Storage Wanted & Evicted

Storage wanted

In recent weeks the price of a crude oil barrel reached a negative $37 which means that producers were paying their customers, to take the stuff off their hands, because we’re not flying, we’re not driving, cruise ships are in dock, and industry is not burning as much fuel as before, the normal demand for oil diminished, yet production remained the same.

It’s difficult to shut down an oil field.

Where would you keep the sticky stuff?

Thirty million barrels in excess, per day.

Anywhere willing to take it, storage tank, ships, reserve systems, tankers.

Imagine, from $147 at its peak to negative $37 a barrel.

Which brings us to Aruba and the former Wickland facility. We’re in the news:

“Aruba has 10 available storage tanks with capacity for 665,000 bl of clean products, 5.224mn bl of crude and 518,000 bl of naphtha, according to promotional material obtained by Argus. Another seven tanks currently awaiting repairs have capacity for 4.224mn bl of crude.”

The estimated net revenue would be at least 5mn florins ($2.8mn per month).

According to the above article it will take about a month to complete some maintenance work around the jetties and tanks and look at offers that are pouring in from around the world.

My friends report Aruba would be better off leasing the storage facility to a third party oil storage company to manage, and worry about the ins and outs and the price of crude, and the availability on the global market. Aruba would be better served just collecting a steady commission instead of running the show itself.

But then knowing the people in charge, they will not make a decisions based on what’s good for Aruba, they will be making decisions based on what fits their agenda.  


Legally we all understand the verdict. The home ‘owner’ got the right to evict his tenant in October. The tenant got 6 months to relocate, and did not move. Thus at deadline, the bailiff showed up to place the washing machine in the street. Again, legally we understand the letter of the law followed by the judge but the actions are morally despicable.

An eviction mid-pandemic. Very bad timing. And it’s not like the home was needed urgently, for transfer to a new owner, and it’s not like the owner was desperate for a place to live himself.

My learned friends believe the justice system here became fed up with the former couple ripping each other’s throat out forever, wasting the court’s time. The judge must have been weary, when he allowed the ax to fall.

And this very public case, is an extremely bad precedent for many others, who will now suffer from morally despicable evictions, based on this precedent.

Didn’t we place a moratorium on eviction at the onset of the pandemic?

Interestingly, the court rushed out to publish the verdict on a SUNDAY, knowing it will be met by criticism, and wishing to suppress outrage.

But I was outraged anyway. A woman, a mother, who built her own house, sweet-talked into an unfavorable sale/lease agreement by a grease ball former lover/employer, where it is uncertain if she got paid, and her appeal to the court arrived late. The way she handled her affairs, wasn’t smart at all.

Marriages and love affairs fall part. Such is the nature of our consumer society which rarely bothers to repair anything. But people have the right for happiness post-divorce, and should not hold each other hostage, for the sake of control.

These two, could not get out of each other’s way, and remained locked and entangled. There is a lesson here.        

Share on:

May 05, 2020
Rona Coster