FYI, this is not political, it is logistical, please help keep it that way.
https://www.reuters.com/articl...ed-oil-idUSKBN1IB0GV
So it seems that the method currently used has been pipe to the Texas coast then moving by sea. However the pipelines are full and rail is being looked at. With Permian crude selling at 58 per barrel versus 70, the discount is steep. Also production is extremely high right now and still moving up.
There seem to be several logistical issues here, some I am aware of, some l am less aware of or have no knowledge of at all.
So the issues I see break down like this:
1. Current rail lines in West Texas are tied up with sand and other supply needs for completion and production, this limits potential rail traffic for tankers as the system seems to be clogged.
2. There is no one direct Class 1 carrier which can handle this, may not be a big deal, but curious what the routing could look like from the Permian to Philadelphia.
3. This one I am not so familiar with but it seems like not so many years ago there was a real shortage of rail tankers available to move crude, is this still an issue?
4. This one I have no knowledge of. Are there any current restrictions on routes that the crude is able to move through? I know over the years that some derailments and possible spillage has been a concern, but not sure by how much and if this has resulted in any restrictions. Can states, cities or counties restrict rail traffic like this in anyway, or is it strictly federal? Again, not looking for politics here, just factual details.