L-188
Topic Author
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:26 am

Quoting Mke717spotter (Reply 49):
How long is it going to take to repair this?

Nobody knows for sure yet. Channel 2 ran some numberrs tonight

They are looking at initially 16 miles of pipe that will need to be replaced. I don't know exactly what the diameter is, but most of that stuff they use is arctic grade steel and that is a specialty item, like avgas. So any they can't find "off the shelf" will have to be made, and I can tell you that lead times from mills for metal products of any type have been getting much longer over the past two years.

Then you have to weld the joints together, they estimated it would take two guys half a day to complete a weld (I think that is a hint on the pipe diameter). There would need to be a weld every 40 or 80 feet. You do the math on 16 miles.

There isn't much choice about replace vs. patching. They found 16 "annomlies" in that pipe and according to the news when the story first broke there where some places where 70% of the original pipe thickness is gone. Again those numbers are the ones I remember on the nightly news the day the story broke.

Edit: Forgot the 1000 odd guys they are going to have to hire, train, feed,house, and the equipment to move up there. Most of the speciality gear and tradesmen are in the gulf right now making money repairing Katrina damage.

[Edited 2006-08-10 04:31:26]
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
roadrunner165
Posts: 838
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2000 6:28 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:53 am

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 33):

That makes no sense. Their profit margin is less than 10%.

I heard on NPR it is more like 5-6%, but even 10% is not great profit margins.

Quoting MD80fanatic (Reply 38):
That is what they want you to think. It doesn't cost any more to extract the crude than it did before. It doesn't cost any more to transport it than it did before. It doesn't cost any more to refine it than it did before. Their costs are the same, yet the prices they are asking for the finished product has doubled and more.

I think if you did some research you would find out that it does cost more to extract, transport, refine, and deliver petro products then it did in the past. Keep in mind there are a lot of middle men in the oil business who all want their fair share of the profits. Also remember that paying three dollars per gallon for gas is not that expensive when compared to oil prices in Europe. The only real solution to this issue is to cut demand and that will lower prices. Sell your SUVs Hummers and buy a fuel efficient hybrid car that get 35+ miles to the gallon.

Adam
 
itsjustme
Posts: 2738
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 6:58 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:57 am

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 45):
We've seen 18 cents a gallon increase here in the last 2 days.

We've seen roughly a .04/gallon increase here (Orange Co. CA).

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 45):
you should see about 50cent a gallon fuel price increase.

When you say "you" are you referring to fellow Alaskans? The reason I ask is CBS News reported that we (the US) would only see an increase of 5 to 10 cents per gallon. That alone would suck but, if we're truly going to see a 50 cent increase, I'm going to have to start writing some bad tickets so I can get some court time to cover the increase in fuel costs (relax LOT367-134598348 square root of Pie, I'm only kidding).
 
MUWarriors
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 12:11 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:58 am

The scariest thing about this right now is how this will affect Alaska in the near future. Losing $6.4 million per day, I heard the state can only stay in the black for 2 months without this revenue. Today they announced a temporary hiring freeze for all state jobs:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060810/..._ylu=X3oDMTA3bGI2aDNqBHNlYwM3NDk-.

Hopefully they are able to figure out what happened, and if BP lied to the state, they will be able to recover the damage. But looking at the Exxon Valdez settlement I won't be holding my breath on that.
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 12:01 pm

Quoting Itsjustme (Reply 52):
We've seen roughly a .04/gallon increase here (Orange Co. CA).

I know its early, but since Sunday the prices have actually dropped .03/gallon at my neighborhood Shell and QT stations here in Arizona where 70% of our fuel comes from the west coast. I expect it will reverse itself in a day or so.
 
roadrunner165
Posts: 838
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2000 6:28 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 12:08 pm

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 46):
If oil goes to $500/barrell and the stock price of oil companies is multiplied ten fold

I enjoyed reading your post and had a few comments to add.
Oil prices will never get that high to begin with, their stock would drop like a rock long before prices got that high. No average American could afford to pay that much money for gasoline or diesel. Even if they could afford it for a short time, it wouldn't matter because everyone would be out of jobs withing a few months because the economy would come to a screeching halt. Remember, eventually some other form of energy will become cheaper and easier to access then oil and then we will switch over and use it instead of oil. In fact, high gas prices are good right now because it gives companies an incentive to research alternative energy sources.

Adam
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:17 pm

Quoting L-188 (Reply 44):
Kuparuk is the reason I have problems with that anaylsis.rnWhen that field was brought on-line it was predicted to have a life ofrn20 years and would produce 2 Billion barrels. Last year it was a 25rnyear old field, and while production is down rougthly half from it's peak, it is still in production and will produce most of the oil that will still entering the TAPS system while PBU is down. Also last year the two billionth barrel was pumped.

Changes from initial calculations of recoverable reserves will always occur. Compared with the late 70s, there is now a big difference, 3D seismic. This gives a much better (though still not 100% accurate picture of the reservoirs. You would also need to know more of the circumstances in which the original reserves were declared - were there bids pending for adjacent acreage for example?

Revisions DOWN also occur. Recently the Chinquetti field was brought in off Mauritania, west Africa. It had excellent seismic in a section with good resolution, but revision DOWN has followed initial production to the embarrassment of the operator.

Overall, revisions tend to be up because they are deliberately made conservative - getting a bit more profit is OK, suddenly running at a loss is not. There has been quite a bit lately about how revisions show there is no reserves problem. I seriously doubt if that is correct. I hate to bring Rumsfeld into the discussion, but it is indeed a known unknown, probably followed closely by a bunch of unknown unknowns!
 
L-188
Topic Author
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 4:02 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 56):
Compared with the late 70s, there is now a big difference, 3D seismic.

3D seismic is a big one, as is directional drilling and steerable drill bits.

And that is why more oil is now recoverable, the technology for getting it out has improved.

Of course I can't think any reason why the technology won't improve in the next 20 years like it did in the last 20.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
L-188
Topic Author
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 4:14 pm

Oh link to tonights Channel 2 news story.

http://www.ktuu.com/cms/anmviewer.asp?a=5965&z=1

They are looking at getting the replacement pipe starting on October and installation to start in November after the ground freezes....

Unless they find a good line to bypass this pipe, that field will be down for a while.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
planesarecool
Posts: 3256
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 6:51 pm

Quoting Andrewuber (Reply 19):
2. More whining and moaning by all of us in the U.S. who are already tired of paying $3.50 for a gallon of gas

You need to come over to England and see what we're paying. You're getting your oil at about a third of the price we are (at least according to a friend who lives in San Diego, but was on holiday here until today)

[Edited 2006-08-10 11:53:22]
 
itsjustme
Posts: 2738
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 6:58 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:17 pm

Quoting Planesarecool (Reply 59):
You need to come over to England and see what we're paying. You're getting your oil at about a third of the price we are

What exactly is your point? That, just because you're paying more for gasoline in England than people are in the U.S., we shouldn't be bothered by the strong possibility that oil companies are taking advantage of every possible scenario to boost their prices and their profits? I've heard that people in some foreign countries are paying 10 times what we pay for a pair of blue jeans. Does that mean we should be forced to pay the same amount, just because they do? No, of course it doesn't.
 
rolfen
Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:03 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:55 pm

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 1):
Was just reading about this. The BP spokesman was predicting spikes of $10/barrel. Oh joys!

At least you have fuel. People in lebanon are going to revert to riding donkeys pretty soon.
rolf
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:45 pm

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 46):
Higher commodity prices only benefit those who own it.

And Al Gore.
You're only as good as your last departure.
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2811
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:05 am

Quoting Roadrunner165 (Reply 51):
I heard on NPR it is more like 5-6%, but even 10% is not great profit margins.

Actually I think 10% is the highest of all the oil companies. And no, it really is not all that much. People just confuse volume with profit.

If I sell 10 widgets at $10 bucks and it cost me $9 each I made 10 bucks and 10%

If I sell 10 widgets at $20 bucks and it cost me $18 each I made 20 bucks so my profit doubles but my MARGIN remains the same 10%.

Econ 101 and people just dont get it. It would seem that people think that McDonald's somehow deserves to make more profit off a cheap hamburger than Ruby Tuesdays does of an expensive one.

Corporations can not lower their margins when prices go up and maintain dividend and share price levels. I dont know what people are thinking, or if they are at all.
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:33 am

Quoting L-188 (Reply 57):
3D seismic is a big one, as is directional drilling and steerable drill bits.

And that is why more oil is now recoverable, the technology for getting it out has improved.

3D means that the original identification of the reservoir size is more accurate and directional drilling, especially horizontal completions, not to mention better fraccing all mean better recovery. However as is usually the case, all of these are curves with diminishing returns. This is easily seen in the discovery curves. Since about 1980, these have headed rather quickly for the baseline. All those lovely technologies have just stopped the decline from being quite as precipitous as it would otherwise have been. Even better technologies will be needed, but the discovery rate will still decline even further, just slower than without them. There is very little frontier acreage left and even less that seems attractive in terms of really large discoveries. And the reality is that US (and soon Chinese and not long after Indian) consumption is so large that only giants and super giants make any difference. Most years and even decades go by without a super giant being found. That is the problem.

The Prudhoe Bay cluster of fields is the largest found in the US, and it is most unlikely that anything near their size will be found. They are in decline, so the woes of BP are a foretaste of what is happening as the decline continues. I have not checked the production rates of the fields, but they are at a stage where losing 400,000 b/d will occur naturally over about 5 to 8 years.

Quoting FDXMECH (Reply 62):

And Al Gore.

Probably, but only indirectly, it is GWB and friends who gain most immediately.
 
flyingbronco05
Posts: 3484
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 11:43 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:34 am

Since this whole thing made the news, gas prices where I am have actually DROPPED about 15-25 cents a gallon.

Gas was about 3.10-3.15 a gallon, now it's down to 2.90-2.95 or so.
Never Trust Your Fuel Gauge
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:58 am

Quoting L-188 (Reply 50):
I don't know exactly what the diameter is,

18 inches.

Expect two to three months. Watching Malone (President of BP America) and his boss in Juneau testifying to the State Senate about this - they don't even have the proper pipe - it will have to be manufactured and shipped here. Of course, that was last nights news (Wednesday).

Further, they stated they wanted to reduce the diameter of the line to speed up the flow - part of the problem apparently is the volume of oil moving through the line moves slowly because the line is bigger than it needs to be. This allows the sediment to settle in the line.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 50):
There would need to be a weld every 40 or 80 feet. You

And every weld has to be X-Rayed and certified. Then once the lines are in place they have to be hydrotested . . . water is thinner than oil, and leak will be quite evident.

Quoting Itsjustme (Reply 52):
When you say "you" are you referring to fellow Alaskans?

 checkmark 

The two primary refineries in Alaska get all their crude from the Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS). With the flow slowed down and volume slowed down, I'm going to guess we'll still get first dibs, but we'll pay for it . . . heavily.

Another 2 cent increase before I left my campground this morning in Seward. And that's on the road network. I won't even talk about how much the cost is going to rise to FLY fuel to villages and remote cities.

Quoting MUWarriors (Reply 53):
The scariest thing about this right now is how this will affect Alaska in the near future.

We can go two months before the surplus $$$ in the State's bank account is used up.

ANOTHER reason to NOT vote for Murkowski - who spent an extra $800,000,000 in oil revenue this year instead of putting it in the bank. We don't call him "Frank the Bank" for nothing.


On a lighter note, the Fiord Field came on line today up on the Alaskan Slope. It's furthest west on the slope and is expected to produce 22,500 bbls a day.

Interesting tid-bit time:

Everyone from Alaska knows this. Some of the rest of you may not . . .

Prudhoe Bay is the biggest field up there. But it's also the generic term for that entire location. Be advised there are many other fields that are still producing oil.

Badami
Alpine
Endeavor
Milne Point
Kuparuk
West Sac

. . . to name a few. So there's still oil moving south . . . about 500,000bbls a day actually.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
L-188
Topic Author
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:16 am

Quoting Baroque (Reply 64):
3D means that the original identification of the reservoir size is more accurate and directional drilling, especially horizontal completions, not to mention better fraccing all mean better recovery. However as is usually the case, all of these are curves with diminishing returns.

My point is that all of these estimates are based on the older 2D tests that where done in the late 1970's.

We would have a better idea if they allowed a 3D seismic study of ANWR.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 66):
We don't call him "Frank the Bank" for nothing.

And his old bank failed.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 66):
Watching Malone (President of BP America) and his boss in Juneau testifying to the State Senate about this - they don't even have the proper pipe - it will have to be manufactured and shipped here. Of course, that was last nights news (Wednesday).

I just caught Malone's clip with Matt Lauer on Channel 2......You could hear people in the background cheering when Matt questioned if BP was conning the US with this and their "Enviriomental Oil Company" image they have been cultivating the past few years.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 66):
Expect two to three months. Watching Malone (President of BP America) and his boss in Juneau testifying to the State Senate about this - they don't even have the proper pipe - it will have to be manufactured and shipped here. Of course, that was last nights news (Wednesday



Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 66):
Further, they stated they wanted to reduce the diameter of the line to speed up the flow - part of the problem apparently is the volume of oil moving through the line moves slowly because the line is bigger than it needs to be. This allows the sediment to settle in the line

It is probably true, but I can't help but wonder if they are trying to come up with every excuse they can.....you can pig for sediments....that is why they call them cleaning pigs.....and would have been taken care of if they done it less then 12 years ago.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 66):
they don't even have the proper pipe - it will have to be manufactured and shipped here. Of course, that was last nights news (Wednesday).

Nobody sits on that much steel.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:23 am

There was just a blurb on CNN that said BP has released info stating they may not need to shut down the entire Prudhoe Field? I didn't hear it on KTUU, so will have to wait for the 10pm news to hear it again.

Wonder if they found a bypass around the field for that oil that doesn't take it between GC2 and GC3 . . .
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
L-188
Topic Author
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:51 am

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 68):
There was just a blurb on CNN that said BP has released info stating they may not need to shut down the entire Prudhoe Field? I didn't hear it on KTUU, so will have to wait for the 10pm news to hear it again.

Yup, It was on Channel 2.

They are looking at keeping the WOA operating at about 150-200 BOPD depending on the tests of the transit lines from that side of the field.

EOA is still screwed.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:57 am

Alyeska is having several problems . . .
1) They've had to stop the Rebuilding of Pump Station 1 because BP evicted all the workers . . . they need the living space . . .
2) They TAPS was tested down to 400,000 bbls a day and it's good to go, anything much less than that and it's not looking good.
3) All wastewater from the remote stations that used to be injected into the TAPS now has to be trucked.
4) Winter is coming, and that crude will get real thick and real slow if they can't keep the pressure up in the line.

So, if the WOA can maintain 200K bbl per day, coupled with Badami, Fiord, Kuparuk, Endeavor, Alpine, etc - they'll likely keep 600K bbl per day moving through the line . . .

That'll be good for our wallets . . .
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Fri Aug 11, 2006 4:03 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 66):
Further, they stated they wanted to reduce the diameter of the line to speed up the flow - part of the problem apparently is the volume of oil moving through the line moves slowly because the line is bigger than it needs to be. This allows the sediment to settle in the line.

From the interview I heard on PBS, pitting is a major part of the problem. They may be identifying pitting with the problem of slower flow rates. But apparently the size/shape of the corroded areas was why they did not show up with the existing testing regime. Pitting might also be a pipe quality problem. Back when the system was installed, there would have been huge cost pressures just because initial development of the fields was so expensive. It is all very well to be wise now 30 years later.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 67):
My point is that all of these estimates are based on the older 2D tests that where done in the late 1970's.

Many fields have in fact had 3D done to assist later field development. But in any event, some of the information that comes from 3D also comes from well performance, so that you should not hope for too much positive news on older fields from 3D surveys, well I will qualify that, late 3D surveys will be commercially viable to improve recoveries, but will not substantially change reserves.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 67):
It is probably true, but I can't help but wonder if they are trying to come up with every excuse they can.....you can pig for sediments....that is why they call them cleaning pigs.....and would have been taken care of if they done it less then 12 years ago.

From what I heard they were worried about pushing silt into the TAP system. If they had blocked that, imagine the screams.I am sure that BP will be grateful for all the technical advice they can get especially on the interaction of the fluids with the steels in their pipelines.

Pity they don't have the problem that some copper mines have with slurry ore pipelines, where parts of the inside of the pipes literally becomes gold plated while other parts are corraded.
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2811
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:51 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 64):
Probably, but only indirectly, it is GWB and friends who gain most immediately.

Source?
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:23 am

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 72):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 64):
Probably, but only indirectly, it is GWB and friends who gain most immediately.

Source?

he won't source it, it's just the same BS everyone spouted . . .


Now, for some real news - with a source:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4109628.html
BP said today that the cost to repair and replace
leaking pipelines at Prudhoe Bay, the nation's largest oil field, could
be about $170 million.

The company also said it hoped to announce as early as today whether it
can keep part of the Prudhoe Bay oil field pumping, offering a glimmer
of hope that oil will keep flowing from the field.

BP PLC also said it had secured orders for all 16 miles of pipeline it
hopes to replace at the oil field, and expects to have the supplies in
place by the end of the year.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
bushpilot
Posts: 1674
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:37 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:49 am

I didnt bother reading through everyone elses posts due to lack of time but I need to chime in on this. Firstly the fact that the lines werent pigged since 1992 is utter and total non excusable. I wonder how much of this is potentially politically motivated due to the current events going on with the state of AK government, and the middle east situation. Before this happened it was generally thought BP was the good oil company in the state at least much better than Exxon. But point being, BP lost a lot of respect in my eyes and I think it is high time the state of AK diversifies its funding stream. I hope the fine for this is 10million per day it is not producing, seeing as the state is losing from what I hear at least 5million in lost tax revenue and as much as 7million. About time we talk seriously about the cruise ship head tax. Wont replace by any means the oil rev, but we need to diversify.
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:55 am

Quoting Bushpilot (Reply 74):
I wonder how much of this is potentially politically motivated due to the current events going on with the state of AK government, and the middle east situation.

i would say none . . . although you're not the first person to mention that . . . my Bartender friend at my favorite haunt suggested that last night.

The motivation here was simply saving $$$ by BP on the Slope. Someone will go to jail I'm sure . . . because there is most certainly documentation that states the lines were pigged . . .

Quoting Bushpilot (Reply 74):
About time we talk seriously about the cruise ship head tax.

Vote no on prop 2.

Quoting Bushpilot (Reply 74):
Wont replace by any means the oil rev, but we need to diversify.

Exactly, but cutting off our nose to spite our face isn't the answer to the test.

Now . . .

How the hell are ya? Busy working on Andy's campaign, or just busy?
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Sat Aug 12, 2006 12:53 pm

Quoting Bushpilot (Reply 74):
About time we talk seriously about the cruise ship head tax.



Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 75):
Exactly, but cutting off our nose to spite our face isn't the answer to the test.

How much per passenger is the proposed tax? Then again how many $$ do the cruise ship passengers already spend in Alaska? I can see this tax ending up in Federal court, interstate commerce etc..

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 75):

The motivation here was simply saving $$$ by BP on the Slope. S

Not a good way to run a company, you're right someone is going to pay on way or another. Just watching OTM on MSNBC, it appears that the price of gas in California hasn't been effected yet, same with the stations around where I live in Arizona.
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:52 pm

Quoting AirCop (Reply 76):
How much per passenger is the proposed tax?

$50 I believe . . .

Quoting AirCop (Reply 76):
Then again how many $$ do the cruise ship passengers already spend in Alaska?

A LOT

And the industry itself spends a lot - and a great bit of that "lot" is already spent on environmental conservation . . . the Proprosition 2 hogwash is all eyewash to add yet another tax . . . the Cruise Ship industry here is exceptionally environmentally friendly. In fact, Princess Cruises even PAID for the electrification of the downtown docks in Juneau so they could shut down the main engines on their ships when in town . . . prevents a black plume over the city all day.

This is just another (unwarranted) tax.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: 9% Of US Oil Production Going Off-line

Sat Aug 12, 2006 11:10 pm

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 72):
Source?

I don't have access to their pecuniary interests, but I would be surprised if Al Gore had more direct interests in oil companies compared with GBW and his friends and allies, most of whom come from small oil, except for Dickie and Rice who are associated with larger parts of oil.

The invasion of Iraq was supposed to bring on an era of cheap (Murdoch said USD20 a barrel) oil. The 2003 average for Brent was $25.02 and for WTI was $26.16 and now it is about $76 for WTI. It could be an unintended consequence but there were those at the time who thought a war would raise and not lower prices. There were also those who pointed out that the actual Iraq reserves were a half to a quarter of the figures put about by the Administration. The actual reserves data being those available at the time from the AAPG website. If anyone wants that file I still have it although AAPG removed the link somewhere about August 2003.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], windy95 and 136 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos