03-16-2022, 03:33 PM
Quote: @Mike Olson said:
that pipeline was also set to haul oil from the bakken (which is in the US) which is not now happening, instead that oil that is going to market is being hauled by rail cars, owned by the people that funded the protests over the pipeline. its not about protecting aquafirs, its about who gets to profit and who doesnt.@JimmyinSD said:
Which pipelin? Because if you are talking Keystone that Had NOTHING to do with gasoline.@StickyBun said:
so killing oil pipelines and closing areas to oil exploration/drilling had nothing to do with the increases? in a speculation driven market, doing things that are negative to the industry wont affect the price?@JustinTime18™ said:
Any sitting President has zero to do with the cost of gas.Barrel of oil
Week ago:
$128
Now: $99
Gallon of gas
Week ago: $4.17
Now: $4.32
Oil company profits are at 7-year highs, they get $180 billion a year in government subsidies and they're issuing $88 billion in buybacks/dividends this year.
Do the math.
First that was canadian tar sands sludge that couldn’t be used for gasoline. Potentially ot could be used for diesel but it was only for export. Not for U.S. consumption. Additionally that coal sludge IS in fact being transported still. Lastly it was to cross an aquifer.
So to wrap it up. It was canadian sludge (not sweet crude) that was for export after being refined in TX. Doesn’t seem like a good value to chance ruining an aquifer for something that would have very little U.S. value.