In Keystone XL Debate, Obama's Warning on Oil Exports Rings Only Half True

A growing share of those imports are now going to refiners owned or part-owned by foreign suppliers, such as Saudi Arabia's Motiva venture, or Mexican PEMEX's half-owned 327,000-bpd Deer Park plant. Those contracts are likely to be hard to displace, since many such producers want to maintain a geographically diverse slate of customers.

Ultimately the question of exports may come down to a completely unrelated but equally contentious U.S. energy policy. Exporting domestic crude has been banned for four decades, although re-exporting foreign crude is not subject to the ban.

"The ironic argument to Obama's statements is if we licensed exports of (U.S.) light sweet crude it would open up more capacity in the U.S. refining system to use Canadian heavy crude," Guy Caruso, senior advisor to the energy program at Center for Strategic and International Studies.

"If Obama thinks it's important to keep that Canadian crude in the U.S. we should export more light sweet."

(Editing by Jonathan Leff and Alden Bentley)


1234

View Full Article

WHAT DO YOU THINK?


Generated by readers, the comments included herein do not reflect the views and opinions of Rigzone. All comments are subject to editorial review. Off-topic, inappropriate or insulting comments will be removed.

Tom Sandin  |  November 17, 2014
President Obamas argument that the Keystone Pipeline will transport Canadian crude oil for export is correct but the following arguments are also valid: ­The same amount of crude can be exported by building a pipeline to the west cost of Canada but it is objected to by the Canadians. ­Anybody favoring it have been provided political contributions by the beneficiaries. ­Refineries at the Gulf Coast are already working to full capacity so there is no benefit to them. ­The pipeline may become a catalyst to expanding the petrochemical plants in the Gulf Coast area and increase the already much polluted air.


Most Popular Articles