How YOUR Senator Voted On Keystone XL

[TooTall]

Why is that? The Koch brothers made their money running businesses with thousands of employees. Do you even know how Soros made his millions?

but aren't you just SWAPPING jobs, at the very most? You're killing all the trucker's permanent jobs hauling the stuff now and trading those jobs in for temporary construction jobs? Taking from Peter to give to Paul?

There is a shortage of long haul truckers as it is, other things will come in to pick up the slack. Same goes with rail transport.

If safety and environmental concerns such as spills are your top priority, a pipeline is the safest way to go.

Will our government have to use eminent domain to take American citizens homes and land away from them for a foreign country's needs?

I thought the US needed the oil at our refineries. That is where it is going to end up. If I understand eminent domain, homes and land are not 'taken' they are bought and paid for at the fair market value.

No.

This Canadian company can come in and buy the land from the person as you say, but if the family owning the land does not want to sell to the company wanting the land, then the government could use Eminent Domain, TO FORCE the families that don't want to sell to this company, off of their homestead, at merely a fair market value.

I will repeat, I can't imagine the pipeline requiring enough land to force someone off of their homestead. It might cause an inconvenience for a short period of time and the owner should be compensated for that.

 

[TooTall]

There is a shortage of long haul truckers as it is, other things will come in to pick up the slack. Same goes with rail transport.

If safety and environmental concerns such as spills are your top priority, a pipeline is the safest way to go.

Will our government have to use eminent domain to take American citizens homes and land away from them for a foreign country's needs?

I thought the US needed the oil at our refineries. That is where it is going to end up. If I understand eminent domain, homes and land are not 'taken' they are bought and paid for at the fair market value.

No.

This Canadian company can come in and buy the land from the person as you say, but if the family owning the land does not want to sell to the company wanting the land, then the government could use Eminent Domain, TO FORCE the families that don't want to sell to this company, off of their homestead, at merely a fair market value.

That is what I said. What makes you think they should get more than the fair market value? And, they can always sue for more and many do just that.

I do not think that a ditch three feet wide that a pipe is put in and then covered up would require anyone to lose their homestead.

I once owned a home on three acres that had a buried pipeline as my western border. There was a 10 foot right of way for the pipeline, but it didn't bother me or any of my neighbors in this restricted sub-division.

I thought I remembered for the lower keystone pipeline there were many people fighting to hold on to their own land....lots of eminent domain suits going on...

I just did a search and here is a recent dispute going on in Nebraska...

On Wednesday, a Nebraska judge struck down a state law that would have allowed TransCanada TRP +2.24% to use the power of eminent domain to seize private land to help construct a short 300-mile segment of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline between Cushing and Steele City, Nebraska.

The law in question, LB 1161, allows Nebraska Governor David Heineman and TransCanada to avoid regulators in siting a crucial portion of the pipeline.

Lancaster County District Judge Stephanie Stacy sided with three landowners who challenged the law, finding that regulatory power over industrial companies such as TransCanada must remain with agencies such as the Nebraska Public Service Commission, not the governor’s office.

The judge ruled that the law violated the state constitution, and she issued an injunction blocking the Governor’s office from taking any action on the Governor’s January 2013 approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline route, which would include allowing land to be acquired through eminent domain (Court Documents).

Nebraska’s attorney general is appealing Judge Stacy’s ruling.

While this judgment seems very local, it has national impact. Eminent domain is the power of the state to take private property for public use by a state or national government. However, it can be legislatively delegated by the state to municipalities, government subdivisions, or even private persons or corporations when they are authorized to exercise functions of public character, usually for health and safety (Wikipedia).

It is sometimes given to corporations. And it is debatable whether building the Keystone aides the health or safety of America, or even our general interest.

More Here:
TransCanada Tries To Seize U.S. Land For Keystone Pipeline - Forbes

That looks like an argument about who gets to authorize eminent domain and all it does is make a lot of lawyers money.

 

[TooTall]

That is what I said. What makes you think they should get more than the fair market value? And, they can always sue for more and many do just that.

I do not think that a ditch three feet wide that a pipe is put in and then covered up would require anyone to lose their homestead.

I once owned a home on three acres that had a buried pipeline as my western border. There was a 10 foot right of way for the pipeline, but it didn't bother me or any of my neighbors in this restricted sub-division.

Just because a pipeline did not bother you, does not mean it does not destroy others livelihood. My state passed a law requiring all eminent domain must be paid 150% of fair market value, it should have been 200%. First off "Fair Market Value" plummets when rumors of condemnation of property start swirling, so you get screwed by the time the seizure & payment takes place.

Then prime real-estate frontage value is destroyed when ROW prevents building on it. I know a family who had a automotive scrap yard in their family for 75 years before their property was seized by developers. It cost more to relocate the automobiles & the business than they got from the property. They were forced into bankruptcy because some billionaire wanted to build a stadium & parking lot on their land.

You can go fuck yourself with that seizing peoples property for "fair market value" crap! My grand parents had their entire 640 acre farm seized for pennies on the dollar because the government wanted to build a lake. Go try & buy another farm & relocate the operation for that. I have 3 power line, 1 gas line, 1 telecom & 2 oil line ROW's on my properties. Don't tell me it has not cost me dearly for those.

My neighbor plowed up a Sprint Fiber Optic cable & they sued him for so dam much money that they took his entire farm. I have hit the oil pipeline with my V-Ripper plow & peeled the plastic coating off. Just imagine if I had broken the pipe & caused an oil leak. I would have lost everything. They fly spy planes over my property twice a day to inspect the ROWs. Then every time they see something they don't like, their people come & hunt you down asking 20 questions.

A pipeline only requires a few feet of right of way so you can go fuck yourself. It isn't a parking lot or a lake, so quit comparing apples to oranges. The fellow with the junkyard that went bankrupt hired the wrong lawyer and I don't believe you plowed deep enough to hit an oil pipeline.

 

[martybegan]

There is a shortage of long haul truckers as it is, other things will come in to pick up the slack. Same goes with rail transport.

If safety and environmental concerns such as spills are your top priority, a pipeline is the safest way to go.

Will our government have to use eminent domain to take American citizens homes and land away from them for a foreign country's needs?

I thought the US needed the oil at our refineries. That is where it is going to end up. If I understand eminent domain, homes and land are not 'taken' they are bought and paid for at the fair market value.

No.

This Canadian company can come in and buy the land from the person as you say, but if the family owning the land does not want to sell to the company wanting the land, then the government could use Eminent Domain, TO FORCE the families that don't want to sell to this company, off of their homestead, at merely a fair market value.

That is what I said. What makes you think they should get more than the fair market value? And, they can always sue for more and many do just that.

I do not think that a ditch three feet wide that a pipe is put in and then covered up would require anyone to lose their homestead.

I once owned a home on three acres that had a buried pipeline as my western border. There was a 10 foot right of way for the pipeline, but it didn't bother me or any of my neighbors in this restricted sub-division.

I thought I remembered for the lower keystone pipeline there were many people fighting to hold on to their own land....lots of eminent domain suits going on...

I just did a search and here is a recent dispute going on in Nebraska...

On Wednesday, a Nebraska judge struck down a state law that would have allowed TransCanada TRP +2.24% to use the power of eminent domain to seize private land to help construct a short 300-mile segment of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline between Cushing and Steele City, Nebraska.

The law in question, LB 1161, allows Nebraska Governor David Heineman and TransCanada to avoid regulators in siting a crucial portion of the pipeline.

Lancaster County District Judge Stephanie Stacy sided with three landowners who challenged the law, finding that regulatory power over industrial companies such as TransCanada must remain with agencies such as the Nebraska Public Service Commission, not the governor’s office.

The judge ruled that the law violated the state constitution, and she issued an injunction blocking the Governor’s office from taking any action on the Governor’s January 2013 approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline route, which would include allowing land to be acquired through eminent domain (Court Documents).

Nebraska’s attorney general is appealing Judge Stacy’s ruling.

While this judgment seems very local, it has national impact. Eminent domain is the power of the state to take private property for public use by a state or national government. However, it can be legislatively delegated by the state to municipalities, government subdivisions, or even private persons or corporations when they are authorized to exercise functions of public character, usually for health and safety (Wikipedia).

It is sometimes given to corporations. And it is debatable whether building the Keystone aides the health or safety of America, or even our general interest.

More Here:
TransCanada Tries To Seize U.S. Land For Keystone Pipeline - Forbes

nine times out of 10, these people fight for more money, not for any cause. This is less an issue of eminent domain as a whole, and more of what government agency can start the procedure.

 

[Newby]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

and thousands of construction jobs are a bad thing? When people tout other infrastructure jobs they get all giddy when talking about the construction jobs created.

44 jobs on the Pipeline only, which ignores the additional jobs created at the feed end, and at the discharge end, and the increased refining jobs. Yes, the feed end jobs go to Canadians, but is that a bad thing?

How many permanent jobs does a solar plant or a wind turbine generate?

the 44 ignores none of those things. you just don't appreciate the hoax being outed. as for construction jobs, why don't you care about them unless the environment is being undermined. where are the jobs programs to actually help the average person in this country and rebuild our failing infrastructure?

i'll ignore the wind turbine thing because it's silly.

I work in wastewater treatment, so I love any infrastructure job, so that dog will not hunt.

All jobs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

This is a oil line, there are thousands of others out there, and the oil will get from point a to point b somehow. You idiots are basically stopping the safest way of doing it just because "carbon bad, unga bunga"

and most of our 'failing infrastructure" is related to auto use. WAIT i thought cars are evul as well??????

You are talking to an engineer here on an engineering topic, and are thus out of your weight class.

I don't even think they're against it because they care about the environment, they're only fighting it because it's what their liberal whacko masters have instructed them to do. Most of them don't understand any of the details. That's how our whole political system works these days, someone makes some sweeping generalized statement without any fact to back it up, and it's just accepted and repeated by the zombies that will follow whatever they say without any thought.

 

[Newby]

Both Utah senators are Koch suckers. Big surprise.

And George Soros and Powell Jobs contributed as much or more to the Democrat effort. So what?

I probably gave the impression that I'm a big fan of Democrats when I'm not. The only thing positive I can say about them is that they're not Republicans. Tell me what Soros and Powell have done and maybe I'll condemn them as harshly as I do the Kochs.

Soros' currency trading record is pretty much common knowledge to anyone that ever looks at the dark side of their icons. Why not do a bit of research.

As for Powell Jobs, I'm sure she is a nice lady, but she does spread around Steve's apple bucks to any Progressive that asks.

I have no interest in soros. the wingers certainly do, though.

you should concern yourself more with the Koch's and the lies they tell the right.

and neither soros nor powell nor apple have anything to do with the fraud of the pipeline.

Ahh but Warren Buffet does. He makes billions transporting oil by rail and truck, billions he stands to lose when Keystone is built.

You're smarter than that, Jill. Read something besides the DNC talking points.

Typically all you have to do with these complex political positions is follow the money. Whoever is opposing it is not opposing it because of 'ethical' reasons, it's about money. They perpetrate the 'ethical' lie to their followers who take it up and run with it in social media and on the news, but at the very root, it's always about money.

 

[Newby]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

and thousands of construction jobs are a bad thing? When people tout other infrastructure jobs they get all giddy when talking about the construction jobs created.

44 jobs on the Pipeline only, which ignores the additional jobs created at the feed end, and at the discharge end, and the increased refining jobs. Yes, the feed end jobs go to Canadians, but is that a bad thing?

How many permanent jobs does a solar plant or a wind turbine generate?

the 44 ignores none of those things. you just don't appreciate the hoax being outed. as for construction jobs, why don't you care about them unless the environment is being undermined. where are the jobs programs to actually help the average person in this country and rebuild our failing infrastructure?

i'll ignore the wind turbine thing because it's silly.

I work in wastewater treatment, so I love any infrastructure job, so that dog will not hunt.

All jobs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

This is a oil line, there are thousands of others out there, and the oil will get from point a to point b somehow. You idiots are basically stopping the safest way of doing it just because "carbon bad, unga bunga"

and most of our 'failing infrastructure" is related to auto use. WAIT i thought cars are evul as well??????

You are talking to an engineer here on an engineering topic, and are thus out of your weight class.

all jobs are not equal. some benefit us as a society (for example, infrastructure jobs like roads, high speed transit, bridges, tunnels, etc). the pipeline benefits no one but a Canadian oil company and the multi-national corporations while undermining our environment and, arguably violating a number of treaties with native American tribes along the way. (though I have far more looking into that to do before I accept it as true).

I am making no observation as to engineering techniques. I leave that to you and others who know about that area. I am, however, commenting on the utility of a project that benefits no one but multi-national corporations and, ultimately, employes a handful of people.

The pipeline will keep oil off the rails and roads and benefit different multi-national corporations.
Yes, someone will make money no matter how oil is moved. You seem to have a problem with just who makes it.

Exactly!

 

[Newby]

Why is that? The Koch brothers made their money running businesses with thousands of employees. Do you even know how Soros made his millions?

but aren't you just SWAPPING jobs, at the very most? You're killing all the trucker's permanent jobs hauling the stuff now and trading those jobs in for temporary construction jobs? Taking from Peter to give to Paul?

There is a shortage of long haul truckers as it is, other things will come in to pick up the slack. Same goes with rail transport.

If safety and environmental concerns such as spills are your top priority, a pipeline is the safest way to go.

Will our government have to use eminent domain to take American citizens homes and land away from them for a foreign country's needs?

I thought the US needed the oil at our refineries. That is where it is going to end up. If I understand eminent domain, homes and land are not 'taken' they are bought and paid for at the fair market value.

No.

This Canadian company can come in and buy the land from the person as you say, but if the family owning the land does not want to sell to the company wanting the land, then the government could use Eminent Domain, TO FORCE the families that don't want to sell to this company, off of their homestead, at merely a fair market value.

So you would be against any project that uses eminent domain? You find it unconstitutional? It's been around since the beginning?

 

[Care4all]

Will our government have to use eminent domain to take American citizens homes and land away from them for a foreign country's needs?

I thought the US needed the oil at our refineries. That is where it is going to end up. If I understand eminent domain, homes and land are not 'taken' they are bought and paid for at the fair market value.

No.

This Canadian company can come in and buy the land from the person as you say, but if the family owning the land does not want to sell to the company wanting the land, then the government could use Eminent Domain, TO FORCE the families that don't want to sell to this company, off of their homestead, at merely a fair market value.

That is what I said. What makes you think they should get more than the fair market value? And, they can always sue for more and many do just that.

I do not think that a ditch three feet wide that a pipe is put in and then covered up would require anyone to lose their homestead.

I once owned a home on three acres that had a buried pipeline as my western border. There was a 10 foot right of way for the pipeline, but it didn't bother me or any of my neighbors in this restricted sub-division.

the house is worth more to them than what some may think the Fair market value is....a long time family homestead, may feel their family history on the land is worth more than money.

Thus EMINENT DOMAIN, FORCING these people to sell, the government telling them their personal property rights are NOT greater than the foreign company that wants to take their land away from them via the hands of using our Government....

Why was it an outrage in New London Ct, with an American Company getting our GOVERNMENT to take these home owners land and home away... and it is NOT even being mentioned now, with a foreign company USING OUR GVT, to take the property away from American citizens that don't want to sell it.

That part just doesn't sit right with me....

As I previously stated, I can't imagine a pipeline requiring more than a few feet wide piece of land that will be restored when the pipe is buried or even elevated above ground. Very similar to the 10 foot easement in the front and one side of my home that sits on a corner lot. They just finished installing a 16 in storm pipeline that required digging a ditch and destroying about 10 feet of my well manicured lawn. The contractor finished yesterday and the landscaping crew is scheduled to come out next week and install sod to restore my lawn back as good as new.

When you find an example of someone losing their homestead to the Keystone pipeline, let me know and I will be just as outrages as you.

well, I would imagine that those involved have their own different circumstances and some may be just like you, and it may not bother them or affect their homestead, or have no longevity with their family heritage there, but others may have problems with it and should not be forced to do this via eminent domain at a mere fair market value... There is no benefit to the community, or to the nation in any great value to the public.... if the builder wants the land, then the builder and the owner should come up with what that $ amount is.... THAT'S the free market. Eminent Domain is NOT....especially in these circumstances, where there is no benefit to the public, but only the few who financially benefit, imo.

 

[Newby]

I thought the US needed the oil at our refineries. That is where it is going to end up. If I understand eminent domain, homes and land are not 'taken' they are bought and paid for at the fair market value.

No.

This Canadian company can come in and buy the land from the person as you say, but if the family owning the land does not want to sell to the company wanting the land, then the government could use Eminent Domain, TO FORCE the families that don't want to sell to this company, off of their homestead, at merely a fair market value.

That is what I said. What makes you think they should get more than the fair market value? And, they can always sue for more and many do just that.

I do not think that a ditch three feet wide that a pipe is put in and then covered up would require anyone to lose their homestead.

I once owned a home on three acres that had a buried pipeline as my western border. There was a 10 foot right of way for the pipeline, but it didn't bother me or any of my neighbors in this restricted sub-division.

the house is worth more to them than what some may think the Fair market value is....a long time family homestead, may feel their family history on the land is worth more than money.

Thus EMINENT DOMAIN, FORCING these people to sell, the government telling them their personal property rights are NOT greater than the foreign company that wants to take their land away from them via the hands of using our Government....

Why was it an outrage in New London Ct, with an American Company getting our GOVERNMENT to take these home owners land and home away... and it is NOT even being mentioned now, with a foreign company USING OUR GVT, to take the property away from American citizens that don't want to sell it.

That part just doesn't sit right with me....

As I previously stated, I can't imagine a pipeline requiring more than a few feet wide piece of land that will be restored when the pipe is buried or even elevated above ground. Very similar to the 10 foot easement in the front and one side of my home that sits on a corner lot. They just finished installing a 16 in storm pipeline that required digging a ditch and destroying about 10 feet of my well manicured lawn. The contractor finished yesterday and the landscaping crew is scheduled to come out next week and install sod to restore my lawn back as good as new.

When you find an example of someone losing their homestead to the Keystone pipeline, let me know and I will be just as outrages as you.

well, I would imagine that those involved have their own different circumstances and some may be just like you, and it may not bother them or affect their homestead, or have no longevity with their family heritage there, but others may have problems with it and should not be forced to do this via eminent domain at a mere fair market value... There is no benefit to the community, or to the nation in any great value to the public.... if the builder wants the land, then the builder and the owner should come up with what that $ amount is.... THAT'S the free market. Eminent Domain is NOT....especially in these circumstances, where there is no benefit to the public, but only the few who financially benefit, imo.

There is no benefit to the community, or to the nation in any great value to the public....

That's not true at all.

 

[KissMy]

That is what I said. What makes you think they should get more than the fair market value? And, they can always sue for more and many do just that.

I do not think that a ditch three feet wide that a pipe is put in and then covered up would require anyone to lose their homestead.

I once owned a home on three acres that had a buried pipeline as my western border. There was a 10 foot right of way for the pipeline, but it didn't bother me or any of my neighbors in this restricted sub-division.

Just because a pipeline did not bother you, does not mean it does not destroy others livelihood. My state passed a law requiring all eminent domain must be paid 150% of fair market value, it should have been 200%. First off "Fair Market Value" plummets when rumors of condemnation of property start swirling, so you get screwed by the time the seizure & payment takes place.

Then prime real-estate frontage value is destroyed when ROW prevents building on it. I know a family who had a automotive scrap yard in their family for 75 years before their property was seized by developers. It cost more to relocate the automobiles & the business than they got from the property. They were forced into bankruptcy because some billionaire wanted to build a stadium & parking lot on their land.

You can go fuck yourself with that seizing peoples property for "fair market value" crap! My grand parents had their entire 640 acre farm seized for pennies on the dollar because the government wanted to build a lake. Go try & buy another farm & relocate the operation for that. I have 3 power line, 1 gas line, 1 telecom & 2 oil line ROW's on my properties. Don't tell me it has not cost me dearly for those.

My neighbor plowed up a Sprint Fiber Optic cable & they sued him for so dam much money that they took his entire farm. I have hit the oil pipeline with my V-Ripper plow & peeled the plastic coating off. Just imagine if I had broken the pipe & caused an oil leak. I would have lost everything. They fly spy planes over my property twice a day to inspect the ROWs. Then every time they see something they don't like, their people come & hunt you down asking 20 questions.

A pipeline only requires a few feet of right of way so you can go fuck yourself. It isn't a parking lot or a lake, so quit comparing apples to oranges. The fellow with the junkyard that went bankrupt hired the wrong lawyer and I don't believe you plowed deep enough to hit an oil pipeline.

You are a total idiot. Keystone ROW is 50' ft wide. See this aerial picture of a 40 year old oil distillate pipeline running through woods near my property. That is a huge area I cant grow trees on or build near. My prime highway frontage commercial real-estate value is completely destroyed.

I planted hundreds of walnut trees on 15' irrigated grid spacings 15 years before a half mile long 200' ft wide power line ROW came through them. I lost over 400 Missouri Walnut Trees that sell for $1,500 each when they reach 25 years old. They offered $5k per acre for 10 acres of land. On just 2 of those acres I lost $600k worth of trees alone.

In 2004 Opal Henderson lost a salvage yard bringing her $170,000 a year in income because Billionaire Anheuser Busch wanted to build a new Cardinals Stadium, parking area & restaurant-bar district. It's been 10 years & she is 83 years old & out a $million of lost income plus half a million cleanup fees & lawyers fees of $330K. She won a lawsuit & again in supreme court, but she will be dead & never see a penny.

Government only serves Billionaires who don't pay taxes. They tax & crush the workers & small business owners to death. Koch sucking Repubtards are only looking out for their Koch Billionaire's Canadian Oil Sands project that needs the US government to screw the hell out of US property owners so they can increase the price they get paid for their Canadian Oil. Koch has brainwashed you repubtards with all their bogus foundations media propaganda.

 

[Care4all]

I am not against this Pipeline, I just want to know all about it before I take a solid position for it, or against it, if it turns out that way....

I want to know more... like why is this XL part of the keystone pipeline even needed? From the maps that have been shown on this thread, it looks like there is already a pipeline up there? Sure this xl part looks like it cuts a handful of miles off of the trek on the other two pipelines because it goes at an angle, but what the heck?

Is it needed because this tar sand oil needs a separate pipeline than the two pipelines that connect up there in the right hand corner of North Dakota, then down towards the Gulf? I mean doesn't it take a heated pipeline and one that can handle the chemicals put in to it to make tar sand oil liquid enough to move through the pipeline as I believe I read on this thread? And maybe this regular oil can not also flow through the tar sand line because the residue of tar sand oil and chemicals put in to it? I just need to know more so I can think everything through.... I don't need expertise in this field, just some general idea of what the process is....

Is it above ground or is it below ground? Is there some kind of automatic alarm and shut off spots just a mile or two apart on the pipeline to prevent excessive flowing spills, that notifies men on call for an immediate clean up when there is a break or leak?

IF there is a break or leak from the smallest to the largest, IS TransCanada going to be responsible for every single dime spent to clean up the spill, and be responsible for all damages plus duress of home owners who were damaged from it.

If the tar oil spill spoils an aquifer that supplies the surrounding State, will TransCanada be responsible for trucking or piping in water from Canada, to supply our bread basket of farms with water?

Is there even a method of cleanup for tar sand oil that works over sand and dirt, with possible drinking water underneath? UNLIKE regular crude, I read that Tar sand oil does not float, but sinks, making it more difficult...but this could be from an old article and methods of clean up could have progressed and improved since then?

Can we get some sort of agreement with those oil companies wanting to use this pipeline to refine and export more oil, that in a condition of Emergency and or War that we get first dibs on it, before other importers?

We need to get something out of this that benefits the Citizen, the Country....not just some business that refines or some business that extracts oil or some business that builds pipelines making more money....

And we need some UPFRONT assurances on how a spill would be cleaned up, and who pays for it, with NO LIMIT on what they are liable for paying, other than the limit of the amount the damages and pain it causes.

This will make the builder be extra careful when building it...

 

[TooTall]

That is what I said. What makes you think they should get more than the fair market value? And, they can always sue for more and many do just that.

I do not think that a ditch three feet wide that a pipe is put in and then covered up would require anyone to lose their homestead.

I once owned a home on three acres that had a buried pipeline as my western border. There was a 10 foot right of way for the pipeline, but it didn't bother me or any of my neighbors in this restricted sub-division.

Just because a pipeline did not bother you, does not mean it does not destroy others livelihood. My state passed a law requiring all eminent domain must be paid 150% of fair market value, it should have been 200%. First off "Fair Market Value" plummets when rumors of condemnation of property start swirling, so you get screwed by the time the seizure & payment takes place.

Then prime real-estate frontage value is destroyed when ROW prevents building on it. I know a family who had a automotive scrap yard in their family for 75 years before their property was seized by developers. It cost more to relocate the automobiles & the business than they got from the property. They were forced into bankruptcy because some billionaire wanted to build a stadium & parking lot on their land.

You can go fuck yourself with that seizing peoples property for "fair market value" crap! My grand parents had their entire 640 acre farm seized for pennies on the dollar because the government wanted to build a lake. Go try & buy another farm & relocate the operation for that. I have 3 power line, 1 gas line, 1 telecom & 2 oil line ROW's on my properties. Don't tell me it has not cost me dearly for those.

My neighbor plowed up a Sprint Fiber Optic cable & they sued him for so dam much money that they took his entire farm. I have hit the oil pipeline with my V-Ripper plow & peeled the plastic coating off. Just imagine if I had broken the pipe & caused an oil leak. I would have lost everything. They fly spy planes over my property twice a day to inspect the ROWs. Then every time they see something they don't like, their people come & hunt you down asking 20 questions.

A pipeline only requires a few feet of right of way so you can go fuck yourself. It isn't a parking lot or a lake, so quit comparing apples to oranges. The fellow with the junkyard that went bankrupt hired the wrong lawyer and I don't believe you plowed deep enough to hit an oil pipeline.

You are a total idiot. Keystone ROW is 50' ft wide. See this aerial picture of a 40 year old oil distillate pipeline running through woods near my property. That is a huge area I cant grow trees on or build near. My prime highway frontage commercial real-estate value is completely destroyed.

I planted hundreds of walnut trees on 15' irrigated grid spacings 15 years before a half mile long 200' ft wide power line ROW came through them. I lost over 400 Missouri Walnut Trees that sell for $1,500 each when they reach 25 years old. They offered $5k per acre for 10 acres of land. On just 2 of those acres I lost $600k worth of trees alone.

In 2004 Opal Henderson lost a salvage yard bringing her $170,000 a year in income because Billionaire Anheuser Busch wanted to build a new Cardinals Stadium, parking area & restaurant-bar district. It's been 10 years & she is 83 years old & out a $million of lost income plus half a million cleanup fees & lawyers fees of $330K. She won a lawsuit & again in supreme court, but she will be dead & never see a penny.

Government only serves Billionaires who don't pay taxes. They tax & crush the workers & small business owners to death. Koch sucking Repubtards are only looking out for their Koch Billionaire's Canadian Oil Sands project that needs the US government to screw the hell out of US property owners so they can increase the price they get paid for their Canadian Oil. Koch has brainwashed you repubtards with all their bogus foundations media propaganda.

That is why God made lawyers dipshit! Tell me you didn't sue for the value of the walnut trees.

I was not aware of the fact that the Koch brothers were invested in the Canadian oil, but now I see exactly why Obama is blocking it. And you approve of a President blocking Americans from getting high paying jobs for political gain. That says a lot about you.

 

[TooTall]

I am not against this Pipeline, I just want to know all about it before I take a solid position for it, or against it, if it turns out that way....

I want to know more... like why is this XL part of the keystone pipeline even needed? From the maps that have been shown on this thread, it looks like there is already a pipeline up there? Sure this xl part looks like it cuts a handful of miles off of the trek on the other two pipelines because it goes at an angle, but what the heck?

Is it needed because this tar sand oil needs a separate pipeline than the two pipelines that connect up there in the right hand corner of North Dakota, then down towards the Gulf? I mean doesn't it take a heated pipeline and one that can handle the chemicals put in to it to make tar sand oil liquid enough to move through the pipeline as I believe I read on this thread? And maybe this regular oil can not also flow through the tar sand line because the residue of tar sand oil and chemicals put in to it? I just need to know more so I can think everything through.... I don't need expertise in this field, just some general idea of what the process is....

Is it above ground or is it below ground? Is there some kind of automatic alarm and shut off spots just a mile or two apart on the pipeline to prevent excessive flowing spills, that notifies men on call for an immediate clean up when there is a break or leak?

IF there is a break or leak from the smallest to the largest, IS TransCanada going to be responsible for every single dime spent to clean up the spill, and be responsible for all damages plus duress of home owners who were damaged from it.

If the tar oil spill spoils an aquifer that supplies the surrounding State, will TransCanada be responsible for trucking or piping in water from Canada, to supply our bread basket of farms with water?

Is there even a method of cleanup for tar sand oil that works over sand and dirt, with possible drinking water underneath? UNLIKE regular crude, I read that Tar sand oil does not float, but sinks, making it more difficult...but this could be from an old article and methods of clean up could have progressed and improved since then?

Can we get some sort of agreement with those oil companies wanting to use this pipeline to refine and export more oil, that in a condition of Emergency and or War that we get first dibs on it, before other importers?

We need to get something out of this that benefits the Citizen, the Country....not just some business that refines or some business that extracts oil or some business that builds pipelines making more money....

And we need some UPFRONT assurances on how a spill would be cleaned up, and who pays for it, with NO LIMIT on what they are liable for paying, other than the limit of the amount the damages and pain it causes.

This will make the builder be extra careful when building it...

Everything you just posted is common sense. I have read that there are thousands of pages that the State Department has published over the many years that they have been investigating the possibility of allowing the pipeline to be built. I would hope they addressed each and every one of your questions, but my faith in the government doing anything that detailed and insightful is non existent.

I will look for any evidence that these issues have been addressed and seriously appreciate your insight. You are a helluva lot smarter than this tired old Engineer and, as much as I hate too, I will admit it

 

[Ernie S.]

There is a shortage of long haul truckers as it is, other things will come in to pick up the slack. Same goes with rail transport.

If safety and environmental concerns such as spills are your top priority, a pipeline is the safest way to go.

Will our government have to use eminent domain to take American citizens homes and land away from them for a foreign country's needs?

I thought the US needed the oil at our refineries. That is where it is going to end up. If I understand eminent domain, homes and land are not 'taken' they are bought and paid for at the fair market value.

No.

This Canadian company can come in and buy the land from the person as you say, but if the family owning the land does not want to sell to the company wanting the land, then the government could use Eminent Domain, TO FORCE the families that don't want to sell to this company, off of their homestead, at merely a fair market value.

That is what I said. What makes you think they should get more than the fair market value? And, they can always sue for more and many do just that.

I do not think that a ditch three feet wide that a pipe is put in and then covered up would require anyone to lose their homestead.

I once owned a home on three acres that had a buried pipeline as my western border. There was a 10 foot right of way for the pipeline, but it didn't bother me or any of my neighbors in this restricted sub-division.

the house is worth more to them than what some may think the Fair market value is....a long time family homestead, may feel their family history on the land is worth more than money.

Thus EMINENT DOMAIN, FORCING these people to sell, the government telling them their personal property rights are NOT greater than the foreign company that wants to take their land away from them via the hands of using our Government....

Why was it an outrage in New London Ct, with an American Company getting our GOVERNMENT to take these home owners land and home away... and it is NOT even being mentioned now, with a foreign company USING OUR GVT, to take the property away from American citizens that don't want to sell it.

That part just doesn't sit right with me....

In New London, the company wanted to build a plant to make pills. The plant could be located most anywhere. Here we are talking a pipeline with a fixed start and end point with a route planned to have the least cost and impact. Moving it to save a single home is impracticable and maybe impossible.

We aren't talking a pretty location for a pharmaceutical corporation here. We're talking a safe, economical, environmentally safe way to move a vital commodity that, like it or not, we ALL use.

 

[jillian]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

and thousands of construction jobs are a bad thing? When people tout other infrastructure jobs they get all giddy when talking about the construction jobs created.

44 jobs on the Pipeline only, which ignores the additional jobs created at the feed end, and at the discharge end, and the increased refining jobs. Yes, the feed end jobs go to Canadians, but is that a bad thing?

How many permanent jobs does a solar plant or a wind turbine generate?

the 44 ignores none of those things. you just don't appreciate the hoax being outed. as for construction jobs, why don't you care about them unless the environment is being undermined. where are the jobs programs to actually help the average person in this country and rebuild our failing infrastructure?

i'll ignore the wind turbine thing because it's silly.

I work in wastewater treatment, so I love any infrastructure job, so that dog will not hunt.

All jobs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

This is a oil line, there are thousands of others out there, and the oil will get from point a to point b somehow. You idiots are basically stopping the safest way of doing it just because "carbon bad, unga bunga"

and most of our 'failing infrastructure" is related to auto use. WAIT i thought cars are evul as well??????

You are talking to an engineer here on an engineering topic, and are thus out of your weight class.

I don't even think they're against it because they care about the environment, they're only fighting it because it's what their liberal whacko masters have instructed them to do. Most of them don't understand any of the details. That's how our whole political system works these days, someone makes some sweeping generalized statement without any fact to back it up, and it's just accepted and repeated by the zombies that will follow whatever they say without any thought.

you're attributing your own motives to others.

you only support it because you know that left-leaners don't want it... even if it has no lasting benefit.

pure spite.

 

[jillian]

And George Soros and Powell Jobs contributed as much or more to the Democrat effort. So what?

I probably gave the impression that I'm a big fan of Democrats when I'm not. The only thing positive I can say about them is that they're not Republicans. Tell me what Soros and Powell have done and maybe I'll condemn them as harshly as I do the Kochs.

Soros' currency trading record is pretty much common knowledge to anyone that ever looks at the dark side of their icons. Why not do a bit of research.

As for Powell Jobs, I'm sure she is a nice lady, but she does spread around Steve's apple bucks to any Progressive that asks.

I have no interest in soros. the wingers certainly do, though.

you should concern yourself more with the Koch's and the lies they tell the right.

and neither soros nor powell nor apple have anything to do with the fraud of the pipeline.

Ahh but Warren Buffet does. He makes billions transporting oil by rail and truck, billions he stands to lose when Keystone is built.

You're smarter than that, Jill. Read something besides the DNC talking points.

Typically all you have to do with these complex political positions is follow the money. Whoever is opposing it is not opposing it because of 'ethical' reasons, it's about money. They perpetrate the 'ethical' lie to their followers who take it up and run with it in social media and on the news, but at the very root, it's always about money.

the "money" is the oil companies... thanks for proving my point.

 

[martybegan]

I am not against this Pipeline, I just want to know all about it before I take a solid position for it, or against it, if it turns out that way....

I want to know more... like why is this XL part of the keystone pipeline even needed? From the maps that have been shown on this thread, it looks like there is already a pipeline up there? Sure this xl part looks like it cuts a handful of miles off of the trek on the other two pipelines because it goes at an angle, but what the heck?

Is it needed because this tar sand oil needs a separate pipeline than the two pipelines that connect up there in the right hand corner of North Dakota, then down towards the Gulf? I mean doesn't it take a heated pipeline and one that can handle the chemicals put in to it to make tar sand oil liquid enough to move through the pipeline as I believe I read on this thread? And maybe this regular oil can not also flow through the tar sand line because the residue of tar sand oil and chemicals put in to it? I just need to know more so I can think everything through.... I don't need expertise in this field, just some general idea of what the process is....

Is it above ground or is it below ground? Is there some kind of automatic alarm and shut off spots just a mile or two apart on the pipeline to prevent excessive flowing spills, that notifies men on call for an immediate clean up when there is a break or leak?

IF there is a break or leak from the smallest to the largest, IS TransCanada going to be responsible for every single dime spent to clean up the spill, and be responsible for all damages plus duress of home owners who were damaged from it.

If the tar oil spill spoils an aquifer that supplies the surrounding State, will TransCanada be responsible for trucking or piping in water from Canada, to supply our bread basket of farms with water?

Is there even a method of cleanup for tar sand oil that works over sand and dirt, with possible drinking water underneath? UNLIKE regular crude, I read that Tar sand oil does not float, but sinks, making it more difficult...but this could be from an old article and methods of clean up could have progressed and improved since then?

Can we get some sort of agreement with those oil companies wanting to use this pipeline to refine and export more oil, that in a condition of Emergency and or War that we get first dibs on it, before other importers?

We need to get something out of this that benefits the Citizen, the Country....not just some business that refines or some business that extracts oil or some business that builds pipelines making more money....

And we need some UPFRONT assurances on how a spill would be cleaned up, and who pays for it, with NO LIMIT on what they are liable for paying, other than the limit of the amount the damages and pain it causes.

This will make the builder be extra careful when building it...

Most of this has been answered, or is part of the Environmental impact statement.

Do you ask all of this when someone hooks up a gas, sewer or electrical line in your neighborhood?

 

[TooTall]

Glad my two voted no.

but I love the pretend concern of the right for the 44 permanent jobs that would be created by endangering our environment and enriching multi-national corporations.

maybe they should put their passion into an infrastructure program that would create real jobs.

nahh

oh...and for the idiots who run around saying "don't vote", voting matters as you can see, which ever way you come down on this issue. (and every other issue)

and thousands of construction jobs are a bad thing? When people tout other infrastructure jobs they get all giddy when talking about the construction jobs created.

44 jobs on the Pipeline only, which ignores the additional jobs created at the feed end, and at the discharge end, and the increased refining jobs. Yes, the feed end jobs go to Canadians, but is that a bad thing?

How many permanent jobs does a solar plant or a wind turbine generate?

the 44 ignores none of those things. you just don't appreciate the hoax being outed. as for construction jobs, why don't you care about them unless the environment is being undermined. where are the jobs programs to actually help the average person in this country and rebuild our failing infrastructure?

i'll ignore the wind turbine thing because it's silly.

I work in wastewater treatment, so I love any infrastructure job, so that dog will not hunt.

All jobs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

This is a oil line, there are thousands of others out there, and the oil will get from point a to point b somehow. You idiots are basically stopping the safest way of doing it just because "carbon bad, unga bunga"

and most of our 'failing infrastructure" is related to auto use. WAIT i thought cars are evul as well??????

You are talking to an engineer here on an engineering topic, and are thus out of your weight class.

I don't even think they're against it because they care about the environment, they're only fighting it because it's what their liberal whacko masters have instructed them to do. Most of them don't understand any of the details. That's how our whole political system works these days, someone makes some sweeping generalized statement without any fact to back it up, and it's just accepted and repeated by the zombies that will follow whatever they say without any thought.

you're attributing your own motives to others.

you only support it because you know that left-leaners don't want it... even if it has no lasting benefit.

pure spite.

I was just enlightened by a lefty why the pipeline had not been approved. The Koch Brothers own about 25% of the Canadian oil and would make a lot of money if it was completed. Is there any further doubt why Obama and his Senate won't approve it?

 

[KissMy]

I was just enlightened by a lefty why the pipeline had not been approved. The Koch Brothers own about 25% of the Canadian oil and would make a lot of money if it was completed. Is there any further doubt why Obama and his Senate won't approve it?

You left out Warren Buffet owns the trains that employ thousands transporting Koch Oil. Plus Koch spent big to buy the Tea Party & Republicans.

You are only a clueless pawn in their game.