If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(globeandmail.com)   Canada's oil could ease U.S. dependence on Middle East   (theglobeandmail.com) divider line 81
    More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

2287 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Oct 2001 at 12:00 AM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



81 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2001-10-31 12:03:29 AM  
I love Canada now!
 
2001-10-31 12:04:49 AM  
Um, I don't see the article now...
 
2001-10-31 12:09:22 AM  
As soon as it become more economical to get Oil fromt eh oil sands in alberta its good bye Saudis
 
2001-10-31 12:10:07 AM  
Greasy moneygrubbing Canucks...
I love ya.
 
2001-10-31 12:10:16 AM  
Where's the article? i just got a page with blank spot in the middle and a search engine thingamabob...
 
2001-10-31 12:13:10 AM  
Do a search. Some interesting articles come up on the second page.
 
2001-10-31 12:13:10 AM  
try this one

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/GIS.Servlets.HTMLTemplate?tf=tgam/searc h/tgam/SearchFullStory.html&cf=tgam/search/tgam/SearchFullStory.cfg&configFile Loc=tgam/config&encoded_keywords=oil+sands&option=&start_row=5&current_row=5&s tart_row_offset1=&num_rows=1&search_results_start=1
 
2001-10-31 12:23:32 AM  
 
2001-10-31 12:24:33 AM  
Didn't I read this on fark already? Perhaps another blog. Regardless, I'm all for it especially with the worries that the Saudis Royalty may very well lose control of their country if things in the Arab world escalate any further. We'll all be screwed when those Arabs double the price of a barrel of oil.
 
2001-10-31 12:35:29 AM  
I think it was here.
 
2001-10-31 12:36:55 AM  
I'm sorry to have to say this, but, um....DUH!! This isn't new information... The expanse of natural resources that Canada is capable of producing is mind blowing! Electricity, oil, food...you name it, we got it...in abundance!
 
2001-10-31 12:47:51 AM  
Farkin shiatty link - no article. Nice big blank white page...... but I guess we all already know that right?

anyway cheers RancidPlasma!
 
2001-10-31 01:12:10 AM  
Funny how Electric Cars kinda disappear.

There are forces acting on us that we are not aware of.
 
2001-10-31 01:17:47 AM  
Or we could just get our own oil out of Alaska ...
 
2001-10-31 01:48:52 AM  

Could also be


The link is kinda sketchy...but blame the content management system the globandmail uses. Let's try to pass a little more data in the querystring, shall we? Try this. If all else fails, do a search on "ingram" and go to the 11th search result.


Obviously this isn't new...apparently the oil has been there for...get this...MILLIONS OF YEARS. But I'd rather help the Canadians become prosperous than stay addicted to the dope those pushers sell. Forget about the price per barrel, the cost is already too high to shovel money into the Middle East. At least diversify our suppliers so we're not so vulnerable. I think I heard of a similar strategy somewhere in the business world...

 
2001-10-31 01:50:46 AM  
I could swear I saw this in late September... or maybe early October, but a different source, and I got it here from Fark...
Why is this not a ?
 
2001-10-31 03:03:40 AM  
Whoooo hoooo can't wait to start medelling (sp.) in Canadas' internal affairs. Any anti-US Minister will be shot by the CIA.

Although i thinks its best to play the middle east and canada against each other. Cant be reliant on just one. And you never trust a person that speaks french.
 
2001-10-31 03:08:18 AM  
I would be happier depending on Canada for oil. I think the Middle East would be in for a nice economic suprise if we cut off buying from them all together. Might lead to a cut in oil prices over the long term.

I'm just curious how much oil Canada can put out. Of course, our stupid government could PUT MORE EFFORT INTO PUTTING MORE EFFICIENT VEHICLES ON THE ROAD!

Just a thought....
 
2001-10-31 03:20:44 AM  
Screw you yankee hot dog eaters. We're keeping our oil. Enjoy the New Dark Age. :P
 
2001-10-31 03:45:07 AM  
Whats this?! No oil? Hmmm... i can distictly remember that some of terrorists might have come thru Canada. Therefore Canada harbours terrorists, and we can bomb them until we get the oil.

Seriously, if canada plays its cards right, it may be able to become the 51st state. Or maybe Canada can peacefully annex the US.... can't remember that site... argh.
 
DIG
2001-10-31 03:54:58 AM  
no american presence in the middle east means
we can start killing each other!
yay!

oh wait, we already do that...


Dat Isrealy Guy
 
2001-10-31 04:03:20 AM  
hehe... DIG. I was watching this show where this kashmiri guy was complaining aboot people dying in kashmir. He was saying how the US doesnt care aboot the area because there's no oil in kashmir.

I was thinking, you're pretty damn lucky there's no oil. If the US got involved, it would be an even bigger mess than it already is.
 
2001-10-31 04:19:21 AM  
Is it me or has Fark steadily declined into a right-wing US propaganda whore?
 
2001-10-31 05:07:49 AM  
Page is gone = We already changed our minds.
 
2001-10-31 05:47:18 AM  
PUT MORE EFFORT INTO PUTTING MORE EFFICIENT VEHICLES ON THE ROAD!

That tends to reduce sales for chevron et al. Then where will bush get his soft money from. Dammit man, think before you make such upsurd comments.

Goatman, dont start that. We all know its gone from a fun, quirky site to a political one.
 
2001-10-31 05:48:29 AM  
er... upsurd=absurd
 
2001-10-31 05:51:33 AM  
This link isn't pulling anything up, eh? But I do love those hosers (and Molson Export is pretty damn good). Go Edmonton Eskimos!
 
2001-10-31 05:52:34 AM  
Sad, isn't it - especially the amount of censorship that now goes on. It's just a bilboard playground for teeny US nationalists - it used to be quite fun.
 
2001-10-31 05:56:48 AM  
For everyone who cant get the link.

Canada's oil could ease U.S. dependence on Middle East

By MATHEW INGRAM

Saturday, September 29, 2001 - Print Edition, Page B7


Why does the United States have to tiptoe so carefully in the Middle East, trying to play one country off against another, careful not to upset certain countries? Why does it even have to get involved in Middle Eastern politics in the first place? One word: Oil. Without the supply of oil that countries such as Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran and others produce, the United States would be in deep trouble. And so, the U.S. government repeatedly finds itself drawn into a volatile morass of shifting allegiances.

Is there any long-term solution? Environmental activists have recommended for some time that the United States pour billions into alternative energy such as wind power, biomass and fuel cells -- but there is no way these technologies could handle a fraction of the current demand for energy from fossil fuels, let alone the growth projected for the coming decades. But where else could the United States come up with the oil to satisfy its needs?

The U.S. government itself mentioned one possible solution in Vice-President Dick Cheney's recent energy report: Alberta's oil sands, a vast ocean of tar-like goo in the northern part of the province.

By most estimates, there is more oil in the so-called "tar sands" than there is in all of Saudi Arabia, or about 300 billion barrels that is recoverable using existing technology. That's enough to supply the United States for more than 40 years -- plus there's another 1.5 trillion to two trillion barrels that would be harder to extract. That's 10 times what Saudi Arabia has.

Alberta's potential was obvious even before Sept. 11, and those attacks have now added even more fuel to the argument. What if Iraq turns out to be involved in planning the attacks? Even worse, what if Saudi-born terrorist Osama bin Laden decides to turn his wrath against the Saudi royal family, whom he despises for allowing U.S. troops to be stationed in the traditional birthplace of Islam?

Saudi Arabia has about one quarter of the world's reserves of conventional oil and last year it supplied the United States with 1.5 million barrels a day, or about 17 per cent of U.S. demand. Almost half of U.S. demand for oil is supplied by countries in the Persian Gulf.

One of the reasons why the oil sands haven't played a larger role on the public policy stage is that, until fairly recently, getting oil out of the ground in northern Alberta was time-consuming and expensive. Until the mid-1990s, producing a barrel of oil cost upward of $15 (U.S.), and that didn't leave much room for profit when the price of oil was at $20. And, it seemed especially ridiculous given that some OPEC countries can produce a barrel of oil for about $5 or less.

Then Suncor Energy,thanks to prodding by vice-president Dee Parkinson, cut a huge chunk out of its costs starting in 1995 by moving to giant shovels and trucks from the balky and expensive bucketwheels it had been using.

Suncor and Syncrude (which copied the move) have cut their costs to $9 a barrel -- and that success, combined with the runup in oil prices over the past couple of years, has spurred dozens of imitators to look at oil sands projects. Conoco, Exxon-Mobil, Shell and other companies both in the United States and elsewhere have done feasibility studies, and more than $20-billion worth of potential oil sands projects are in the planning stages.

There are also dozens of projects aimed at exploring ways of extracting some of the harder-to-reach oil. The current method is not very different from the Clark hot-water process, which was discovered in the 1920s -- and that itself was a refinement of the way early explorers boiled the gooey substance in water over the campfire to produce a tar they could patch their canoes with. Newer methods for extracting the oil involve things such as "steam-assisted gravity drainage,"' which involves injecting steam into the sand and then forcing the oil to drain out for refining.

In the 1930s, the U.S. government and several business leaders (including Henry Ford) reportedly looked into extracting oil from Alberta to help meet the growing demand in the United States. But then oil was discovered in Saudi Arabia, and the seeds of OPEC and the energy dominance of the Middle East were sown -- something the United States may want to reconsider in the light of current events. And then maybe Canada could take the place of Saudi Arabia in the American universe.
Mathew Ingram writes analysis and commentary for globeandmail.com
 
2001-10-31 06:03:21 AM  
I read earlier - can't remember where, may even have been a link from Fark - that actual average mpg figures for new US vehicles is less this year than last year. Scary.

Bring on that car in Mission Earth that ran for a squillion miles on a lump of coal.

No, I'm not a Scientologist.
 
2001-10-31 06:12:22 AM  
Flamebait... I'm sure glad you reminded me. I nearly forgot our government lives by screwing the people and environment in favor of keeping special-interest income flowing. If they cut back on fuel production they might not be able to huff it as often and come up with such briliant "war" strategies...

I officially retract my request for more efficient vehicles.
 
2001-10-31 06:22:58 AM  
Grivas
Surely that comment about Molson Ex was in jest!?
 
jph
2001-10-31 06:38:06 AM  
As soon as Quebec secedes, we'll annex the rest of Canada anyway. They're already effectively just a separate territory anyway.
 
fb-
2001-10-31 06:53:50 AM  
I'd sooner give my money to the rag-head terrorists in the middle east than depend on those shifty Canadians for oil.
 
2001-10-31 07:25:22 AM  
Boy.... I can't wait to be called a camel-jockey..... O.K., Caribou Jockey
 
2001-10-31 08:12:04 AM  
I see Canada's plan. They have been sending all this cold air down for years. Now they are going to charge us a lot of money for the oil to heat our homes. Bastards.
 
2001-10-31 08:14:33 AM  
First thing ya know ole Jed's a millionaire.
 
2001-10-31 08:18:53 AM  
Goatman,

don't biatch about the political crap - just make some clever and funny comments.
 
2001-10-31 08:35:53 AM  
Fb-:
Wash your mouth out....you hate those middle easterners...remember
 
2001-10-31 08:41:17 AM  
LMAO
 
2001-10-31 09:20:08 AM  
This gives me an idea. There would not be any trouble in the middle east if there weren't any people there. The sooner we start buying our oil from Canada the sooner we can start carpet bombing the middle east. By by people, by by problems.
 
2001-10-31 09:51:49 AM  
yeah I agree with Killemall. I love those new Ford commercials about planting forests and dancing with unicorns in the vast green wonderland or whatever. Meanwhile, back at Ford headquarters on the moon, scientists are developing ways to make SUVs even BIGGER than last year's innovation, the "Excursion," meaning they will be about the size of a houseboat and go about 0.3 mpg.
 
2001-10-31 10:07:42 AM  
Fark threads:

They're all fun and games until somebody disagrees with you.
; )
 
2001-10-31 10:09:40 AM  
You know what would really reduce our dependence on other countries? Alternitive energy sources such as Fuel Cells. Of course Big Oil isn't going to let that happen with their cronnies in office (not party specific, just people that take kick backs from oil and power companies)
 
2001-10-31 10:10:18 AM  
Yeah Someguy, then people get defensive and start making personal attacks. How I love the internet and the kids that have farked it up!
 
2001-10-31 10:16:46 AM  
Screw the oil! Send us your BEER!
 
2001-10-31 10:19:19 AM  
"Or we could just get our own oil out of Alaska ..."

No, the goal is to burn up the oil reserves of other countries before we burn up ours. :)
 
2001-10-31 10:25:28 AM  
WE HAVE NO OIL IN CANADA THIS IS A PROPAGANDA STORY*





































* a note to all Canadians, please tell are your American friends that we have no oil.
This is a P.S.A from the Ministry of Natural Resources
 
2001-10-31 10:34:02 AM  
Sure, we'll give you the oil. Of course, it would be a shame if we can't settle this nasty softwood lumber tariff dispute... We might just be forced to crank the price so high your wallets squeak. Oh, and how about all the fresh water we send South, or the electricity that bailed California out of the blackouts, it sure would suck for you guys if we stopped providing that...
 
2001-10-31 10:41:40 AM  
Or we could just stop providing Canada with everything we provide....I'm sure Canada is pretty self sufficient without the US (chuckle, chuckle) :)
 
Displayed 50 of 81 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report