🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁

Should US oil cpompanies who sell their oil outside of the US lose their subsidies?

I've never seen any evidence of either being true.

I know less about drilling than you do, but doesn't it stand to reason that Saudi Arabia would be the ultimate in drilling since they have the most oil, the most wells, and the most drilling expertise?
This says slant drilling was 1928.

Quick-History-of-Oil-Drilling.jpg
 
Last edited:
I know less about drilling than you do, but doesn't it stand to reason that Saudi Arabia would be the ultimate in drilling since they have the most oil, the most wells, and the most drilling expertise?
Well no since they had no understanding of their own on how to exploit it.

That's why BP and then several US companies handled their drilling and exploration for decades.
 
Well no since they had no understanding of their own on how to exploit it.

That's why BP and then several US companies handled their drilling and exploration for decades.

Saudi Arabia nationalized their oil in 1980, so have over 50 years experience doing it on their own.
 
You have no clue what modern fracking is. For one thing, previously they couldn't do horizontal drilling.

They did it but many companies didn't invest in it because it was no real financial advantage. It's kind of like automation. It isn't worth it unless you can do better paying for a machine than a human. As automation became cheaper, more advanced, less maintenance and breakdowns, more and more companies began replacing us and it continues today. In fact most American jobs were not lost to outsourcing or moving to China. Most of our jobs in the US (and around the world) were lost to machines.
 
Those refineries are already getting the oil from Keystone.
Yes and with the completion of the keystone XL they stated they would stop supplying those refineries because it's a loser for them. Their gunk only brings $29 a barrel.
 
Hundreds of dollars per second of net profit is grotesque. There is so much obviously wrong with our utter dependence upon these few profiteers that one cannot understand those who defend them as if they were friendly.
 
Hundreds of dollars per second of net profit is grotesque. There is so much obviously wrong with our utter dependence upon these few profiteers that one cannot understand those who defend them as if they were friendly.
They also have hundreds of dollars per second in expenses.
 
A cheap excuse really. The oil is going through the US by road, train or pipeline. Which one is safer for the environment?
Road and Train...

Us has a bad history of pipeline spills... The pipeline wis going over a very important Water Basin which feeds to a large amount of crops for US food production


At least with trains and road a crash is covered... We know that these spills will be covered up and lobbyists will make sure they have next to no liability... So they could pollute farmers land with no recourse..
The pipeline operators want the US people to take on that risk so they can make more money with reduced extraction costs, do not believe for one minute the consumer is seeing that benefit...
 
Daily crude output is 12,500 x 1000 barrels per day.

That's 1.25 million barrels per day and again, we cannot even process a lot of our own oil because of environmental regs and again, we're bound by international agreements and trade treaties to import some oil from outside as well as to provide US crude to other countries.
Texan,

Lets start with the Environmental regs... So you think that Oil refineries should be allowed to pollute and put people in danger.. Abandoning health and safety saves oil workers lives


Health and Safety maybe a pain in the hole but it saves a huge amount of lives, they estimate almost 100,000 Americans lives a year ( and that doesn't take into account injuries)
 

Forum List

Back
Top