While many have warned the economic viability of moving crude by rail is threatened by the narrowing of the benchmark Brent-West Texas Intermediate spread, a group of railroads are still singing its praises, vowing that the shipping phenomenon has staying power.
At the same time, big upstream operator Newfield Exploration last week called CBR–a growing abbreviation for that mode of transportation–more of a “logistics” move to ship crude from the Utah’s Uinta Basin, instead of a way to gain price advantages.
So, how can there be so many differing opinions on the transportation method that has rapidly taken the crude logistics industry by storm?See story at the link.
By the way, MDW was one of the first to refer to shipping oil by railroad with the acronym CBR.
The earliest post I can find in which I used the "CBR" tag was back on May 9, 2012. The link was to a story in which EOG mentioned that it had received its first crude from the Bakken shale oil fields in North Dakota at the St. James, Louisiana terminal on April 15 (2012). Wow, that was just less than a year ago.
No comments:
Post a Comment