Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Texas Is About to Create OPEC’s Worst Nightmare

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 132 posts

Re: Texas Is About to Create OPEC’s Worst Nightmare

#71

Post by rcMgD2BwE72F »

2trill2spill wrote: post #19
sk5t wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it typical for each economy to export the thing it is best at producing? Also look at Norway--huge petroleum wealth, lots of Teslas because oil is dirty.

Depending on where you get the electricity to charge your Tesla it could be worse than oil. But seeing as Norway gets almost all of it's electricity from renewable energy that's not the case there.

Even though Norway is the perfect country where it makes sense to go full EV, few countries would gains from switching to electric (even from coal)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tailpipe#Carbon_footp...

And all grids get greener every year. And this accelerates, so your argument gets weaker over time.

Re: Texas Is About to Create OPEC’s Worst Nightmare

#72

Post by hnphillipj »

technofiend wrote: post #49
hnphillipj wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should know that oil is hardly used for elec. gen in developed countries. They are only indirect competitors - through the automobile.

>You should know that oil is not used for elec. gen in developed countries. Eh? When I worked for a United States generation company our coal-burning plants could and would be switched to bunker fuel if the price was right. To be fair it's not much (less than 5%) depending on how you slice it, but in their 2016 annual report [1] Dynegy reported 2.6 TWh (terawatt hours) sold into the wholesale market and .7 TWh into r…

> To be fair it's not much (less than 5%)

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3

Here's a better source. It's 0.5%. I felt that was enough to warrant using "not used in developed countries," but fair enough.

>Be careful about blanket statements unless you're an expert in the area because other HN readers are experts.

Easy there hotshot

Re: Texas Is About to Create OPEC’s Worst Nightmare

#73

Post by rcMgD2BwE72F »

Kaveren wrote: post #70
buboard wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the alliance is based around a lot more than just oil, curious what else

Intelligence sharing, mutual distaste for Iran, strategically placed ally, arms deals.

> Intelligence sharing, mutual distaste for Iran, strategically placed ally, arms deals.

It's the snake that bites its own tail, because these all go back to oil.

About the alleged common "distaste for Iran", for instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalization_of_the_Iranian...

Re: Texas Is About to Create OPEC’s Worst Nightmare

#74

Post by mc32 »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #45
mc32 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China imports more oil than we do and their demand for energy is only going to go up. We’re producing more energy domestically and lessening our reliance on foreign energy, so China has a bigger incentive to change their energy equation —in addition, their gov can just issue a decree and change policy with but a little corruption interfering a bit.

We have spent a non-insignificant amount on the Fifth Fleet (25 navy vessels) to ensure the stable supply of middle eastern oil onto energy markets. That seems to be of substantial incentive to mitigate our need for oil to drive our economy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Fifth_Fleet > Well, even a blind pig finds an acorn once in awhile. While working on a recent piece on how to cut $1 trillion from the…

Much of keeping gulf oil flowing is to keep the European and east Asian economies stable —they are petroleum poor. We get most of out foreign petros from Canada, Vz and Mx.

No doubt Trump would love to recall rhe fleet, if possible, but it’s not. Unless he’d like to see chaos in the world economy.

Re: Texas Is About to Create OPEC’s Worst Nightmare

#75

Post by hnphillipj »

rcMgD2BwE72F wrote: post #63
electricslpnsld wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trains don't get you and your overseas goods across oceans (yet).

Shipping accounts for ~2% of total US oil consumption so that's a tiny little chunk. Source: https://3kpnuxym9k04c8ilz2quku1czd-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/w...

Air is listed right beside that, which is probably closer to what he was referring two. Combined, they sit at 10%. Not as much as he thought, but nothing to scoff at.

Re: Texas Is About to Create OPEC’s Worst Nightmare

#76

Post by buboard »

Kaveren wrote: post #70
buboard wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the alliance is based around a lot more than just oil, curious what else

Intelligence sharing, mutual distaste for Iran, strategically placed ally, arms deals.

Strategically for what? all of those are related to oil and ARAMCO. Peace would not be an objective if the goal is to sell arms. And i doubt the americans have an inherent preference between the saudi and iranian people (maybe you could say that about israel however)

Re: Texas Is About to Create OPEC’s Worst Nightmare

#77

Post by SOLAR_FIELDS »

stcredzero wrote: post #28
CodeSheikh wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that Texas is also one of the largest producer of nuclear energy in the nation.

Lots of people in Texas have gotten good at making money from producing energy. Simple as that.

It is probably the most innovative place in the world for energy production. Hydraulic fracturing was invented there. Well, not invented, but innovated upon enough to the point where it was basically invented there. Without discussing the environmental problems that came with its onset, it’s easy to acknowledge how that one technique completely transformed the natural gas industry and the overall energy industry in the last 20-30 years.

Re: Texas Is About to Create OPEC’s Worst Nightmare

#78

Post by Kaveren »

rcMgD2BwE72F wrote: post #73
Kaveren wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intelligence sharing, mutual distaste for Iran, strategically placed ally, arms deals.

> Intelligence sharing, mutual distaste for Iran, strategically placed ally, arms deals. It's the snake that bites its own tail, because these all go back to oil. About the alleged common "distaste for Iran", for instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalization_of_the_Iranian...

I think that's an oversimplification of current affairs. It's complicated. Iran wants to spread its sect of Islam, and that is at odds with a lot of the Arab world. Iran also hates Israel much more than Saudi Arabia does, and that comes into play. The Middle East is also important because of radical Islam (you can debate the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11 and whatnot but I don't see that being about oil).

I don't see how the coup in 1953 means that we don't have a distaste for Iran today. Obviously it's an important part of recent history, but the government is not the same. The US and the UK used to fight in wars, but now we are allies.

Arms deals don't go back to oil because it benefits the American military industrial complex, not the energy industry.

Edit: Clarified statement on coup.

Edit again: I clicked on your old unedited link so I replied to a false understanding of what your point was, now my reply looks dumb.

Re: Texas Is About to Create OPEC’s Worst Nightmare

#79

Post by selimthegrim »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #11
Kaveren wrote: post #7

I'm hopeful that America can further lessen our dependence on Saudi Arabia as much as possible through this. Alas, the alliance is based around a lot more than just oil, and the Saudi vision is to shift away from oil reliance, but I'll gladly take a chink in the armor. > "Global oil demand has so far absorbed the extra U.S. crude barrels, limiting the impact on prices" This slightly curbs my optimism.

This isn't feasible. The refineries in the US are not designed for the same oil produced by the Permian basin (the Permian is producing light crude, US refineries are configured for medium to heavy crude). More importantly, oil is fungible on the world market; you can't effectively dictate "Oil produced in America is consumed in America" without drastically regulating the energy market with public policy (not going t…

My main concern is that the Permian Gulf Coast pipeline in the article is linking up to the Bayou Bridge one in Louisiana, and driving its construction rationale further. ETP is no saint and I don’t want to see them handed more of a reason to trample over people’s rights.

Re: Texas Is About to Create OPEC’s Worst Nightmare

#80

Post by kthejoker2 »

lykr0n wrote: post #40
hnphillipj wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should know that oil is hardly used for elec. gen in developed countries. They are only indirect competitors - through the automobile.

I do know that. I'm commenting on the fact that Texas is investing in renewables while at the same time investing nonrenewables at the same time.

Renewables are primarily for domestic consumption, oil is an export good.
Post reply on HN