RE: US may be drawn into South American war

RE: US may be drawn into South American war (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

cyberdude611 -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/3/2008 9:42:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 The problem for Venezuela is that the US owns the technology to refine Venezuelan crude oil. No other nation in the world has the refineries to refine that particular type of crude, which has certain odd chracteristics. What exactly are those "odd characteristics'? What makes it so different from, say, West Texas Intermediate? Do you have a link for the technical data? Im no expert in oil chemistry but I believe the biggest issue is that Venezuelan crude has a high level of sulfur and is extremely thick. It's difficult to extract and difficult to refine if you dont have the facilities and the technology to do so. Saudi, Russian, and Chinese oil is much thinner and has low amounts of sulfur and can be refined very easily. The reason we have that technology and others do not is because we have been an oil importer for decades. And when we made oil deals with Venezuela many years ago, we agreed to produce the technology to refine it as long as they continue to sell it to us. So these threats about Chavez shutting off the oil....well, that's all they are. Threats. He cant if he wants his own country to continue economic growth. Because no one else out there, at least right now in the capacity to be worthwile, has the ability to refine that oil. Over half of the oil Venezuela sells is to the United States. That would be a massive profit loss if they lost the US as a customer.

meatcleaver -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 1:23:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xBullx ORIGINAL: Sinergy quote: Clinton actually released a report and a briefing to George W. Bush on Iraq which was ignored by everybody in that administration, largely because it stated that the US would overthrow Saddam Hussein in a week to ten days, and stick us in a quagmire we could not leave because... 1) The locals hate us, but hate each other more, and it was Saddam's dictatorship which kept everybody from killing each other. Clinton's administration did their homework and knew this. 1a) It was AnencephalyBoy's father who sold Saddam the chemical weapons he used against the Kurds, for example. 2) Bush's administration lied to Congress about weapons of mass destruction, and about the link between Saddam Hussein (Iraq) and Al Qaeda. 3) Saddam Hussein had weapons caches placed throughout Iraq and had actively trained his people in the sorts of geurilla tactics and building of IEDs and the like in order to convince Iran (who has wanted to invade and conquer Iraq for decades) to not invade. 3a) The US military was not instructed by their commander in chief and military leaders (Rumsfeld on down) to SECURE these weapon sites, leaving vast quantities of small arms and explosives in the hand of militant extremists. 4) Anybody who invaded Iraq and overthrew Saddam Hussein would simply release the people in Iraq to engage in a full scale civil war among people who have no qualms about destroying the oil infrastructure, et al, which were the reason that the US would invade in the first place. US foreign policy has been built since the 1950s on the support of governments that are strong enough to maintain themselves in power, or foster insurgencies against governments who disagree with our foreign policies. Saddam was there with our blessing, until he started trying to sell his oil for Euros or to the Chinese, at which point the US military-industrial establishment decided it was time to throw him under a bus. 5) The Dipshit in Chief's cabal authorized the use of torture against people not convicted of a crime, and convinced our Congress to suspend the right of Habeas Corpus for American citizens. I have deep ethical issues with my country doing the former, and a great deal of dread that those people you seem to admire could so easily dispense with a right you and I are guaranteed to have by the US Constitution's Bill Of Rights. It seems I have read a great deal of the same things you have, though I can't recall any articles or documentation where the President was addressed as you have titled him in your comments. Not sure why you seem intent on projecting the possibility that I am an avid supporter of the present President. I'm not much more impressed than you seem to be as to a great many things he has done, but while I seem capable of identifying short comings on both sides of the political aisle you seem rather partisan. But again that is just my opinion. I must say that you seem quite impressed with your excellent degree of hind sight. If only you had been our President over the past eight years. General Schwartzkopf said the US army in Iraq would be like a mamoth in a tar pit. He said that well before the invasion but Bush and his acid head Strausian disciples Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Perle, just didn't want to listen.

RealityLicks -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 6:08:58 AM)
Cyberdude, not all Venezuelan oil is heavy crude but with prices around $100pb, it is becoming more attractive for refiners to process that type. There are also huge deposits in Canada, Nigeria, Saudi, North Sea etc. and so expect to see more and more refineries coming on line to service them. The UK is building a new one in the north of England and China can be expected to increase its capacity for doing so also. It's not just a threat - Chavez has been using favourable oil prices to ship to China for a while and reducing sales to the US simultaneously. I wouldn't bank on a war. In order to make his country less dependent on your market, sorry er, great nation, Chavez will need to construct a pipeline through Colombian territory to reduce shipping times to China. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&refer=latin_america&sid=a_H7VhJXt_6I

Hippiekinkster -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 9:37:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 The problem for Venezuela is that the US owns the technology to refine Venezuelan crude oil. No other nation in the world has the refineries to refine that particular type of crude, which has certain odd chracteristics. What exactly are those "odd characteristics'? What makes it so different from, say, West Texas Intermediate? Do you have a link for the technical data? Im no expert in oil chemistry but I believe the biggest issue is that Venezuelan crude has a high level of sulfur and is extremely thick. It's difficult to extract and difficult to refine if you dont have the facilities and the technology to do so. Saudi, Russian, and Chinese oil is much thinner and has low amounts of sulfur and can be refined very easily. The reason we have that technology and others do not is because we have been an oil importer for decades. And when we made oil deals with Venezuela many years ago, we agreed to produce the technology to refine it as long as they continue to sell it to us. So these threats about Chavez shutting off the oil....well, that's all they are. Threats. He cant if he wants his own country to continue economic growth. Because no one else out there, at least right now in the capacity to be worthwile, has the ability to refine that oil. Over half of the oil Venezuela sells is to the United States. That would be a massive profit loss if they lost the US as a customer. "You believe..." well, how about some research to back it up? Here's a start for you. Go to the American Petroleum Institute.

Archer -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 10:14:28 AM)
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article645.html http://www.courierpress.com/news/2008/feb/12/running-on-empty/ Seems cyberdude is not the only one pointing out the fact that venezuelan oil is predominently sour. Hardly an opinion unbacked by facts. Venezuela has an estimated 78 billion barrels of conventional crude oil reserves and an additional estimated 235 billion barrels of unconventional extra-heavy crude oil in the Orinoco Belt region located southeast of Caracas. So while not all venezuelan crude is extra heavy the vast majority of it in terms of reserves barrels is. (over 4/5ths) Edited to add that yes other countries are moving to build refineries capable of handling the extra heavey crude. But that's likely to be several years into the future. I don't think Cavezes goal of expanding markets beyond the US is flawed, I just think the timeing is poor and the methods not to my liking.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 10:33:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article645.html http://www.courierpress.com/news/2008/feb/12/running-on-empty/ Seems cyberdude is not the only one pointing out the fact that venezuelan oil is predominently sour. Hardly an opinion unbacked by facts. Venezuela has an estimated 78 billion barrels of conventional crude oil reserves and an additional estimated 235 billion barrels of unconventional extra-heavy crude oil in the Orinoco Belt region located southeast of Caracas. So while not all venezuelan crude is extra heavy the vast majority of it in terms of reserves barrels is. (over 4/5ths) Edited to add that yes other countries are moving to build refineries capable of handling the extra heavey crude. But that's likely to be several years into the future. I don't think Cavezes goal of expanding markets beyond the US is flawed, I just think the timeing is poor and the methods not to my liking. No, cyber dude was making assertions without proof or data. I like to see proof, as you just gave. Proof is a good thing. Talking out of one's ass is not. Moving right along, the technology for processing high-sulfur/high viscosity crudes isn't all that complicated. The catalytic cracking requires some tweaking. This is a decent primer on the processes involved in generating marketable products from crudes: http://www.eni.it/en_IT/innovation-technology/research-eni/downstream-oil-processes/downstream-oil-processes.shtml Bear in mind refinery ops aren't my area of expertise (well, former area). I was involved in EOR with Shell. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_oil_recovery

Archer -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 10:39:05 AM)
I was EHS (Environmental Health and Safety) at ARCO before BP bought them, LOL but I worked at the lab that did enhanced recovery research for the prudogh bay and some other areas. Refining not my strong suit either but I did learn a thing or two about crude oil and the various grades. and the product percentages you get from them. Another thing about sour/ heavey/ extra heavey crude is the percentage of gasoline you get per barrel of crude. lighter oils (light sweet) you get 30% or so gasoline and such products when you move to sour you drop down closer to 10 or 15%, and when you get down to extra heavy you get 5% gasoline. A major reason we still get so much from the middle east, (very light sweet).

RealityLicks -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 10:51:58 AM)
Just out of curiosity, are deisel engines popular in the US? Europeans love a turbodiesel.

Archer -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 10:57:56 AM)
At one time they got popular when diesel prices were less than gasoline but now with the price for them usually being diesel just a little higher than gasoline, diesel vehicals for general public are not all that popular.

RealityLicks -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 11:01:04 AM)
Pricewise, thats the same this side but they offer such greater economy that sales are climbing here. They're greener too and with the newer models most people can't tell the difference to drive them. OK, who wants a stock tip?

xBullx -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 11:06:38 AM)
Prepare to drool. My diesel engine is rated at 625 horsepower, I have 2050 foot pounds of torque and my ideal operating speed is 75 mph or for you around 125 kph at 1500 rpm's. I also get 5.5 mpg weighing in at 86,000 lbs.[;)] quote: ORIGINAL: RealityLicks Just out of curiosity, are deisel engines popular in the US? Europeans love a turbodiesel.

RealityLicks -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 11:13:37 AM)
OK, Bull but at 40 tons, hardly the regular runabout I hope? [;)] That's UK tons - much heavier than the Colonial type! PS - dude, we use mph.

Sinergy -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 3:43:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster I don't like "dipshit in chief" either. I much prefer "the Smirking Chimp" or "Fuckwad in Chief" or "that asshole at 1600 PA Ave.", among other terms of endearment. Fine, I will go back to the one I came up with when monkeys objected to "MonkeyBoy" Anencephalyboy it is. Sinergy

Sinergy -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 3:57:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: xBullx Hindsight. General Schwartzkopf said the US army in Iraq would be like a mammoth in a tar pit. He said that well before the invasion but Bush and his acid head Strausian disciples Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Perle, just didn't want to listen. I am trying to determine if your comment, xBullx, about my hindsight was intended as an insult or not. In the interest of being civil, I want to thank you for the compliment about my ability to read, retain knowledge, and apply this knowledge to understanding past history as well as avoiding future mistakes. As for what meatcleaver posted, he forgot the real mover and shaker in the administration; the former secretary of Defense under Bush's father, who spent much of the time during Desert Storm trying to convince Bush Sr. to initiate regime change while the US military was in Kuwait. Bush Sr. was smart enough, or his advisors were smart enough, to realize that an invasion of Iraq would cause a meltdown of the entire region, result in the destruction of the oil infrastructure, and piss off both the Syrians and Jordanians and Iranians and Israelis and the Saudi Arabians (who owned a large percentage of the US economy). Bush Sr. indicated to Cheney that once Hussein withdrew from Iraq, the US' job was done and we should all come home. It was the dimwitted cretin son who was used by Cheney and the rest of the Neo-Cons to further the aims presented by the PNAC, "Project For A New American Century," which was intended to lay the groundwork for a global strategy of neo-Imperialism. If you have never read about why we invaded Iraq, it is a good place to start. Then you might learn how poorly placed your trust in those people today, and how cynically you were/would have been used, if or when you helped vote those people into power. Sinergy

kittinSol -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 3:59:54 PM)
Hilariously, Shwarzkopf is a brand of shampoos and conditionners and other hairy things. Maybe the General is trying to compensate. http://www.schwarzkopf.com/

Sinergy -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 4:08:19 PM)
On an unrelated note, the Dipshit In Chief is what Bill Maher refers to AnencephalyBoy. I apologize for not attributing the source for the name I started using, when I stopped laughing, when I heard him say it on his show. Not quite as balls-a-licious as Stephen Colbert's roast of AnencephalyBoy at the White House Correspondent's Dinner, but somewhat funny. Sinergy

Sinergy -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 4:13:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xBullx I'm disappointed; That is unfortunate. Do you know somebody you could discuss your disappointment with? quote: It seems I have read a great deal of the same things you have, It was not an exhaustive list of what I read / have read, and the list was not intended to prove any particular point I have made. Sinergy

xBullx -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 4:30:47 PM)
Good luck..........

Hippiekinkster -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 4:44:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer I was EHS (Environmental Health and Safety) at ARCO before BP bought them, LOL but I worked at the lab that did enhanced recovery research for the prudogh bay and some other areas. Refining not my strong suit either but I did learn a thing or two about crude oil and the various grades. and the product percentages you get from them. Another thing about sour/ heavey/ extra heavey crude is the percentage of gasoline you get per barrel of crude. lighter oils (light sweet) you get 30% or so gasoline and such products when you move to sour you drop down closer to 10 or 15%, and when you get down to extra heavy you get 5% gasoline. A major reason we still get so much from the middle east, (very light sweet). I was all ERRD (Enhanced Recovery Research Department) when I was w/ Shell in Bellaire. Chemical stuff. Some polymer work, mostly alkaline (alk foams too) and surfactant experiments, and a pilot project in Whie Castle. LA, south of Red Stick. Had 3 labs devoted to it. Alkaline was usually Silicates, OH- converts petroleum acids to soaps, soaps form a high-viscosity emulsion which drives out the oil in front of it. Had up to around 80% recovery under lab conditions (low pressure, formation temp, unconsolidated medium). Had to work up a wet lab silicate analytical technique derived from some Russian inorganic chem journal (pre-interwebs, library was most engineering/geology/metallurgy/organic chem stuff). Interesting stuff. In-situ cat-cracking will probably be used extensively in heavy-crude formations soon (if it isn't already; I'd have to do the research).

kittinSol -> RE: US may be drawn into South American war (3/4/2008 4:59:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster quote: ORIGINAL: Archer I was EHS (Environmental Health and Safety) at ARCO before BP bought them, LOL but I worked at the lab that did enhanced recovery research for the prudogh bay and some other areas. Refining not my strong suit either but I did learn a thing or two about crude oil and the various grades. and the product percentages you get from them. Another thing about sour/ heavey/ extra heavey crude is the percentage of gasoline you get per barrel of crude. lighter oils (light sweet) you get 30% or so gasoline and such products when you move to sour you drop down closer to 10 or 15%, and when you get down to extra heavy you get 5% gasoline. A major reason we still get so much from the middle east, (very light sweet). I was all ERRD (Enhanced Recovery Research Department) when I was w/ Shell in Bellaire. Chemical stuff. Some polymer work, mostly alkaline (alk foams too) and surfactant experiments, and a pilot project in Whie Castle. LA, south of Red Stick. Had 3 labs devoted to it. Alkaline was usually Silicates, OH- converts petroleum acids to soaps, soaps form a high-viscosity emulsion which drives out the oil in front of it. Had up to around 80% recovery under lab conditions (low pressure, formation temp, unconsolidated medium). Had to work up a wet lab silicate analytical technique derived from some Russian inorganic chem journal (pre-interwebs, library was most engineering/geology/metallurgy/organic chem stuff). Interesting stuff. In-situ cat-cracking will probably be used extensively in heavy-crude formations soon (if it isn't already; I'd have to do the research). Guys... could you get just a tiny little bit more technical please [:D] ?

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875