Conclusion-Contrary to some claims, NAFTA does not commit Canada to exporting a certain share of its energy supply to the United States regardless of Canadian needs. Canadian producers sell without restriction on the open market.
The only significant limitation NAFTA places on Canada is that it prevents the Canadian government from implementing policies that interfere with the normal functioning of energy markets in North America. Provided they have the demand and can pay the price, Canadian consumers could conceivably buy 100% of all energy produced in the country without violating NAFTA.
MOCKBA wrote:605 is nothing but anti-dumping clause and as been said many many times it only forbids Canadian government to implement policies that would give canadian businesses unfair competative advantage due to cheaper energy. As long as energy is available to everyone in NAFTA and actually outside NAFTA as well at the same price Canada could buy all the NG it produces... and what the hell could buy all North American NG if it wishes. Mexico doesn't have similar clause only because it is a poor country and cannot function without subsidized energy.Conclusion-Contrary to some claims, NAFTA does not commit Canada to exporting a certain share of its energy supply to the United States regardless of Canadian needs. Canadian producers sell without restriction on the open market.
The only significant limitation NAFTA places on Canada is that it prevents the Canadian government from implementing policies that interfere with the normal functioning of energy markets in North America. Provided they have the demand and can pay the price, Canadian consumers could conceivably buy 100% of all energy produced in the country without violating NAFTA.
Cashmere wrote:If so, explain why Canada is importing NG from the other side of the planet.MOCKBA wrote:605 is nothing but anti-dumping clause and as been said many many times it only forbids Canadian government to implement policies that would give canadian businesses unfair competative advantage due to cheaper energy. As long as energy is available to everyone in NAFTA and actually outside NAFTA as well at the same price Canada could buy all the NG it produces... and what the hell could buy all North American NG if it wishes. Mexico doesn't have similar clause only because it is a poor country and cannot function without subsidized energy.Conclusion-Contrary to some claims, NAFTA does not commit Canada to exporting a certain share of its energy supply to the United States regardless of Canadian needs. Canadian producers sell without restriction on the open market.
The only significant limitation NAFTA places on Canada is that it prevents the Canadian government from implementing policies that interfere with the normal functioning of energy markets in North America. Provided they have the demand and can pay the price, Canadian consumers could conceivably buy 100% of all energy produced in the country without violating NAFTA.
ROCKMAN wrote:could the Russian NG be used in the TS fields to increase production rates with that new volume going to China via the new pipeline?
jdmartin wrote:Shouldn't there be a cornucopian on this thread by now claiming that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about, that oil will be back to $30 in no time?
OilFinder2 wrote:jdmartin wrote:Shouldn't there be a cornucopian on this thread by now claiming that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about, that oil will be back to $30 in no time?
This guy doesn't know what he's talking about, and oil will be back to $30 in no time.
Then the prediction looks even more far off. We are not going to see $250 oil in the midst of the 2009 world wide depression.MonteQuest wrote:OilFinder2 wrote:This guy doesn't know what he's talking about, and oil will be back to $30 in no time.jdmartin wrote:Shouldn't there be a cornucopian on this thread by now claiming that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about, that oil will be back to $30 in no time?
From the link:"Officials said the prediction was for 2009." Oil may be back below $40 but a world wide depression is coming.
OilFinder2 wrote:This guy doesn't know what he's talking about, and oil will be back to $30 in no time.jdmartin wrote:Shouldn't there be a cornucopian on this thread by now claiming that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about, that oil will be back to $30 in no time?
DoomWarrior wrote:$30? How about $20?OilFinder2 wrote:This guy doesn't know what he's talking about, and oil will be back to $30 in no time.jdmartin wrote:Shouldn't there be a cornucopian on this thread by now claiming that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about, that oil will be back to $30 in no time?
MonteQuest wrote:Oil may be back below $40 but a world wide depression is coming.
JohnDenver wrote:MonteQuest wrote:Oil may be back below $40 but a world wide depression is coming.
Perhaps, but whatever is coming, it obviously wasn't caused by peak oil.
Bottom line: peak oil isn't a problem at all anymore. There's a huge glut of the stuff.
Well, recession at least.MonteQuest wrote:Oil may be back below $40 but a world wide depression is coming.
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
W/ rigorous lending practices and no funny bidness of Wall St. I doubt we would've seen the same crisis. Oil prices might have popped up a bit but w/o all the free credit running around pumping up economic growth and speculation I doubt they would've gone to $145/bbl.Bas wrote:That peakoil coincides with the worst economic crisis in living memory may be a coincidence but that by no means means that the same crisis couldn't have been caused by peakoil a (few) year(s) down the road.
Eventually it will, but considering we're probably going into the first world recession since the GD I think it'll take longer than a few years before we start having supply problems due to lack of production. That said, who knows, maybe it'll be a very mild recession and world consumption could pop up a bit.Bas wrote:And like many argue this crisis may be bad for the supply situation a few years down the road as projects for new oil now are being postponed.
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
yesplease wrote:W/ rigorous lending practices and no funny bidness of Wall St. I doubt we would've seen the same crisis. Oil prices might have popped up a bit but w/o all the free credit running around pumping up economic growth and speculation I doubt they would've gone to $145/bbl.Bas wrote:That peakoil coincides with the worst economic crisis in living memory may be a coincidence but that by no means means that the same crisis couldn't have been caused by peakoil a (few) year(s) down the road.
Eventually it will, but considering we're probably going into the first world recession since the GD I think it'll take longer than a few years before we start having supply problems due to lack of production. That said, who knows, maybe it'll be a very mild recession and world consumption could pop up a bit.Bas wrote:And like many argue this crisis may be bad for the supply situation a few years down the road as projects for new oil now are being postponed.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests