Posted on 01/06/2012 8:12:42 PM PST by Olog-hai
CALGARY—Athabasca Oil Sands Corp. said it was selling a 40% stake in one of its oil-sands prospects to PetroChina Co., a move that for the first time will give full ownership of such a project to a Chinese company.
Athabasca is selling its remaining interest in the MacKay River project in northern Alberta to PetroChina for C$680 million, or US$666 million. In 2010, Athabasca sold 60% stakes in MacKay and a separate development, Dover, to PetroChina for C$1.9 billion. …
Canada holds the world's third-largest reserves of oil. Most of those are oil-sands—essentially a mix of bitumen and quartz sand—located in the western Canadian province of Alberta. Oil-sands output has grown quickly, and Alberta and Canadian officials have sought out new markets.
That has particularly been the case after the U.S. State Department late last year delayed a decision on a pipeline proposed to carry oil from Alberta to the U.S. Gulf Coast.
The government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said it would actively market its oil to Asian buyers, including China. The Canadian government has said it backs the construction of another pipeline running from Alberta to the Pacific, where oil could be loaded onto tankers bound for Asia. …
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The canadians need to realize if they are ever war with china these “areas” will be shut down. Just a heads up, from your friends to the south, or at least we though you were. We still control the artic and NORAD(IE Air Dominance over North America). Dont side with potential enemies, yes Obama suck but give us time to get rid of him in 2012.
artic=arctic, bleh wtb edit function
And a pipeline to the Pacific, from Alberta, doesn't mean oil from there still won't be piped to the US, in the future, once environmental studies are completed. Canada simply wants to diverse its customer base.
Between the tar sands, coal, and the potential gas from fracking, North America could be a large source of energy for China. North America would simply join the long list of countries or parts of the world that supply energy to China, i.e., Africa, Australia, the Middle East, Russia, Latin America, etc. None of these parts of the world have qualms about supplying energy to China. North America shouldn't either.
You are a long term chicom troll as shown in your past posts. FK the chicoms.
‘zackly.
Take the money. If we come to blows, that’s another issue.
Huh? While I have some difficulty imagining a war between Canada and China, I kinda, sorta think if such a thing were to happen, it would be China, not Canada, that would lose from the loss of Canadian oil production.
There is no "spat" between the Canadian and U.S. governments. The environmentalists don't like fossil fuels and are opposing fossil fuel development at every turn. Obama has caved to them. So he flipped Canada the bird and made it clear that, so long as he is in the White House, the U.S. government would block utilization of this resource.
This is not a spat. It is a straightforward policy call by a President whose conception of the national interest does not include affordable energy.
I guess the massive military buildup over in China is nothing to worry about either . . . ? Alas, this generation is naïve.
We don’t need oil. We got Solyndra.
Not true. The folks who OWN the environmental move-mint love "fossil fuels" (but for coal, ain't no such thing; petrochemicals are geological in origin), but they LOVE higher prices for existing sources even more, especially without having to risk investment in new sources.
not to mention now Obama will share our Nuclear secrets with Russia...I still say he is a Russian mole.....
not to mention now Obama will share our Nuclear secrets with Russia...I still say he is a Russian mole.....
Wow!
There are a lot of really ignorant, vicious replies to this thread you started. Great job troll! Allow me to add mine.
The U.S. has been selling or outright giving dual purpose technology and your grandchildren’s liberty to the Chicoms for decades, but Harper and the damn Canadians selling a lease to mine a tiny chunk of the oilsands is the problem.
America gives more money and sells more debt to the Chicoms than practically all other nations combined, but the Canadians (not numerous successive U.S. administrations) are traitors to your cause!?
Despite your blatant attempt to spin it, this is not a “spat between” Obama and the Harper Government (as an aside, this single statement clarifies for me the fact that you are against Harper, an Obama supporter and afraid this will affect Obama’s re-election prospects).
Your crypto-communist leftists, greenies, marxists, warmists and abortion-loving one worlders don’t want Canadian oil and do want to destroy America from within, but it’s the damn Canadian’s fault!?
Your Obama regime was offered an oil pipeline by your biggest ally, supporter and trading partner. They said “F.U. Canada, we don’t want your dirty oil or the jobs that come with it”, but Harper betrayed your trust?
You make me sick, you propogandist troll. I hope your beloved Muslim and commie-loving Obama administration gets CRUSHED in November, though he is sure to get re-elected with wide-spread cheating and helpful worshippers such as yourself.
Since you are likely being paid to disseminate your filth here, I hope you choke on it.
Kindest regards, FUBO.
Way to miss the point, genius, never mind put words in people’s mouths that were never said. Congrats on being an enabler for the left.
I'm not a troll. I simply have a different perspective about China and like to share it.
FK the chicoms.
I'm convinced China will become a democracy within the next decade or two. But even then, there will be those that will resent her growing presence in the world. That's something the Chinese will need to learn to get accustomed to, just as Americans have had to get accustomed to resentment about her global presence. Its just that its ironic that some of the resentment towards China's rise comes from the US who should understand how it feels.
China's military expenditures, as a percentage of GDP, is no higher than many other countries with their peace time budgets.
In fact Russia, has about one million active duty personnel vs China's 2.5 million. But China is 9 times larger. So, the proportion of China is actually much smaller. And I could make this comparison to most of the countries including the US. Even the Pentagon's estimate of China's military budget, which is much higher than China's claim, would still put China's military budget at a lower percentage of her GDP than the US military budget as a percentage of GDP. And even with the coming budget cuts in the coming decade in the US military, the US may still have a higher budget in terms of the percentage of GDP than China. And higher, of course, overall, in absolute dollars.
The contrast with the Chinese approach couldn't be greater - they encourage foreign investment in domestic oil exploration only to welsh on the profit-sharing agreement (typically cutting the foreign company out) once oil is found. The result is zero foreign investment and increasing Chinese dependence on imported oil. Encouraging Chinese dependence on imported oil is a good thing. That way, we can stop them in their tracks (after B-2's take care of the Chinese strategic oil reserve) when they finally pull a WW2 Japanese-style invasion of their neighbors.
But that's no different, than Europe, Japan, and the US in terms of dependence on foreign oil. Many of the world's developed countries are dependent upon foreign oil.
That way, we can stop them in their tracks (after B-2's take care of the Chinese strategic oil reserve) when they finally pull a WW2 Japanese-style invasion of their neighbors.
Actually, a Japanese style invasion of their neighbors won't happen. You can bank on that. China's growing economic size, her growing dependence on world wide trade, the internationalization of her currency, will put China in a position where she will slowly become a sort of a hub of trade activity. China can do commercially, what the Japanese tried to do militarily, and that is create a co-spherical prosperity world. Which is already happening as the economic gravity is shifting Eastward with China at the center.
And the US, ironically, set in motion, what the Japanese failed to do. And, of course, China is merely taking the helm from the US, via commercial ties.
By 2050, those B-2's you are talking about will have been outdated. And China's military expenditures of about 2% of GDP will have surpassed the US military expenditures of 4% of GDP in absolutely terms.
A shot will not have been fired :) By 2050, many of today's ultra conservative Americans who are extremely hawkish of China, would have either grown old or passed away. And a new generation of Americans will know only of a China that is influential in global affairs and fully accept it without viewing China in a hawkish way. Much like 20th century British have long accepted an America as the global power without ill will towards America, unlike 19th century British towards the US where there were some animosity.
The U.S. is amongst the countries flexing their muscles in the Arctic. Canada realizes that its only hope is that the disputes will be settled by rule of international law, rather than diplomacy by other means.
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.