We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : KMI- a fallen high dividend yielder - for how long? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E_K_S who wrote (117)1/18/2021 12:30:19 PM
From: robert b furman  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 161
Hi E_K_S,

I may well have a bad impression, but I thought there was not a lot of desire to build the pipeline.

Shale will be so much cheaper and plentiful, with export ability from the Gulf of Mexico already in existence and more coming on why build an expensive pipeline for oil coming from Canada.

Remember we have a glut of oil. LOL

Maybe after the Capex destruction we've already endured the price of WTI goes back to 100.00 and it is justifiable, but with a 3 years completion lag?

Not sur eit is a wise investment?

Canada has already bought out KMI's Transmountain pipeline. I say let them do a pipeline to the west coast and build a Pacific Coast terminal.

The alyeska pipeline in Valdez is running at 25%. Seems no real need for the frozen tundra development either.

A lot of these huge infrastructure plans go away with a commodity collapse.

I think that is what we're seeing. Once bit twice shy.

The beauty of inexpensive shale. Prices go up, turm it on, prices go down,turn it off.

The US holds the pricing of world oil.

Not a bad place to be in. Surely should curtail long timeframe capital developments - unless the reserves are huge and can be done cheaply over the long run. ie Guyanna, Suriname, Brazil.