Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Is Oil a Push or Pull commodity?

  1. #1

    Default Is Oil a Push or Pull commodity?

    Your thoughts on this. What comes first, the demand for oil or the supply?

    When celebrities and others come to Alberta to look at the destruction the oil sands have created are they seeing the oil industry as pushing their products on the world?

    There's an old saying in the financial industry: "Mutual funds are sold, not bought."

    I think the opposite applies here: Oil is bought, not sold.

    Oil is generally a secondary purchase. People first spend money on an oil consuming product and then, second to that initial purchase, they spend money on oil. So to me, even though we pump oil through pipelines, it seems that figuratively speaking, oil is pulled from Alberta, not pushed from Alberta.

    Hence, environmental protestors seem to be targeting the producers and not the users. It's just not like drugs where the drug makers are essentially the pushers getting people hooked on their addictions. Our oil industry is more akin to the needle makers - the drugs are bought and now a means to make use of the drugs is needed.

  2. #2
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,499

    Default

    ^ Point aside, why would you describe the oil-sands industry as causing "destruction"?

    How many of you wanted to go on a vacation to visit northern Alberta, and camp where the oil sands mines are, I bet none. Why are the Alberta oil sands being villainized when there are so many better examples of "environmental villains" out there? All one has to do is look to the California oil fields to find heavier polluting oil, even Nigeria's oil is worse for the environment compared to Alberta crude. Why is it that the protesters do not go to Saudi, Iraq or even Russia and protest their oil field projects? Have these environmentalists ever seen lithium or diamond mines?

  3. #3

    Default

    ^sure, but the big scars on the landscape, temporary as they may be, are what attracts the attention.

    ^^I think for the most part your hypothesis is a good one. It is demand-driven, and often locked in with those prior decisions. On the consumer side, especially, there is a tendency to ignore operating costs. Buying a house or a car is a big expense that we all consider our ability to pay for before making the purchase, but we too often don't consider the ongoing expenses. Like, when you buy a house the bank will make you do calculations to make sure that you won't be paying more than a certain percentage of you income on your mortgage, but they will rarely add in your utility bills that come as a package with the house, and as fas as I know they NEVER advise you to consider transportation costs when deciding if you can afford a home - if you're approved for $400,000 you're approved for $400,000, no matter whether the commute is 500m and cost nothing, or it's 50km and costs $10,000 a year.
    There can only be one.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    ^ Point aside, why would you describe the oil-sands industry as causing "destruction"?

    How many of you wanted to go on a vacation to visit northern Alberta, and camp where the oil sands mines are, I bet none. Why are the Alberta oil sands being villainized when there are so many better examples of "environmental villains" out there? All one has to do is look to the California oil fields to find heavier polluting oil, even Nigeria's oil is worse for the environment compared to Alberta crude. Why is it that the protesters do not go to Saudi, Iraq or even Russia and protest their oil field projects? Have these environmentalists ever seen lithium or diamond mines?
    You want to spin the story do you?

    Any surface mining operation causes destruction of the environment it occurs on. That's just telling it like it is. Farming does the same. Hydro too. Cities too.

    Also in other threads I've talked about the remediation and reclamation that takes place in the oil sands.

    Oh as for camping there, I have picture of my father camping in the bush in Waterways (before it was s subdivision) in the late 1930s, early 40s when he worked up there. And a picture / interview article on him in the Ft McMurray paper when he went back for that vacation you talk about. So, yes some people vacation there.

    And one more thing. In the 1920s, 30s on it was unofficially and officially called "tar sands".
    Last edited by KC; 13-01-2017 at 10:27 PM.

  5. #5

    Default

    In the terms of your original post...it is a pull. Oil is bought not sold.

    It has been that way since before our dependence on it, when it was low volume and used for lighting.

    IMO

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •