No Excuses: Keystone XL Pipeline Clears Major Hurdle

[Mr. H.]

True. Yet, during this huge increase in production, Americans have not seen lower gas prices. Why? Because we are exporting it as fast as we can, keeping the price high for us.

It will be the same with Keystone. More exports to a hungry world, while not lowering our gas prices a penny.

This is from only two years ago, so you know it's gotten worse:

U.S. Gas Exports Force Drivers Into Bidding War With Mexico At Pump




.

From your linked opinion article:

Most of the ongoing increases in gas prices can be traced to geopolitical concerns and rampant financial speculation that have run up the cost of crude oil.

If you want facts, go to the source:

U.S. Exports of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products

And remind us again, why we pay record prices at the grocery while the U.S. exports tens of millions of tons of agricultural products each year?

It's not an opinion article, it's from reporter Dan Froomkin.

And why should we be paying record amounts for groceries? The same reason we pay so much for gas: no economic patriotism from the corporations, which is to be expected since they only care about profit. And no regulations by Congress to protect Americans from rising prices.


ETA: your link shows exports increasing every year, so I don't know what point you thought you were making.

Maybe I'm just pretty fucking stupid.

 

[Synthaholic]

From your linked opinion article:

Most of the ongoing increases in gas prices can be traced to geopolitical concerns and rampant financial speculation that have run up the cost of crude oil.

If you want facts, go to the source:

U.S. Exports of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products

And remind us again, why we pay record prices at the grocery while the U.S. exports tens of millions of tons of agricultural products each year?

It's not an opinion article, it's from reporter Dan Froomkin.

And why should we be paying record amounts for groceries? The same reason we pay so much for gas: no economic patriotism from the corporations, which is to be expected since they only care about profit. And no regulations by Congress to protect Americans from rising prices.


ETA: your link shows exports increasing every year, so I don't know what point you thought you were making.

Maybe I'm just pretty fucking stupid.

I doubt that. Oil industry flaks are usually pretty smart... But you ARE a Republican...


I'm SO confused!

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Given the alternatives to shipping oil like tanker trucks and rail, the pipeline will result in 20-30% less pollution. Only alternative to more oil altogether is using less, and asking Americans to ration hasn't been tried since WWII. So long as we insist on using fuel-inefficient vehicles when mass produced ones have been rated at 57MPG (Geo Metro,) or riding a bike for short trips, or tolerating reductions in the speed limits, we'll need more oil.

I'd like to see a few other things done before we secure more oil though, namely outlaw cars for sale in the US that can vastly exceed the maximum speed limit anywhere in the country. What is that, 75MPH? If you can't legally go faster than 75MPH, why can even economy-class vehicles go over 100MPH? Make a less powerful engine that's correspondingly more fuel-efficient (being lighter and not as fuel guzzling) and you could stave off things like the pipeline. Simple sensible solution.

 

[Synthaholic]

Americans will not get any of the refined gas that results from Keystone.

So why should America take the environmental risk?

 

[tinydancer]

Americans will not get any of the refined gas that results from Keystone.

So why should America take the environmental risk?

Because you already have Keystone I and Keystone II. Oh and I guess you've never seen actually all your pipelines across the country.

Where were the enviro weenies and enviro whackos when all of these were built?

 

[tinydancer]

Americans will not get any of the refined gas that results from Keystone.

So why should America take the environmental risk?

And to address the question of why the Keystone Pipeline should be built the answer is easy.

Your oil and natural gas producers who do pay taxes and employ so many need the pipelines to get their product to a refinery.

Ta da!

 

[Silhouette]

This thread sounds like a constructed rant from an oil schill paid to be mad at "Hussein" Obama. It's like a war dance to drum up fervor to approve that carbon based [really kids, we aren't moving on to concentrated solar steam power plants or seawater [hydrogen electrolysis] cars?]

The future history books will read "back around the turn of the 21st Century, they STILL were trying to burn as much of the greenhouse gases as they could get their hands on, all the while at their fingers were solutions to move away from that. The rich fat men back then even believed in pumping corrosive solvents in the frail shale layers just below our last reserves of freshwater aquifers that were punctured by those solvents when aging and brittle well casings shattered and began leaking back in the great lateral shear earthquake of 2034.."

 

[Synthaholic]

Americans will not get any of the refined gas that results from Keystone.

So why should America take the environmental risk?

Because you already have Keystone I and Keystone II.

That's a reason?

Oh and I guess you've never seen actually all your pipelines across the country.

Where were the enviro weenies and enviro whackos when all of these were built?

Fighting each and every one of them.

 

[Synthaholic]

Americans will not get any of the refined gas that results from Keystone.

So why should America take the environmental risk?

And to address the question of why the Keystone Pipeline should be built the answer is easy.

Your oil and natural gas producers who do pay taxes and employ so many need the pipelines to get their product to a refinery.

Ta da!

Am I a Canadian now?

 

[tinydancer]

Americans will not get any of the refined gas that results from Keystone.

So why should America take the environmental risk?

Because you already have Keystone I and Keystone II.

That's a reason?

Oh and I guess you've never seen actually all your pipelines across the country.

Where were the enviro weenies and enviro whackos when all of these were built?

Fighting each and every one of them.

Bullshit. You have to remember I'm a devout conservationist who has fought many an environmental battle. I concentrate mostly on water purity. I've been heavily involved in fighting intensive hog farming especially where I lived in South West Ontario when the government had allowed this abomination of hog barns on a very sensitive aquifer.

I follow true causes and participate and monitor bogus ones. Keystone III is completely a bogus issue strictly based on politics.

And I do find it most interesting that the individuals who are financing these "protests" all come for your left wing wealthy elite.

They have been so brazen to date that my government and the Canadian Revenue Service have launched a massive investigation into your left wing backers of protests attempting to interfere with the Canadian Energy policy.

It's a big deal.

 

[Mr. H.]

It's not an opinion article, it's from reporter Dan Froomkin.

And why should we be paying record amounts for groceries? The same reason we pay so much for gas: no economic patriotism from the corporations, which is to be expected since they only care about profit. And no regulations by Congress to protect Americans from rising prices.


ETA: your link shows exports increasing every year, so I don't know what point you thought you were making.

Maybe I'm just pretty fucking stupid.

I doubt that. Oil industry flaks are usually pretty smart... But you ARE a Republican...


I'm SO confused!

I remember Nixon's price controls. They created an artificial scarcity of crude and products (remember rationing?). "Economic patriotism" is a silly notion. More spread the wealth rhetoric. No profit, no "stuff". When an industry spends hundreds of billions each year so we can power our lives and our commerce then we better hope they keep making profits.

As to that story I linked, I just don't remember where I was going with it LOL. That was a lot of whiskey ago.

 

[tinydancer]

Americans will not get any of the refined gas that results from Keystone.

So why should America take the environmental risk?

And to address the question of why the Keystone Pipeline should be built the answer is easy.

Your oil and natural gas producers who do pay taxes and employ so many need the pipelines to get their product to a refinery.

Ta da!

Am I a Canadian now?

Well I guess because you love Gino Vannelli so much I could make you an honorary Canuck....

But seriously one only has to look at North Dakota and what they are pulling out of the ground up here. They have to get it to refineries somehow. They would greatly benefit with the pipeline.

Pipeline is the safest way to transport IMHO. Rail is unnerving because transporting such a highly flammable product thru towns and cities run the horrid risk of a disaster like what happened in Quebec last year.

 

[tinydancer]

Here you go. I can always back up my posts.

BISMARCK, N.D. — TransCanada Corp. says it has a growing list of U.S. oil shippers signing up to use a proposed connector to the proposed Keystone XL pipeline that would run from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.

The Calgary-based company announced in 2011 that it secured five-year contracts to move crude from the oilfields of North Dakota and Montana via a proposed five-mile-long pipeline known as the Bakken Marketlink. The $140 million project, designed to carry 100,000 barrels of crude daily from the rich Bakken and Three Forks formations, would meet with the Keystone XL in Baker, Mont.

TransCanada spokesman Shawn Howard said Monday that the contracts, which are confidential, have since been renegotiated in anticipation of U.S approval of the long-delayed Keystone XL, which would be primarily used to transport crude from Alberta's oil sands to refineries in Oklahoma and Texas. It cleared a big hurdle last week when the State Department raised no major environmental objections to its construction.

"We have not lost customers," Howard said. "In fact, we have a waiting list."

TransCanada initially balked at allowing U.S. oil companies to tap into the Keystone XL but reversed its stance in 2010 after political pressure from officials in Montana and North Dakota, which has seen soaring oil production in the past few years and is now the nation's No. 2 oil producer behind Texas.

Howard said TransCanada now views the link to the states' oil fields "as a very important underpinning for the whole (Keystone XL) project."

When TransCanada first sought shipping commitments for the pipeline spur in 2010, North Dakota was producing about 342,000 barrels of oil daily. The state now puts out nearly 1 million barrels daily.

BISMARCK, N.D.: Keystone XL waiting list grows for US oil shippers | Business | Modesto Bee

 

[tinydancer]

And here's what can happen with rail transportation.

The July 6 train derailment that incinerated the downtown area of Lac-Mégantic and killed 47 people was named Canada's top news story by editors and news directors across the country.

Lac-Mégantic train disaster voted top news story of 2013 - Montreal - CBC News

 

[Trajan]

There is no benefit to America, only risk. No pipeline.

That may have been true about 100 years ago.

What's the benefit, then?

Oil will flow through the United States, be refined in Texas, and shipped overseas. I mean, that's the plan. They aren't making any secret of it.

So what's the benefit to America?

because oil for gasoline is globally fungible. The more you pull out of the ground over all the lower the price will drop.

example, the fracking boom has just begun to really hit full tilt despite some states holding it back, and crash home heating fuel prices ( depending on what you use of course). 10 years ago people were pooping fracking and still some say forget it carbon is dead, like the peak oil arguments, they were wrong. Some states and the feds are 2 of the biggest impediments in this case despite the tech. revolution.

Oil Boom Likely to Lower Heating Bills in Coming Years, but Not Quite Yet
December 12, 2013
By Seth Daniel

Oil Boom Likely to Lower Heating Bills in Coming Years, but Not Quite Yet | Chelsea Record ? Chelsea Massachusetts Newspaper

right now the biggest hindrances for fracking related fuels dropping the price further is transportation and some states and the fed. regulatory agencies etc. And in the case and topic oil for refining to gasoline.

 

[Trajan]

Americans will not get any of the refined gas that results from Keystone.

So why should America take the environmental risk?

Because you already have Keystone I and Keystone II.

That's a reason?

Oh and I guess you've never seen actually all your pipelines across the country.

Where were the enviro weenies and enviro whackos when all of these were built?

Fighting each and every one of them.

well then, you're part of the problem. physician heal thyself.

 

[Synthaholic]

Maybe I'm just pretty fucking stupid.

I doubt that. Oil industry flaks are usually pretty smart... But you ARE a Republican...


I'm SO confused!

I remember Nixon's price controls. They created an artificial scarcity of crude and products (remember rationing?). "Economic patriotism" is a silly notion. More spread the wealth rhetoric. No profit, no "stuff". When an industry spends hundreds of billions each year so we can power our lives and our commerce then we better hope they keep making profits.

As to that story I linked, I just don't remember where I was going with it LOL. That was a lot of whiskey ago.

Then U.S. import/export policy, and corporate tax policy, etc. should reflect that, with all companies being treated the same whether they are Chinese or American or French.

I'm on my first beer. Usually I wait until at least 9 EST but nothing else was cold. Whatcha gonna do?

 

[Synthaholic]

And to address the question of why the Keystone Pipeline should be built the answer is easy.

Your oil and natural gas producers who do pay taxes and employ so many need the pipelines to get their product to a refinery.

Ta da!

Am I a Canadian now?

Well I guess because you love Gino Vannelli so much I could make you an honorary Canuck....

But seriously one only has to look at North Dakota and what they are pulling out of the ground up here. They have to get it to refineries somehow. They would greatly benefit with the pipeline.

Pipeline is the safest way to transport IMHO. Rail is unnerving because transporting such a highly flammable product thru towns and cities run the horrid risk of a disaster like what happened in Quebec last year.

My basic question, which NOBODY asks, is: Why doesn't Canada build it's own refinery, and it's own pipeline to it?

 

[Synthaholic]

Because you already have Keystone I and Keystone II.

That's a reason?

Oh and I guess you've never seen actually all your pipelines across the country.

Where were the enviro weenies and enviro whackos when all of these were built?

Fighting each and every one of them.

well then, you're part of the problem. physician heal thyself.

No, I want solar, wind, and hydro, along with specific locations for nuclear.

 

[edthecynic]

Am I a Canadian now?

Well I guess because you love Gino Vannelli so much I could make you an honorary Canuck....

But seriously one only has to look at North Dakota and what they are pulling out of the ground up here. They have to get it to refineries somehow. They would greatly benefit with the pipeline.

Pipeline is the safest way to transport IMHO. Rail is unnerving because transporting such a highly flammable product thru towns and cities run the horrid risk of a disaster like what happened in Quebec last year.

My basic question, which NOBODY asks, is: Why doesn't Canada build it's own refinery, and it's own pipeline to it?

Because the Canadian people are not stupid enough to spoil their land when the Tea Bag Brotherhood is willing to foul the air they breath here in the US!