| | |  | |
06-23-2008, 12:04 PM
|
#106 | | New Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 17
| ConocoPhillips
Don't miss in big red letters Now Accepting CCC
7000 jobs projected in area.
Lots of undeveloped oil in Colorado and Wyoming. |
| |
06-23-2008, 12:24 PM
|
#107 | | Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 101
| Why not drill? Cuba is letting China drill 45 miles off the Fla. coast. Why not let the US have that oil, and all the good paying jobs that go with it. |
| |
06-23-2008, 01:25 PM
|
#108 | | Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: West Coast
Posts: 264
| What we are doing right now is exploiting the natural resources like oil in third world countries. These countries do not have the laws that we have to protect the environment nor the refinery and exploration workers.
We are perfectly happy to protect our environment in our own country as well as our own workers while we fill our cars with gasoline products that come from exploitation of resources elsewhere in the world.
How hypocritical is that? |
| |
06-23-2008, 01:33 PM
|
#109 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,816
| Quote: |
Not that this was the purpose of my post, but I believe Alaska pays its residents a regular sum due to oil revenues. Texas may have something similar.
| Not in this lifetime. |
| |
06-23-2008, 01:40 PM
|
#110 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Seattle, Lynchburg, VA
Posts: 8,209
| Without the oil exports those countries would be far worse off than they are. Our "exploitation" is their development of jobs and a future. |
| |
06-23-2008, 01:58 PM
|
#111 | | Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: West Coast
Posts: 264
| Oil exports don't seem to have solved many issues for the economy of Mexico or the nations of Africa. The average citizen receives little benefit from the gas we put in our tanks. |
| |
06-23-2008, 03:10 PM
|
#112 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,292
| We need to drill. According to this morning's news, the increase in Saudi production is going to get sucked up by China. |
| |
06-23-2008, 03:30 PM
|
#113 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,324
| SA is known for heavy sour so this may not help the market out that much. |
| |
06-23-2008, 03:33 PM
|
#114 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Seattle, Lynchburg, VA
Posts: 8,209
| Imagine Mexico without the oil money. The government uses the oil money to run the country such as it is. Some countries in Africa are using the money wisely, others are not. That's Africa.
"Mexico's federal budget is closely linked to world oil prices. Pemex revenues contribute 40 percent to the budget, which is set based on what officials expect worldwide oil prices to be: about $50 a barrel for Mexican crude this year. Instead, the price of Mexican crude has reached $113 a barrel, leading some analysts to predict Pemex could take in at least $20 billion more than projected by budget-setters."
Now do they use it all wisely--probably not but they would be far worse off without it. |
| |
06-23-2008, 05:43 PM
|
#115 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Texas
Posts: 1,929
| My understanding is a significant majority of US refineries have the ability to process medium to heavy sours, they just don't have the excess capacity to devote to it. They are too busy with those special summer and winter blends for the West Coast.
Btw....when the Saudis say they have excess production capacity and crude stock available to 'anyone who wants to buy it', they are talking about their heavy sour stock, not the WTI light sweet stuff. They very well know most global refiners have not invested in refinery conversion to handle medium/heavy sours, so they are being just a wee bit disingenuous imho. |
| |
06-23-2008, 05:50 PM
|
#116 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,324
| Valero bought out some other refinery with a lot of capability to handle sour several years ago and they made out very well due to the lower cost of sour over sweet. But they certainly are hurting now because of the overall price of crude.
Definitely agree on the Saudis adding heavy sour capacity. It's not the stuff in high demand. |
| |
06-23-2008, 05:57 PM
|
#117 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Texas
Posts: 1,929
| Agree BC. Honestly, I'm not sure what the current spread between sour and sweet is right now. (The oilman of the family is down in Colombia at the moment...so I have no one to ask.)
Isn't Valero is one of the top three or four US companies with investment in heavy sour refining. (If I'm not mistaken?) |
| |
06-23-2008, 06:04 PM
|
#118 | | Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 205
| ConocoPhillips, Total SA, ExxonMobil, and Sinopec recently signed deals with Saudi Aramco to increase Saudi Arabia's refining capacity--mostly of heavy crude--by 80%. Unfortunately, it's expected to take 5 years for the new refineries to be operational: Saudi Arabia plans royal treatment for heavy crude - MarketWatch |
| |
06-23-2008, 08:33 PM
|
#119 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: SoCal.
Posts: 2,380
| Quote: |
Oil exports don't seem to have solved many issues for the economy of Mexico or the nations of Africa. The average citizen receives little benefit from the gas we put in our tanks.
| That's because you aren't looking at the correct figures.
Exporting 1MM-2.5MMbbl/day is virtually meaningless to the average citizen if the country has a population of 100 million. Nigeria, Mexico, etc. It's not like Indonesia ever got a large benefit from oil production.
The countries that benefit substantially are those with high oil production per capita ratios. Kuwait, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman. |
| |
06-24-2008, 06:11 PM
|
#120 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,324
| There's an interesting article at ABC News on reverse globalization. It appears that companies are looking to manufacture goods in the US again as transportation costs are making China/Mexico more expensive than building it in the US. |
| | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:40 AM. |