World oil price depends on cheaper and more efficient tractor-trailers for Fracking?

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

The Keystone pipeline would certainly be the most effective at moving liquids. For liquids, nothing beats a pipe.

I like it how people who claim they care about the environment are blocking the pipe line.
As if forcing oil companies to use less efficient more spill prone methods (by truck and rail) to move the oil is going to save the environment.
Just think of all the wonderful CO2 all those trucks will create.

Maybe they really don't care about the environment and think that forcing the oil companies to use more expensive transport is some how hurting them, like a poke to the eye with a stick.
If there is a huge train crash fire and oil spill the oil company only pays for it temporally. Eventually we foot the bill.
We know that all costs are passed on to the end consumer (the real trickle down economics).

Just more unintended consequences from the loony environmental nut jobs.

[wdb]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Just more unintended consequences from the loony environmental nut jobs.

Like most everybody on this forum?

[Frank Lee]

I don't think it's so much the pipe as is is the filthy shale oil. And all the deception and spin that this pipeline somehow benefits us.

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I don't think it's so much the pipe as is is the filthy shale oil. And all the deception and spin that this pipeline somehow benefits us.

Yeah pipes are far more safe and have fewer long term consequences than rail.

Especially considering in 10 years there will be no further use for the pipe

[Xist]

My Global Energy professor showed us a chart with imports and exports around the world. I pointed out that many counties both imported to and exported from the same trade partner and it seemed something like on one side of a country might export to the other, but the other side would import from them. Kind of weird, though.

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by Xist

My Global Energy professor showed us a chart with imports and exports around the world. I pointed out that many counties both imported to and exported from the same trade partner and it seemed something like on one side of a country might export to the other, but the other side would import from them. Kind of weird, though.

Our country plays a shell game of eliminating as much light sweet US crude as possible and trading it for sour overseas crude and processed crude from the lowest bidder.

US gas being considered crap by many foreign nations is earned since we take only from the lowest bidder in the most outdated foreign facilities.

Even though laws exist like the one I listed above our domestic producers have many loopholes to get crude out, hence why we really don't become energy independant even if we produced 100% of the crude we needed domestically.

The other side of this is that our local supply is rather limited; cost inevitably will go back up and supply back down. Unless of coarse we all stop driving gassers and semis

Ah well

[oil pan 4]

We have the technology to refine feed stocks besides light sweet.

[Big time]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

I like it how people who claim they care about the environment are blocking the pipe line.
As if forcing oil companies to use less efficient more spill prone methods (by truck and rail) to move the oil is going to save the environment.
Just think of all the wonderful CO2 all those trucks will create.

Maybe they really don't care about the environment and think that forcing the oil companies to use more expensive transport is some how hurting them, like a poke to the eye with a stick.
If there is a huge train crash fire and oil spill the oil company only pays for it temporally. Eventually we foot the bill.
We know that all costs are passed on to the end consumer (the real trickle down economics).

Just more unintended consequences from the loony environmental nut jobs.

Why they just don't build some U cross-section spill containers and place the pipes in them.
Something like this


These are solar collectors just meant to depict the basic U shape so for oil spill containment
The carrying pipe would need to be larger in diameter.
The U-section can have a different shape other than parabolic.
The carrying pipe can be placed lower in the U section.
Some endplates should be placed every few hundreds of yards or miles to prevent the spill from pouring itself the entire pipeline length while being large enough to allow for a large spill.

Sure it adds costs and some complexity but nullifies most arguments against spills.

Originally Posted by rmay635703

Yeah pipes are far more safe and have fewer long term consequences than rail.

Especially considering in 10 years there will be no further use for the pipe

Why only good for 10 years?
Will shale oil run out so fast?
I'm confused.

[Xist]

Originally Posted by Big time

Why only good for 10 years?
Will shale oil run out so fast?
I'm confused.

Sorry, I looked at the first several Google results and did not find anything better than statements that it is impossible to guess how much oil is actually there, let alone recoverable. From what I remember from my Global Energy class, Canada has a tiny fraction of the petroleum supply found in the Middle East, but is trying to compete, so yes, Canada will run out in very approximately ten years.

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by Xist

Sorry, I looked at the first several Google results and did not find anything better than statements that it is impossible to guess how much oil is actually there, let alone recoverable. From what I remember from my Global Energy class, Canada has a tiny fraction of the petroleum supply found in the Middle East, but is trying to compete, so yes, Canada will run out in very approximately ten years.

The trouble is not QTY, it is cost. The crude we are getting does not come cheap, current rates will kill it off unless they rebound, also we are getting this domestic crude from hydro fracking just like natural gas.

This all comes with a multitude of costs economic and environmental and the crude we have gotten so far has been much more difficult to get than expected, unless something strange happens that is unlikely to change.

Those factors mean the future of this energy boom is very questionable, 10 years might be optimistic.

Economics will decide.