all use cleaner air and water. Not by treating the symptoms with air purifiers and water filters, but by consciously using less fuel to begin with.

Could we all do our part and benefit by cutting back on our energy use? Consider that the future technology will likely reduce our dependence on fossil fuels for vehicles and heating our homes, but at what cost of producing electricity in its place? The switch to electric-powered vehicles still requires production of electricity. Where does that energy come from?

If solar or wind-powered energy is the advent of the future, we'll need to invest heavily in these resources soon, rather than depend on nuclear or coal power.

I am reminded of the familiar Tower of Power tune, "Only So Much Oil in the Ground," which coincidentally, resides in juxtaposition to "Soul Vaccination."

Do you think the media is trying to tell us something? Are we "on track" to enjoy our energy sans oil in the future?
 
While all for lower gas prices, I'm also environmentally-conscious and don't travel unless necessary, in order to reduce pollution. We could all use cleaner air and water. Not by treating the symptoms with air purifiers and water filters, but by consciously using less fuel to begin with.

Could we all do our part and benefit by cutting back on our energy use? Consider that the future technology will likely reduce our dependence on fossil fuels for vehicles and heating our homes, but at what cost of producing electricity in its place? The switch to electric-powered vehicles still requires production of electricity. Where does that energy come from?

If solar or wind-powered energy is the advent of the future, we'll need to invest heavily in these resources soon, rather than depend on nuclear or coal power.

I am reminded of the familiar Tower of Power tune, "Only So Much Oil in the Ground," which coincidentally, resides in juxtaposition to "Soul Vaccination."

Do you think the media is trying to tell us something? Are we "on track" to enjoy our energy sans oil in the future?
Brother, somewhere along the way we've been conditioned to believe that the population and their vehicles are the problem. We're miniscule. The real, and main contributors, are ocean going vessels. Cruise ships, tankers, and the ilk make up the vast vast majority of pollution by combustible fuel.
 
Brother, somewhere along the way we've been conditioned to believe that the population and their vehicles are the problem. We're miniscule. The real, and main contributors, are ocean going vessels. Cruise ships, tankers, and the ilk make up the vast vast majority of pollution by combustible fuel.
Interesting notion.
Can you provide links to sources please?
 
Totally uniformed folks-Keystone pipeline has NOTHING to do with oil production. Jeeezzzz-do your own research instead of listening to others.....................
 
Back
Top Bottom