Quote:
Originally Posted by u crank
This has nothing to do with extending the use of oil. As I said the oil will come to the USA from the Alberta Tar Sands one way or another. There are only two ways, by rail or by pipeline. If the current section of the Keystone is at full capacity then the oil will come by rail. This is a possibility with that method.
|
OK. First of all I understand tar sands oil is a major economic factor in Canada and around 1Bn C$ of Alberta taxpayer's money already spent on KXL is a huge amount. We both know the amount of crude oil that has to be shipped to the US or other countries of importation one way or the other to make the tar sands business as profitable as offshore drilling and other methods of exploitation depends on the price in the global market. My question is this: Do we need investments in infrastructure to make crude oil more available (and alternatives less attractive), or would it be wise to limit the amount of crude oil available to the market in order to stabilize prices? Take a look at charts on the nominal price for crude oil in the seventies and early eighties when OPEC was fully functional.
And just playing devil's advocate for a minute: Could this be Biden playing the "America first" card and making Canadian oil more expensive and harder to get?