Oil producers buy and sell oil at global market prices. What is this about discounted Canadian oil?
However, if the transportation costs are lower from Canada than from the Middle East, say, then it would be cheaper to buy from Canada assuming they charge everyone the same, and don’t actually charge us more than overseas shippers would, since they know that we can afford it since our transportation costs are lower 
It would cost more to process it, so they might be giving some sort of discount to take that into account. Also, as Ludovic says, (and discounting the capital costs of building the pipeline) the costs to transport the oil via pipeline would be substantially less than the costs of moving the oil via ship. That might be where the concept of a ‘discount’ is coming from, though I don’t know for sure.
-XT
Then explain to me why gasoline isn’t markedly cheaper in US states like California and Texas where the gasoline is actually refined?
Ever heard of those things called ‘taxes’? They have been in the news quite a bit lately, from what I understand…
(There is, of course, more to it than that…but that’s a good place to start)
-XT
Will not these “taxes” as you say, still be there however Canadian oil gets here?
Sure…as will all that ‘supply and demand’ and ‘logistics’ stuff. What’s your point, exactly? If it’s cheaper (in theory) to purchase the crude below market value because transport costs are cheaper, then all things considered it will be cheaper. Right? Or do you suppose that taxes will go up in California and Texas if we get some sort of discount on 700,000 barrels a day, or whatever they are projecting this theoretical pipeline to bring down? Or are you trying to make some other obscure point here? Feel free to elucidate one whatever you are getting at, since I’m not getting it.
(FWIW, my own thoughts are that whatever savings, if any, we get because of the pipeline would be eaten up in the additional processing costs to refine the bitumen over refining, say, light sweet crude, so it will most likely be a wash. It WILL be a more secure source for us though)
-XT
So they promise to sell it to us cheaper than say, oh, China? Gee, that’s great! We should thank Canada, lets lower their rent!
Iran will be giving China it’s discounts, no doubt, so it’s really a wash. I say we invade Canada and take all their caribou and wemens and such. What sort of evil capitalist lowers the rent when there is a good chance for a hostile take over??
-XT
Sure. You have two people Goofus and Gallant who both live in remote northern cabins.
Gallant heats his cabin with a heat pump, supplemented by a wood burning stove, where he gathers the fuel from the trees on his property.
Goofus heats his cabin with an oil burning system, getting his small oil tank filled weekly from a reliable local provider.
An epic storm hits which knocks out the roads from here to Timbuktu. Which of our characters is going to be freezing his ass off at the end of the week? That’s the guy who doesn’t have energy security.
Heck, guy upthread bragging about talking the First Nations into it. Shit, we took the greater part of North America for just a few blankets! And we gave 'em away!
If you don’t know, you don’t have to get huffy and pretend you do know.
Is a Canadian pipeline from Canada to the gulf really going to result in cheaper fuel? For whom? Not me.
US energy security? How? We already trade oil with Canada.
I also just read that the US was a net fuel exporter in 2011.
Yeah but in all those cases, the people getting hurt are politicans, not the national credit rating.
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
If you don’t know, you don’t have to get huffy and pretend you do know.
[/QUOTE]
You asked why fuel costs more in California and I explained why. And explained how it was irrelevant. I don’t know if the pipeline will end up costing less per barrel than whatever the price per barrel will be whenever this theoretical pipeline becomes a real pipeline because, well, it’s all still theoretical. If you want to think that’s me being huffy and not knowing, well, that’s fine by me. 
And you know this…how, exactly? I mean, there are so many variables here that it’s a pretty silly assertion either way. Even if you aren’t in the US it might impact the price of fuel where ever you are, either positively or negatively.
I hope you aren’t serious here. You can’t grasp how our supply of oil might be even fractionally more secure if we have a pipeline sending it to us (from freaking Canada), as opposed to large freighter ships bring it in from all over the world?
Yes? And? What do you suppose this point proves…or whatever you were trying to do with this drive by link? You do understand the difference between refined fuel and crude oil, yes?
-XT
It might impact my price of fuel. That’s not a very compelling reason for me to support such a contentious issue.
Fractionally more secure? Gosh, I don’t care. We already have plenty of pipeline running from Canada to the US. You know that, right? Pipelines between the US and Canada isn’t a new innovation or something.
It wasn’t offered to prove anything in particular. It’s hard to convince me of the urgency and benefits of this XL project when we’ve already got all the Canadian oil we can use, refine, etc.
That’s all very well, but you evade the question, sir! Do you, in fact, understand the difference between crude oil and refined fuel? Well? We’re waiting! C’mon!
Crude oil fucks you over at the pump. The refined stuff buys you dinner first. Or at least a snickers bar from the mini-mart inside the station!
What, is Wikipedia still blacked out?
Wikipedia on Keystone Pipeline:
Not much time for Nebraska to do its study, no? Recommended background reading; the Wiki article and Audubon Magazine July-August 2011. If you slide past the cuddly parts, the Audubon article contains a lot of relevant information. The pipeline is controversial because the risks are not well controlled or accepted. For example: Comparative gasoline price increases in the midwest. Pumping of a high-temperature, high pressure abrasive, acidic slurry (DilBit) that US Department of Commerce regulations do not distinguish from ordinary crude oil. Understandably poor reliability of existing DilBit pipelines. Not a slam dunk.
[QUOTE=elucidator]
That’s all very well, but you evade the question, sir! Do you, in fact, understand the difference between crude oil and refined fuel? Well? We’re waiting! C’mon!
[/QUOTE]
I’ll take it as a definite maybe…
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
It might impact my price of fuel. That’s not a very compelling reason for me to support such a contentious issue.
[/QUOTE]
shrug I’m not trying to advocate supporting or not supporting this issue. It has very little to do with what I have said in this thread, and since you have been quoting me I’m puzzled.
We don’t have a pipeline running to this oil field…you know THAT, right? Again, I’m puzzled as to what, if anything, is your point in all of this. Do you HAVE a point that has anything even vaguely to do with anything I’ve written in this thread, or are you just using what I’m writing to run your own tape recorder of views on this subject?
So, it was just a drive by factoid with nothing to do with anything? Gotcha.
-XT