Posted on 12/29/2012 8:51:23 AM PST by george76
Energy companies behind the oil boom on the Northern Plains are increasingly turning to an industrial-age workhorse - the locomotive - to move their crude to refineries across the U.S., as plans for new pipelines stall and existing lines can't keep up with demand.
...
The environmental fears carry an ironic twist: Oil trains are gaining popularity in part because of a shortage of pipeline capacity - a problem that has been worsened by environmental opposition to such projects as TransCanada's stalled Keystone XL pipeline. That project would carry Bakken and Canadian crude to the Gulf of Mexico. Wayde Schafer, a North Dakota spokesman for the Sierra Club, described rail as "the greater of two evils" because trains pass through cities, over waterways and through wetlands that pipelines can be built to avoid.
(Excerpt) Read more at abc-7.com ...
Boy, I have not seen a single word of this in the Buffalo News!
Would it be a conspiracy theory to think Warren Buffet’s ownership in the Buffalo News had any bearing on this not being covered?
I’ve been working my way through John DeCamp’s “The Franklin Coverup”.
I can only stomach reading a few pages at a time. The conduct described therein is absolutely OUTRAGEOUS.
Of course, the other little cultural tidbit that comes to mind is the praise given to Mussolini: "He got the trains running on time."
We're living with fascism, and God is giving us all kinds of clues as to what is happening, and the sheeple just smile and nod and think it's all under control.
And, of course, getting everything under control is precisely what's going on.
So far, the trains are ahead in developing new capacity, and are more versatile--at least for the time being. The rail loading facilities were built because the pipelines were not. When light sweet crude is selling for a $30 discount because there is no way to move it (as it was), someone will find a way, not only to move the material, but to profit from it. They did.
The other simple advantage is that the EPA hasn't been able to ban trains yet.
Good start. Now ship the product there without also shipping the train and you will begin to approach the efficiencies of pipelines.
I know, a pipeline would be ideal, but a train is the next best thing until a pipeline can be built, plus we already ship most of the supplies for building those pipelines, and oil fields, and fracking sand, and all sorts of other stuff, and have track into those regions already. Every bit helps.
The big BP fuel terminal near me is supplied by pipeline with no active rail within 15 miles. That terminal in turn, fills dozens of trucks every day so they can go fill tanks at gas stations for miles around.
Rail is great for long distance single source and single destination transportation but continuously flowing fluids are not one of those things.
It costs about $5/bll to ship by pipeline vs $10-$15/bll by rail car. (Railcar cost = up to 3 x pipeline cost) Oil sources, where infrastructure is insufficient, might use rail car, ...but generally the best buy is to ship to a terminal nearby, then continue the shipment by pipeline.
Because our primitive tribal chieftain Obamugabe won’t allow a pipeline we are forced to revert to rail instead of the more efficient, lower cost oil pipeline. It is absurd to send oil by rail when it can be done by a pipeline
The whole Keystome Pipeline thing was to benefit one administration mouthpiece and it isn’t Susan Rice.On perdogg's prediction thread hereLook where the oil comes from....Alberta Canada. Which states border Alberta/Saskatchewan? Idaho/Montana?North Dakota. And how do they get that oil to those refineries now....by rail. And who has the track through that part of the country all the way south to Texas where those refineries are ? Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad.
BNSF a wholy owned subsidiary of....Berkshire Hathaway. And who is Berkshire Hathaway....that wonderful humanitarian “the a$$hole from Omaha” Warren Buffet. Doesn’t Warrne Buffet have a special class of preferred GE stock just for him? Why yes, he does. And what is one of GE’s products? Diesel-electric locomotives. Makes Commodore Vanderbuilt look positively generous by comparison.
Warren Buffet should be public enemy #1.
25 posted on December 28, 2012 7:23:15 PM PST by Ouderkirk (Obama has turned America into an aristocracy of the unaccomplished.)
Got distracted and left your names off of the “To:” block for post #30.
Got distracted and left your names off of the “To:” block for post #30.
You say "we’re the second choice for moving crude".
I admire your honesty.
Full Disclosure: I work for Buffet’s Railroad.
Here is the non-logic of thinking Buffet would be mad if they built the pipeline(beyond the idea that people really think Obama cares what anyone thinks, including Buffet)...
If it is profitable to transport oil with trains now, and it is, it will still be profitable when a pipeline is built. On top of that as some have stated here, who is going to move the supplies to build the pipeline? That is right, rail roads.
Warren is going to make big bucks whether there is a pipeline or not.
The Keystone XL would have added about 100,000 Bbl/day of capacity, but BO stopped that, and the railroads have stepped up to handle that (and make a profit, too).
With what was a $30/bbl discount (meaning oil that should have brought $90 was only selling at $60), there was room for both the railroad to profit and the oil companies to make out better.
It is a question of infrastructure keeping up with growth in production, and North Dakota passed Louisiana, Oklahoma, Alaska, and California to move into the no. 2 spot as an oil producing state in the time frame all this developed.
When the pipeline capacity is built enough to bring the $30 differential in price down to $6~7 differential, it will no longer be profitable to pay $15 dollars to move it by rail. It will still be profitable to pay $5 to move it by pipeline.
The only reason the price differential exists, is a bottleneck in pipeline capacity. When it is built out, just like it has in every other place in the world, it will drop the differential.
I think the issue is unions. The railroads are run by the unions, and the pipelines probably are not.
You can’t shorten the work day of a pipeline like you can an engineer with union rules.
I would also suggest you can’t pipeline everything.
Crude isn’t just for gasoline. Plastics, other chemicals are refined. You wont be piping plastic anywhere anytime soon.
So you build a pipeline, with the railroads help and you pipe the crude to where? It isn’t like there is 1 refinery that does all the refining. You could bring it to a central point and you would still need the railroad to haul it to the end user(where are the refined products going?).
Does anyone think Buffet will be losing money(not, not making more money, but losing money) in any scenario?
Look I am for the pipeline, but I am just trying to point out the fact that Obama isn’t listening to Buffet tell him to not approve a pipeline when Buffet will make money either way. And Obama’s ego will not allow him to listen to anyone anyway.
There is enough money to go around to everyone involved in the pipeline and the railroads along with all the ancillary enterprises that support both.
Good points. If there’s lots of oil there will be piped and railed volumes. Let the market work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.