Obama - no to Keystone pipeline

[michal1980]

If Obama is a socialist then so was every Republican president for the last half century.

did you read the definition?

Alot of the republican presidents had socialistic policies. Obamas are far to the left of them. So yes, he is a socialist.

 

[Fern]

Haha.

Check out this map showing all the pipelines already placed over the aquifer.

It looks like a spider web.

http://heartland.org/sites/default/files/ogallala_aquifer_map.pdf

Makes the concern about the aquifer look phony. I'm getting the impression the real objection is about tar sands (and fossil fuels).

Fern

 

[michal1980]

If Obama is a socialist then so was every Republican president for the last half century.

did you read the definition?

Obama fits, does he blame private business for the woes of the poor? Yes
Does he think that goverment should fix those woes? Yes

Hench he's a socialist.

The NO to the pipeline is just a futher example of that.

Alot of the republican presidents had socialistic policies. Obamas are far to the left of them. So yes, he is a socialist.

 

[CanOWorms]

It sure would, gas would hit $10/gal ($17.50/gal in Chicago) in days. We import close to 18% of our oil from Canada.

You're assuming that the US would do it immediately and that there's no replacement. Advancements and changes are coming by quickly in this area.

 

[shira]

Facts directly related to the conclusions are hard to come by in this study.

For example, TransAmerica has stated that 75% of the steel pipe will be manufactured in Little Rock, AR.

Skinner states otherwise "based on the experience of Phases 1 and 2, the final processing work for KXL will probably be performed in the US with most of the steel and pipe sourced from oustide of the US (notably India and South Korea)."

Who are we to believe?

Crap like this is littered throughout this "independent study". Most everything I read is highly biased speculation. I call it garbage.

Except that if you read further into the study, you'll see that it cites TransCanada's previous actions with respect to steel pipe, and TransCanada has indeed used the Russian and Indian pipe companies cited. The problem isn't that the study is vague. The problem is the TransCanada has not provided any details about who will manufacture the steel, who will manufacture the pipes, and where the manufacturing will take place. So the only option is to speculate based on TransCanada's previous practices.

If TransCanada plans to use U.S. domestic steel producers and U.S. domestic steel-pipe producers, let them be specific on how much they will spend domestically on steel and steel-pipe production and how much they will spend outside of the U.S. on steel and steel-pipe.

There are many, many other places in the study where it's pointed out that the details of TransCanada's claims are unavailable, and that's it's therefore impossible to verify that TransCanada's claims are true. All the study can do, therefore, is to use the best available information and try to connect the dots itself. If TransCanada disagrees with the information in the study, then the onus is on TransCanada to provide SPECIFIC information.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

You're assuming that the US would do it immediately and that there's no replacement. Advancements and changes are coming by quickly in this area.

The US doesn't have the ability to replace 18% that quickly.

 

[CanOWorms]

The US doesn't have the ability to replace 18% that quickly.

How much is "that quickly?" I haven't set a time frame, so I'm curious what you perceive it as.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

How much is "that quickly?" I haven't set a time frame, so I'm curious what you perceive it as.

If Canada shut off the supply lines to the US, the replacement would have to take place within weeks.

 

[CanOWorms]

If Canada shut off the supply lines to the US, the replacement would have to take place within weeks.

Canada is too spineless to do such a thing. The Canadian government is also owned by the oil industry.

 

[RabidMongoose]

So we should immiediately shut down all existing Canadian pipelines in the US? LOL

I am not in favor of any trade with Canada, be it for oil or anything else.

 

[sandorski]

The US is washed up, best to turn China into our lap dog now anyway.

 

[Whiskey16]

A pipeline through Northern Alberta and Northern BC is currently being constructed

No, no such thing is "currently being constructed."

You lack quite a bit of knowledge, eh? Preliminary hearings for the proposal have not even concluded.

Your opinions are invalidated:

..with some minor resistance from a bunch of self righteous mother-earth-loving-natives.

As per law, those individual groups have a valid say upon activities on their treatied land, or the decades of expected court muddle for territory still open for treaty settelments.

Not going anywhere near Vancouver.

So? The residents of the BC electorate and multitudes of various distinct First Nations are present throughout the province, well beyond Vancouver.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

It doesn't matter anymore Canada is not going to wait for Obama to stop playing political games or for him to secure his re-election. They are moving toward selling off this oil to Asia.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...ia-after-obama-rejects-keystone-pipeline.html

Canada Pledges to Sell Oil to Asia After Obama Keystone Denial

By Theophilos Argitis and Jeremy van Loon - Wed Jan 18 23:03:35 GMT 2012

Canadian policy makers reacted to President Barack Obama’s decision to deny a pipeline permit to TransCanada Corp. (TRP) by pledging to rely less on the U.S. for energy sales and export more oil to Asian markets.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, in a telephone call today, told Obama “that Canada will continue to work to diversify its energy exports,” according to details of the call provided by Harper’s office. Canadian Natural Resource Minister Joe Oliver said relying less on the U.S. would help bolster the country’s “financial security.”

The “decision by the Obama administration underlines the importance of diversifying and expanding our markets, including the growing Asian market,” Oliver told reporters in Ottawa.

Currently, 99 percent of Canada’s crude exports go to the U.S., a figure that Harper wants to reduce in his bid to make Canada a “superpower” in global oil markets.

Canada accounts for more than 90 percent of all proven reserves outside of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, according to data compiled in the BP Statistical Review of World Energy. Most of Canada’s crude is produced from oil sands deposits in the landlocked province of Alberta, where output is expected to double over the next eight years, according to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

Harper “expressed his profound disappointment with the news,” according to the statement, which added that Obama told Harper the rejection was not based on the project’s merit and that the company is free to reapply.
Enbridge Pipeline

Canada this month began hearings on a proposed pipeline by Enbridge Inc. to move crude from Alberta’s oil sands to the British Columbia coast, where it could be shipped to Asian markets.

Environmentalists and Canadian opposition lawmakers welcomed the Obama administration’s decision. Megan Leslie, a lawmaker for the opposition New Democratic Party, said the Keystone pipeline project was harmful to Canada’s energy security.

“What I’m opposed to is continuing the unchecked expansion of the oil sands,” Leslie said by telephone.

The denial came before a Feb. 21 deadline set by Congress after Obama postponed a decision in November. TransCanada said the 1,661-mile (2,673-kilometer) project would carry 700,000 barrels of crude a day from Alberta’s oil sands to refineries on the U.S. Gulf coast, crossing six U.S. states and creating 20,000 jobs.

“I’m disappointed that Republicans in Congress forced this decision, but it does not change my administration’s commitment to American-made energy,” Obama said today in a statement. “We will continue to look for new ways to partner with the oil-and- gas industry to increase our energy security.”
May Hurt Relations

The decision may hurt relations between the two countries, according to David Pumphrey of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

“It certainly introduces new uncertainties into the economic relationship,” said Pumphrey, deputy director of the energy and national security program at the CSIS. “This is a cornerstone of economic development for the country.”

Canadian policy makers said they remain optimistic TransCanada will eventually be able to proceed.

Alberta Premier Alison Redford said in a press conference in Edmonton that it is still “entirely possible” the pipeline will be built, and said it was good news that TransCanada planned to apply again.

Canada will continue to support TransCanada Corp.’s plans to build the Keystone XL pipeline, Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird said, adding that it is in the best interests of both Canada and the United States.

“We strongly believe that Keystone’s in the best interests of both countries,” he said. “We’ll continue to be an active supporter of the project.”

 

[umbrella39]

Not a bad idea. My brother is a certified welder and he was looking forward to working on the project. I understand this kind of project pays big bucks for that type of welding.

Fern

Yeah, we can run ads on all the good paying jobs the GOP shipped off shore the past 11 years, too.

I understand those already were paying hard working Americans big bucks already, not these imaginary jobs that haven't been created yet for your brother.

Agreeing with spidey? Nice to see the list gain a new buddy....

EDIT: NVM... odd vBulletin rules don't allow it...

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Yeah, we can run ads on all the good paying jobs the GOP shipped off shore the past 11 years, too.

I understand those already were paying hard working Americans big bucks already, not these imaginary jobs that haven't been created yet for your brother.

Agreeing with spidey? Nice to see the list gain a new buddy....

EDIT: NVM... odd vBulletin rules don't allow it...

Who signed GATT, NAFTA, who gave China the "favored trading partner" status? Oh wait that was all Bill Clinton.

I guess we can all rely on "green jerbs" from companies like Solyndra and Obama's other "shovel ready" bullshit.

 

[Fern]

Yeah, we can run ads on all the good paying jobs the GOP shipped off shore the past 11 years, too.

I understand those already were paying hard working Americans big bucks already, not these imaginary jobs that haven't been created yet for your brother.

Agreeing with spidey? Nice to see the list gain a new buddy....

The GOP hasn't shipped off any jobs. Nice job of parroting the taking points though.

Business aren't leaving here because we don't have enough govt regulations.

They leave for a bunch of reasons. The only real impact political policies can have is to run them off with burdensome regulations or high taxes, neither of which the GOP supported or implemented.

Fern

 

[umbrella39]

Yeah, Clinton is totally responsible for the mass exodus of jobs during Bush's term. Winnar111! Yep, big business owners always turn to the dems when they want to screw their hard working Americans and fatten their own wallets at their expense!

EDIT: was reply to 666

 

[theeedude]

It makes sense for Canada to build a pipeline to its own west coast. It doesn't make sense for us to build a pipeline to Houston so that Canada can export their oil from there. If they are going to export this oil outside of the US, they should deal with the environmental problems on their territory.

 

[umbrella39]

The GOP hasn't shipped off any jobs. Nice job of parroting the taking points though.

Business aren't leaving here because we don't have enough govt regulations.

They leave for a bunch of reasons. The only real impact political policies can have is to run them off with burdensome regulations or high taxes, neither of which the GOP supported or implemented.

Fern

Better job placating spidey regarding those yet to be created pipeline jobs!

Same parrot... we are just talking the different hole that the points come out of.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Exactly. Let the Canadians deal with their own dirty oil. We don't need the death of the world on the American conscience. Let the Canadians destroy the world for a quick buck.

 

[umbrella39]

Exactly. Let the Canadians deal with their own dirty oil. We don't need the death of the world on the American conscience. Let the Canadians destroy the world for a quick buck.

You are now an America hating job killer etc, etc, etc!

 

[Whiskey16]

As someone who has actually seen the tar sands up in Northern Alberta to call them an environmental disaster is far from true. Much of this land is swampy and sandy.

Wow, just wow. As a physical geographer and geotech, I just have to face palm at such inanity.

Did you know that the sand up there actually has oil in it? Did you know that the environment is naturally "polluted" with oil in this area? Extracting oil using modern processes leaves the area cleaner than it was before.

With that sense, drinking Draino will clean your bowels out, too.

A quick little lecture for you, kid:

-- Pollution is of expelling pollutants into the environment that would not be there otherwise. The processing of crude bitumen from clay, silica sand, and water, releases aerosal pollutants along with billions of litres of, now contaminated, water that may not be fully contained.

-- the lack of such industry will not release pollutants of the relatively inert strata under other glacial deposits and a veneer of ecologically supporting soil.

The second item I must discuss is that the delivery and transportation of Canadian crude oil is highly regulated and handled in a much safer manner than the current methods used to transport Middle Eastern oil.

Yes, Canada has regulations that you are applauding. Yet the irony is that your sheer ignorance misses the reality that Canadian federal law will have to be changed to de-regulate in order to permit petroleum shipments out of Kitimat.

Also did you know there are already multiple pipelines going to the US from Canada? In fact both countries have pipelines all over the place. Why are you idiots raising such a fuss about another one? ... Dare I call you a war monger to put your environmental bullshit above the lives of real people.

"Real people" Listen kid, those who may disagree with you are also people. Dehumanize them if you wish, but you will only be written off as an idealogical troll.

Back on point, the TransCanada effort will succeed as they redirect the route to not infringe upon vulnerable water tables.

 

[michal1980]

I know america is making too many jobs these days. We dont need any more.

Our employement roles are just too low right now, need to add a few more people to that list.

 

[Jhhnn]

I know america is making too many jobs these days. We dont need any more.

Our employement roles are just too low right now, need to add a few more people to that list.

Yeh, that's why we need to cut, cut, cut federal spending... or is this just the usual forked tongue speech?

 

[Muse]

According to the NY Times Obama didn't say no, what he said was the 60 day limit on evaluation stipulated by the Republicans was insufficient to determine the important issues. There is no reason it can't be approved but to do so the process has to be started over. Feb. 19th or so is the current deadline. There's a whole lot of stupid and sorry invective flying around about this, not a lot in the way if reasoned discourse, it seems.