Toro Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 For information and reference http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/usa.html Breakdown of US consumption Overall, the United States depends on natural gas for about 24% of its total primary energy requirements (oil accounts for around 40% and coal for 23%). Oil The United States averaged total net oil (crude and products) imports of an estimated 11.8 million bbl/d during January-October 2004, representing around 58% of total U.S. oil demand. Crude oil imports from Persian Gulf sources averaged 2.4 million bbl/d during that period. Overall, the top suppliers of crude oil to the United States during January-October 2004 were Canada (1.6 million bbl/d), Mexico (1.6 million bbl/d), Saudi Arabia (1.5 million bbl/d), Venezuela (1.3 million bbl/d), and Nigeria (1.1 million bbl/d). Gas Natural gas consumption for 2004 is estimated at about 22.0 Tcf, with gross imports of 4.1 Tcf. More than 80% of U.S. natural gas imports come from Canada, So, 11.8 / 0.58 = 20.3 MM bbl/d total US oil consumption 1.6 / 20.3 = 7.8% of total US oil consumption comes from Canada 7.8% x 40% = 3.1% of all America's energy needs are derived from Canadian oil 4.1 / 22 = 18.6% of US natural gas consumption comes from imports 18.6% x 80% = 14.9% of total US nat gas consumption is imported from Canada 14.9% x 24% = 3.5% of America's energy needs are derived from Canadian gas 3.1% + 3.5% = 6.6% of America's energy consumption is from Canadian oil and gas imports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yaro Posted July 27, 2005 Report Share Posted July 27, 2005 But what do you think of that? I don't know what I think but I sure don't like the fact that we signed a treaty that barred us from reducing that total. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted July 27, 2005 Report Share Posted July 27, 2005 But what do you think of that? I don't know what I think but I sure don't like the fact that we signed a treaty that barred us from reducing that total. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Reducing that total, jesus, that's low...I say more! More natual gas from Nova Scotia!!! rahahahahaah! MONEY MONEY MONEY...I'll give them 12% It's free enterprise at work, how do you think Alberta is so rich, Oil and Americans that are willing to buy it...rahahahaha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbacon Posted July 27, 2005 Report Share Posted July 27, 2005 First of all it is NOT Canada's energy, the oil and gas etc belong to the people of the Provinces not TROC that is a Trudopian Communist idea, read up on the BNA Act. Within 7 months most of Alberta's crude oil will flow directly to Texas via pipelines to be refined. That income belongs to Albertan's not TROC. Just like Hydro Quebec etc does not allow Canada to squander their money neither will we allow Ottawa to squander our birthright in Alberta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted July 27, 2005 Report Share Posted July 27, 2005 First of all it is NOT Canada's energy, the oil and gas etc belong to the people of the Provinces not TROC that is a Trudopian Communist idea, read up on the BNA Act. Within 7 months most of Alberta's crude oil will flow directly to Texas via pipelines to be refined. That income belongs to Albertan's not TROC. Just like Hydro Quebec etc does not allow Canada to squander their money neither will we allow Ottawa to squander our birthright in Alberta.It not Alberta's oil its Fort Mcmurray's oil. Those thieves in Edmonton have not right to take steal the Birthright of the people of Fort Mcmurray. Even worse: if Alberta actually tried to separate they would have a very difficult time stopping the various native groups from doing the exact same thing. If anyone has a right to claim birthrights it is the natives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbacon Posted July 27, 2005 Report Share Posted July 27, 2005 It is not a city's oil, it was the taxpayer's of Alberta that paid for FT. Mac. If the various Native groups would like to contest our claim best of luck to them. Albertan's own Alberta, not any ragtag band of natives that have been mistreated by TROC and definately not TROC. Read the BNA ACT all resources belong to the people of the Province. What will TROC do if we declare UDI, wring their hands and wet themselves, that is what you will do, and that is all you will do. When we run off the ROC we will also turf all federal and UN influence out of Banff Jasper and Waterton Alberta. Your dollar with be worth zilch, your pension will be worth zilch, you will be saddled with enormous socialist debt load and we will laugh at you. As we will have secure pensions, no debt, no income tax no property tax etc. enjoy your little commie hell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted July 27, 2005 Report Share Posted July 27, 2005 Read the BNA ACT all resources belong to the people of the Province.I suggest you read the BNA Act yourself. Resources are not owned by the province - rather the province has the exclusive power to regulate the exploitation of natural resources. The resources are 'owned' by everyone in the country.What will TROC do if we declare UDI, wring their hands and wet themselves, that is what you will do, and that is all you will do. When we run off the ROC we will also turf all federal and UN influence out of Banff Jasper and Waterton Alberta.Right, a UDI is illegal - secession must be negotiated. No one particularly wants a civil war but attitudes like yours can start one really fast.Your dollar with be worth zilch, your pension will be worth zilch, you will be saddled with enormous socialist debt load and we will laugh at you. As we will have secure pensions, no debt, no income tax no property tax etc. enjoy your little commie hell.If any one province believed that a UDI would allow them to avoid taking their share of the debt then all provinces could dissolve the country of Canada and renege on the entire debt. I am pretty sure the IMF/US/Japan/Europe would be twisting a lot of arms in Edmonton before things ever got that far. You are the one who needs to be careful about 'punching above their weight'.You must remember that an attempt at separation on the part of Quebec or Alberta would be a public relations game in the rest of the world. The best way for Alberta to ensure its oil and gas pipelines to the US get shut down will be to provide images of gunflights between native groups and Alberta police on prime time TV. All those lefty liberal voters in California and NY would be clamoring for sanctions against Alberta so fast you would not know what hit you. For that reason, Alberta will have to negotiate with the natives even if it thinks it can overwhelm them with force. Furthermore, the native groups (if they are smart) will be playing Aberta against the rest of Canada. They will insist to their right to stay in the country of their choosing be recognized first and then negotiate with the highest bidder second. It is quite possible an inpendent Alberta would have no choice but watch big chucks of oil country rejoin Canada and they could not lift a finger for fear of sanctions by the US and the EU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakunin Posted July 27, 2005 Report Share Posted July 27, 2005 Interesting stats about energy here: Live stats about hydro-quebec energy selling and buying. http://www.transenergie.com/oasis/hqt/en/schemas.htmlx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbacon Posted July 28, 2005 Report Share Posted July 28, 2005 All resources belong to the people of the Province in which they are found. They have not belonged to Ottawa since the 30's in Alberta's case. So dream on, that is only a Trudopian communist wetdream. Trudeau is dead and so is NEP. Do you really think that a Sovereign State like Alberta that is apart of a Confederation only, that never voted to join the Confederation, having some 3,000,000 free people, that if we decided to leave you or TROC could stop that happening, not likely. We already have a Prime Minister, a Parliament and a Head of State who will do as he is told. Canada isn't even a real country. No one in Canada ever voted for the so called Constitution that is a joke. In Canada only 30,000 voters elected Premier Martin and He appointed all your senators and judges and your Head of State that is not a Democracy that is a Kleptocracy. Look at the theft of public funds going on right now in Ottawa. Pathetic socialist backwater. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbacon Posted July 28, 2005 Report Share Posted July 28, 2005 TROC could no more shut off Alberta's oil than TROC could shut off Quebec's hydro power to the USA. Just try that one and you would have an armed uprising overnight. And what would TROC's mighty peacekeepers do, keep in mind there are only about 5,000 of them. And they would have to walk to Alberta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yaro Posted July 28, 2005 Report Share Posted July 28, 2005 Riiiiight... So now Alberta is going to win a war with the rest of us? I will admit your entertaining. Just out of curiousity when did you drop out of school? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbacon Posted July 28, 2005 Report Share Posted July 28, 2005 Anyone could win a war against Canada's sorry assed military, you don't have one. You are funny too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toro Posted July 29, 2005 Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2005 But what do you think of that? I don't know what I think but I sure don't like the fact that we signed a treaty that barred us from reducing that total. Sorry to take so long getting back on this. I'm vacationing in Key West and a thunderstorm drove me to this computer. In the Free Trade Agreement, Canada cannot unilaterly cut off exports to the US. Canada must maintain the same rate of exports, I believe, as a percentage production to the US as the previous 3 years if Canada chooses to restrict exports to the rest of the world. However, that doesn't mean exports to the US cannot decrease. For example, natural gas exports have been falling for the past several years since production has been falling. I'll track it down for you when I get back next week but you can find NAFTA online and it will say what the exact terms are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yaro Posted July 29, 2005 Report Share Posted July 29, 2005 I wasn't refering to the NAFTA agreement on energy, I believe there was a specific treaty signed which stated we couldn't drop the % of oil shiped to the US (% vs production). Maybe I am insane though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toro Posted July 29, 2005 Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2005 I wasn't refering to the NAFTA agreement on energy, I believe there was a specific treaty signed which stated we couldn't drop the % of oil shiped to the US (% vs production). Maybe I am insane though... No, not insane. There is no agreement that says Canada cannot drop the % of production apart from the provisions in NAFTA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.