Skip to comments.Latin oil supplies for U.S. start to dry up
Posted on 01/03/2012 3:32:38 PM PST by mandaladon
The political and environmental debates swirling around the proposed $7 billion Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to Texas miss a crucial point, energy analysts say: The Canadian oil is needed to replace fast-dwindling production from two other major suppliers of oil Mexico and Venezuela.
The United States remains the largest consumer of oil in the world, requiring more than 8 million barrels a day of fuel imports to feed its appetite, with nearly half of that coming from oil-rich neighbors in Latin America as recently as 2005.
But oil production south of the border has fallen off dramatically, and Canadian crude in recent years quietly overtook imports from Mexico, Venezuela and even Saudi Arabia to become the most important outside source of oil for the U.S.
The trend toward replacing unstable sources of oil in Latin America and the Middle East with reliable and friendly sources in Canada was heartily welcomed in political circles until the pipeline controversy broke out last year. After trying to delay a decision until after the presidential election, the White House agreed in a compromise with congressional Republicans to determine within the next two months whether to proceed with the pipeline.
Because nearly all of Canadas production will come from the Alberta tar sands served by the Keystone pipeline, energy analysts say, the pipeline extension will be needed to ensure that promising trend continues and that the U.S. does not go back to relying inordinately on unstable and hostile suppliers. As traditional supplies of heavy crude from countries such as Mexico and Venezuela decline, Canadian oil sands become more important, said Lucian Pugliaresi, an analyst with the Energy Policy Research Foundation Inc. Canada ships about 2.5 million barrels a day of crude to the U.S., more than twice as much as Mexico and Venezuela combined.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
But wait...we just gave how much to Brazil??
The US has been increasing Gulf production greatly in recent years. There is no reason to believe Mexico’s end of the Gulf is any less rich, but they aren’t investing in current fields or doing enough exploration for new ones. And they won’t let international oil companies partner with them to do that work.
Don’t think Brazil has produced a teacup full yet, regardless of the vast size of their offshore field.
Don’t think Brazil has produced a teacup full yet, regardless of the vast size of their offshore field.
We build the pipeline and “F”ing Soros looses billions! That’s the real problem and what Soros says is what Obama does!
Reason No. 1,517 why Obama has to be defeated this year.
You’re wise beyond your years
I only wish. Soros will be shorting Petrobras if it looks like a Republican will win. BTW, I have yet heard a Republican candidate say he would denationalize the Venezuelan oil industry (along with every other American business that got ripped off thru Hugo's nationalization movement). If one would, I would seriously consider voting for him.
Some of the bigger LatAm oil producers have been taken over by leftists in recent years, and they’d all be happy to see their citizens starve to death rather than sell their oil (or gas) to the eeevil US.
Latin America’s big problem is the left. Bush blew it when he didn’t let the generals fly Chavez off to exile in Cuba and the leftist corruptocracy has been growing by leaps and bounds ever since then.
“...I have yet heard a Republican candidate say
he would denationalize the Venezuelan oil industry...”
I’m curious as to how you think that could be done.
And the seriously expect us to believe that there just isnt enough oil anymore ? That it;s that simply ? Bullying by Greenpeace and Environmentalist gangs stopping us from drilling in the best parts of Latin America have nothing to do with it ?
I wholeheartedly agree. One of his worst mistakes.
I still remember those days thinking Venezuela might be rid of Chavez in the nick of time and the sinking feeling I got when I learned the Bush administration was behind nixing the plot.
Next, Canadian Liberation Front starts sabotaging the pipeline. Getcher own Texas tea, yank, eh.
I’m a Spanish translator and I was working on a job that night, so I kept checking the LatAm press and anything that came across the wires here. Bush came out right away, after it was announced that Chavez was at the airport and about to be either shot or flown away, and congratulated the Venezuelan people.
By morning, he had completely reversed his stand, because the New York Times and evidently the majority of the Latin American State Department reps had come out and attacked him. Bush, as was his wont, backed down immediately and the Chavez was reinstated.
While Bush later replaced the Latin American chief as soon as he could, it was much too late. In his defense, I can only say that because of the shenanigans with the election, he was late in getting appointments out and changing people, and some of his worst problems came from the Clinton hold-overs (held over because Bush couldn’t make appointments because he was being dragged through the courts).
Bush faced uniquely different challenges throughout his mandate. For better or for worse, his policy was to defer to the “middle manager” on the ground, and in this case, it was not only worse but a disaster that has led to over a decade of problems and the vastly expanded influence of the left in Latin America.
It seems Americans have lost all will to defend their property; at home and abroad. This weakness has been slowly creeping for the last hundred years. Most Americans are unwilling or lack the guts to defend their own home and property. This can be seen in every liberal (major) city in America. If Americans are unwilling to defend their homes and neighborhoods, then why would they care about American interests abroad? In my book there are two reasons to fight; self-defense and property. Usually the two go hand-in-hand. Please don't think I am some war monger, I am not. But I do believe in fighting for what is right in the most brutal, quickest and cheapest manner possible without American casualties. I also do not give a crap about our enemies' well being, military or otherwise if it meets our objectives and spares American lives.
BTW, I live in a neighborhood where people would defend their property. There are more guns than people. We have a small police force. We have some of the lowest taxes in PA, relatively low unemployment, and about zero crime. In other words, we are conservative ... which works.
I'm sorry I couldn't post this gif without the ad to buy the book being included, as I understand that ad's are frowned upon here at FR. For the record, I have no financial interest in this book, or Mr. Levant.
I do however, personally endorse the book. It's a pleasurable read that explains what Canada's Oil Sands are, and why both Canada and America should be thankful for them, while showing the lies told by the left, for what they are.
The question is valid.
Where do you want to get your oil?
From Saudi Arabia?
Or from Canada?
I have thought about it and come to the conclusion that you are clinically insane.
Iran Placing Medium-Range Missiles in Venezuela; Can Reach the U.S.
‘Die Welt’: Iran building rocket bases in Venezuela
Good news: Iran now offers a missile umbrella to fellow Muslim nations; UPDATE
“Tell this to the liberal nuts who oppose the pipeline.”
Why bother? They will be over-joyed that fewer evil fossil fuels will invade their utopian Gaia earth. They will giggle all the way to lighting their candles for light and burning their furniture and rags for heat, and then whine and cry once more once the wax and rags are gone.
At my age, I will just delight watching the inner-city socialists wonder why they can’t get their checks, and why social services have been cut off. I’m not a cruel man, but the idea of the “gimmes” not “getting” is something I hope I see before my end time. Unfortunately, it will include those who don’t deserve it, but hey, many of them voted for it...so...too bad.
Thank you very much. I think you proved my point. Most Americans are not willing to defend their property. If you do not think that when a socialist nation takes over American businesses, with millions of American shareholders is not worth taking a stance, then we certainly have a difference in opinion. I see no difference between that and the welfare folks across the river from me in Harrisburg that want to "socialize" America than those in Venezuela.
They are thugs. They take other people's property ... Legally in many cases, forcibly in others. They did not earn, they do not work, they are parasites on society. They are ALL DEMOCRATS, might as well be socialist. Most importantly, they do not own. That is because they rely on others for their meager existence.
I have no problem whatsoever in offing some of the socialists from, say Occupy Harrisburg, coming into my neighborhood that want to take or destroy my property. Heaven forbid they step one foot on my property ... we have the castle doctrine in PA. My neighbors feel the same way, and we help each other out. Is that harsh? Yes. But it is just. Our nation was formed on such justice.
So what is so insane about about defending your property? It can be real estate, it can be stocks, it can be my laptop that I carry to work in the midst of "heavy handed robberies" according to the Capitol Police. Call me insane, but I carry, and if some thug is going to steal my laptop for my work (when he does not work, takes handouts from the tax dollars that I pay, and wants more through the hand of socialism) then he is dead.
So what is the difference between the thug in Harrisburg and the thug in Venezuela? None. It is just scale.
They both deserve the the outcome, but only one deserves the rights given under our constitution. However, those that have the rights still have to deal with me and my neighbors. That is why I have no crime in my neighborhood. That is the way America worked for the majority of its history, and still to today. Yes, that is insane.
Thank you. I think you get it.
If 0bama rejects that new pipeline, it would be treason, IMO.
Why would I want to go to war over businesses that take their business to other nations? They want to play in other countries, then they take the risks. I’m not bailing their stupidity, financially or militarily.
ObaMao is patronizing a small (nearly 100% white) cult of the left, in the end the pipeline will be built. I mean do any of you think that the left is a monolith of “enviros?” Please, half his voting coalition can’t feed themselves you think they care about the Sand Hills of NE? The other half drive luxury SUVs. But in the meantime this is a great campaign issue to beat him over his pimple sized head.
Thanks for the info. The Americans who played a role in keeping Chavez in power owe a huge apology to the Venezuelan people, and, for that matter, people in many other countries he has made miserable.
I do not see it as bailing out their stupidity. Yes, they take risks, and stockholders take risks, but what do you do when the rules of the game change? E.g., doing business in Venezuela pre-Hugo, then for a number of years, under Hugo, and later ... overnight your business is nationalized. What message does that send to other countries/dictators? I guess American businesses can only do business in America. American technologies/know-how can not be exported. I guess middle east oil would only have been developed by the Brits and Dutch.
As for war, I believe in carrying a big stick, seldom using it, but when it is used, it is fast and brutal. I also believe in war paying for itself. Spoils to the victor. The Iraq war should have lasted 3-4 months and we should be sucking their (our) oil dry, while maintaining a strategic position in the middle east. There would be no nation building and Iran would be scared crap-less.
This is peace through strength. It saves American lives and wealth. Unfortunately, in our PC world, we are not even able to identity our enemies and wage war when necessary that limits American casualties and dissuades our other adversaries from working against our just interests.
I don’t think we gave anything. What was given was loan guarantees I think.
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.