Shell could abandon Arctic after this season


#121

You mean those rail cars owned by our illustrious presidents friend, Warren Buffett??


#122

Why couldn’t they get US flag tankers either? Cheap fucks.


#123

Axed it after trans-Canada shelved it. The Canadians will build it to the Pacific Coast and send product to Asia. I read yesterday that a lot of money is leaving Canada.


#124

[QUOTE=z-drive;173049]Why couldn’t they get US flag tankers either? Cheap fucks.[/QUOTE]

Maybe they found it difficult to get them up to Alberta?


#125

[QUOTE=The Commodore;173035]Very true on all counts. No surprise to see our fearless Commander in Chief finally axe Keystone Pipeline today. Fortunately we have all those rail cars to safely transport that oil down to the Gulf. Maybe they will get some magic locomotives that don’t emit greenhouse gases to pull the cars too.[/QUOTE]

Instead of worrying about the Jones Act, why don’t we let Warren Buffet start getting his rail cars and magic locomotives from China. Then he can get work visas for Chinese engineers that know how to run them. Filipinos for the rest of the railroad crew. Think of all the money those workers would spend at Walmart on Chinese made goods. What a fantastic boost to the US economy through “free trade”!


#126

Spoke to my manager today, he says Shell is buying out of Aiviq contract. It’ll become a Government vessel but with out ECO employees, just like the Wheeler deal.


#127

[QUOTE=JB Slave;173235]Spoke to my manager today, he says Shell is buying out of Aiviq contract. It’ll become a Government vessel but with out ECO employees, just like the Wheeler deal.[/QUOTE]

but the WHEELER was built for a specific mission to satisfy the needs of the Navy however the AIVIQ was built to satisfy the needs of Shell. Except for the USCG, what government agency can even use a vessel like the AIVIQ and we have already discussed that the USCG would not be thrilled to be forced to take a vessel not built to their specifications of with their mission in mind? I can imagine that if Shell handed the AIVIQ to the USCG that they would still be needing Congress to appropriate $50M or more to make the vessel acceptable to their standards and still it will be a compromise with what the USCG would want. Besides, who does Shell have to politically cram this down the throats of the USCG and the Congress anyway? Uncle Ted is long dead and buried and Lisa Murkowski doesn’t have Ted Steven’s unique ability to magically create money in the Congress for pet projects.


#128

Could be your blueberries, epa, Kings point, mothballed, you never know. The gummint work in strange ways. Maybe they’ll make it into some navy salvage ship being dp-9 and all. Ice commando base. Arctic spy ship.


#129

Alberta? What the fuck does Alberta have to do with arctic drilling?


#130

[QUOTE=z-drive;173241]Could be your blueberries, epa, Kings point, mothballed, you never know. The gummint work in strange ways. Maybe they’ll make it into some navy salvage ship being dp-9 and all. Ice commando base. Arctic spy ship.[/QUOTE]

none of those agencies (including the Navy) has the budget for the fuel let alone anything else to operate that moribund blue behemoth


#131

[QUOTE=z-drive;173242]Alberta? What the fuck does Alberta have to do with arctic drilling?[/QUOTE]

Nothing, but the Keystone pipeline was intended to transport shale sand oil from Alberta to the Gulf coast wasn’t it??


#132
You could probably dig a canal from the NW passage through the NW territories (lots of lakes) and then come into Alberta at the NE corner into Lake Athabasca.


#133

so why did you say they didn’t use American tankers because they couldn’t get to Alberta? American tankers are commonly calling at certain Alaskan ports, so there goes that argument if you MEANT Alaska and not Alberta.


#134

[QUOTE=z-drive;173260]so why did you say they didn’t use American tankers because they couldn’t get to Alberta? American tankers are commonly calling at certain Alaskan ports, so there goes that argument if you MEANT Alaska and not Alberta.[/QUOTE]

I meant Alberta, not Alaska, so there goes your argument, whatever it was supposed to be.


#135

http://gcaptain.com/canada-prime-minister-delivers-on-northern-b-s-oil-tanker-ban-promise/

“A ban on oil tanker traffic on the northwest coast will essentially kill Enbridge Inc’s controversial Northern Gateway pipeline project, which would have [B]carried oil from Alberta to the port of Kitimat[/B] for export to Asian markets.”


#136

the question was why shell got foreign tankers, not US flag ones for standby. Next thing I know ombugge is talking about Alberta.


#137

[QUOTE=z-drive;173442]the question was why shell got foreign tankers, not US flag ones for standby. Next thing I know ombugge is talking about Alberta.[/QUOTE]

why do I feel the need to go out and buy a can of insecticide?

.


#138

[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;173436]http://gcaptain.com/canada-prime-minister-delivers-on-northern-b-s-oil-tanker-ban-promise/

“A ban on oil tanker traffic on the northwest coast will essentially kill Enbridge Inc’s controversial Northern Gateway pipeline project, which would have [B]carried oil from Alberta to the port of Kitimat[/B] for export to Asian markets.”[/QUOTE]

Justin Trudeau is Canada’s Obama. His father Pierre was a terrible Prime Minister and this liberal whacko kid is even worse.


#139

[QUOTE=z-drive;173442]the question was why shell got foreign tankers, not US flag ones for standby. Next thing I know ombugge is talking about Alberta.[/QUOTE]

The posts before and after was about the Keystone pipeline. Since you didn’t quote I assumed you were commenting on that subject.
I applogize.


#140

eh, there are lots of “green” sources of energy that would maintain jobs in the US maritime industry. :slight_smile:

Offshore wind is one, ocean thermal energy conversion is another. An OTEC offshore plant would look very much like an offshore oil rig, requiring merchant mariners to supply it and people there to operate it. The difference is that instead of pumping up fossil fuel, it pumps up water. Surface water heats ammonia to the boiling point, and the steam turns a turbine.

These guys have an experimental onshore OTEC plant in Hawaii, and are planning an offshore one that will be far more powerful:

Makai OTEC plant

Lockheed is also interested:

Lockheed OTEC project

As far as offshore wind, that involves 200 foot tall slowly turning wind turbines that float on the surface of the water. They’re connected to each other and to the shore. Of course it requires merchant mariners to go out on ships to maintain the wind turbines. Statoil just got a contract in Scotland to build a small pilot/experimental floating offshore wind plant:

Statoil offshore wind projects

There’s a company that wants to build a floating wind power plant just south of the Bay Area, here in California. I hope they get to do it. It is a great idea. And it will employ people to build it and it will require merchant mariners to maintain it.

So yeah…I think you guys sound just like people complaining about how there wouldn’t be jobs to take care of horses because the car was going to replace them. Well, lots of people make money taking care of cars, now, instead of horses. People used to say, oh these personal computers, they’re so horrible, this paperless office will eliminate so many jobs, what will happen to the people who make money pushing paper? Well, businesses still deal with documents and files, but they’re all on computers. And people make lots of money in Information Technology. Indeed, people even said that about engines replacing sails. Oh no! Where will all the jobs go now that a ship won’t require all those people to operate the rigging??

Fossil fuel power [B][I]will[/I][/B] go away. It is rapidly becoming obsolete. The last new coal plant will probably be made in this decade. The people who currently operate fossil fuel power plants will get new jobs, working on Wind or Solar or Nuclear instead of Coal.

There will be offshore platforms in the future…but they will be OTEC or Floating Wind platforms. The ships that maintain them will run on hydrogen generated in port from seawater using green energy sources.

IEEE Spectrum article on floating offshore wind platforms.

Article about what kind of boats and ships are needed to work on offshore wind platforms.