Join the discussion on the following article:
Statoil invests in North American oil production
The Railroads are coming full circle again, It’s about time their turn has come. I just hope that maybe the Railroads in Savanna Il will be able to give use some economic growth in our community; such as increased yard work
The Railroads are coming full circle again, It’s about time their turn has come. I just hope that maybe the Railroads in Savanna Il will be able to give use some economic growth in our community; such as increased yard work
Nice to see foreign companies are investing in the US and the profits for shipping will leave the US completely.
It is no coincidence that UTLX, the biggest tank car manufacturer and leasing company, and BNSF are both owned by savvy investor Warren Buffet.
DRILL,…BABY,…DRILL !!!
I agree, drill, drill, drill!
For a long time the main discussion regarding Bakken oil movements has always been that pipelines would eventually be built in the area taking the overwhelming majority of oil to refiners and thus limiting rail movements of oil to residual dribs and drabs. Whatever business railroads captured in the short term due to the ability of the railroad to construct facilites more quickly than pipelines would most assuredly be lost to pipelines. This issue and business model projection has been laid out in this forum at various times over the past year or two or three. Now it seems that the oil companies themselves are investing heavily in rail movements. I contend that this investment shows that there is “something” to the concept that by going to market via rail the oil producer gains flexibility of destination and thus the ability to get the best net price for the oil. This flexibility is lost when transporting via pipeline. Could this surge of investment in rail transporation of Bakken oil now mean that the business model of pipeline transport of oil is outdated and that rail movement of oil is the true “way of the future” …?
Wouldn’t it make much more sense to refine the oil near the source wells and move finished product by rail? The finished product would have a much higher value by volume than the crude and be better able to support the higher cost of rail transportation.
As much as I like railroads, if we are going to be transporting oil around the country on a regular basis, pipelines are the way to go. Too bad the one from North/South Dakota to Oklahoma was shot down. To become energy independent we have to stop making our policy a political football. Under the U.S. and it’s off-shore coastal waters (inside the 12 mile limit) we are most likely sitting on enough oil and gas to power the country for decades and decades into the future.
Funny how railroads have historically been viewed as so inflexible–when compared to trucks, for example–yet in this case are clearly the more versatile option…
Railroads are always happen to carry coal and oil, but it seems they’re carrying most of it to the ocean where it leaves us so others can burn it, since we are not allowed to. Meanwhile, the cost of fuel and electricity skyrockets at home.
Pipeline versus railroad: in addition to flexible delivery routes, fewer environmental hurdles exist in the building of a transload facility on an existing rail line, and they may be lower than those that pop up along a pipeline right of way.
Mr. Garon, it might make more sense on the surface to build new refineries, but try it and watch all the NIMBYs scramble. Then there is the matter of the cost to protect the environment from the refinery. Old refineries are able to continue operations under grandfather clauses in the laws.