Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames in 07
Over time you have demonstrated that there are some very important things you just don't comprehend. It's just true. The demand for oil is such that if the AB oilsands crude doesn't come out of the ground, it will somewhere else. Maybe Brazil, maybe Kuwait maybe S.A. or most likely Venezuela.
|
Demand for oil is not "locked in." Infact you seem fall victim to the issue that you accuse me of below in not understand elasticities. Demand for oil is not completely inelastic. Infact, we're seeing that over $120 bbl demand becomes highly elastic especially in price taking countries like China.
Quote:
|
The Oil will be produced anyway. It just will.
|
Actually this is the least comprehensible statement between you and I. Oil being produced is not a fait-accompli and no amount of saying that it will will make it so. Oil being produced is a product of the regional demand which is responsive to oil prices and to substitutes for oil.
Quote:
|
If you want to understand why, go learn about the concepts of demand elasticity. Wether this line goes ahead or not, the same amount of oil will come out of the ground. Crude Oil vessels move all over the world rather cheaply, distributing it to who wants it. Its simply a competition to see who produces those barrels.
|
A true laffer of a passage when you seem to ignore you're own advice. It's not simply a competition, it's very complex actually. Chinese oil demand is not a black hole.
Quote:
|
We could make or not make some 17% GHG target, but to the extent we get there because we don't produce heavy oil, someone else on the planet will. if this is what it takes to meet this GHG target we will do the equivalent of creating a non smoking row on a plane that permits smoking everywhere else. You can feel good about what you've done in row 17, but it won't matter.
|
Heavy oil production is not locked in. The IEA just released a report yesterday saying how shale oil production is likely to be the next marginal unconventional resource. Shale oil GHGs are approximately 20% lower than oilsands. That will come with a GHG benefit.
If you are really interested in learning on the marginal GHG impacts of whether oilsands pipelines are built or not, read this article. It's a good scenario analysis of whether blocking pipelines will reduce GHGs. It's certainly up in the air but it's not nearly as simplified as you make it. My statements throughout this thread are that you can expand oil production with pipelines so long as you reduce GHG emissions from that expanded production. It's possible with regulations.
http://theenergycollective.com/jesse...ts-keystone-XL