Obama Got It Right: Tar Sands Pipeline Would Drive Up Prices

[Truthseeker420]

You keep posting the same argument. Over and over ignoring any outside information.

It is called the 'lone synapse syndrome'.

What information did you want me to look at? I would be happy to look a it but doubt it would be more credible than the link fom TrnsCanada report I posted 3 times.

So you have a synapse on the grassy knoll?

The 'taking property' argument is as silly as a jelly bean and the safety/environment argument falls flat on its face because there are already millions of existing pipelines in the US.

Bring on that grassy knoll synapse again.

Eminent domain is just a side issue from my original point but they aRe planning on building new pipe and it is going(as proposed) through private and public land.

And I do have thoughts on the Assasination JFK But I'll save that for another thread.

 

[tinydancer]

I'm trying to wrap my brain about a pipeline going to the Gulf to sell Canadian oil to China.

Ok. Now my brain really hurts. I've seen this argument before from individuals who obviously have no concept of geography.

Why would we go all the way to the Gulf to sell oil to China?

 

[Mr. H.]

I have posted this link agin to TransCnada report. which i would assume to be more biased in favor of the project.

https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/li...ecision.pdf?nodeid=604637&vernum=0&redirect=3

What else were you hoping to have addressed that hasn't already been?

I posted three links and you seeed to dimiss my first link as,I assume, biased so I posted a link directly to TransCanda report which confirms my assertion that it would raise ol prices of oil in the midwest.

As I've posted earlier- the pipeline would bring crude prices up to parity with prices in other local markets around the country. Midwest crude is currently discounted because of a glut of inventory. In Illinois as an example, producers are paid $8.40 LESS than NYMEX.

The XL pipeline may alleviate this "spread" but not to the tune of $8.40 a barrel.
My guess is $2 to $5. And how would that translate at the pump? A nickle a gallon?

You're going to fucking bitch and moan about an extra 5 cents when federal, state, and local governments are alread gouging you 47 cents/gallon?

Get real.

Bloated inventories are inefficient and counterproductive.

 

[The T]

I'm trying to wrap my brain about a pipeline going to the Gulf to sell Canadian oil to China.

Ok. Now my brain really hurts. I've seen this argument before from individuals who obviously have no concept of geography.

Why would we go all the way to the Gulf to sell oil to China?

If the line isn't built? the OIL will go to China.

 

[tinydancer]

What else were you hoping to have addressed that hasn't already been?

I posted three links and you seeed to dimiss my first link as,I assume, biased so I posted a link directly to TransCanda report which confirms my assertion that it would raise ol prices of oil in the midwest.

It will raise the price of gasoline for the whole country. What is it about the words "finite refining capacity" that you people do not get? That pipeline oil is not coming here for our use. It will be refined in our refineries and the products sold overseas. That means less refined gas for us you dolts! "Less supply equals higher prices" ring a bell???? Anyone working on this pipeline or promoting it should be shot for treason....after a fair trial of course.

What are you talking about. Huggy you already have two Keystone pipelines. No shit.

One to Illinois and one to Oklahoma. This is all bullshit hype you've been fed. For true.

 

[tinydancer]

I'm not opposed to eminent domain if it is in the best interest of the public(American) which I believe in this cse it is not.

So a project that would employ thousands of people for several years for a pipeline that would ship oil to the US that we can refine rather than buying it already refined from countries that hate us at a steep premium is not good for the United States?

I think he is trying to tell us that the envirowhackos won't allow it.

Why didn't anyone protest the first two? Why now?

The bullshit that is flowing is just staggering. People pontificating when they don't even know that this is only Phase 3.

Holy toledo. It's unreal.

 

[The T]

What else were you hoping to have addressed that hasn't already been?

I posted three links and you seeed to dimiss my first link as,I assume, biased so I posted a link directly to TransCanda report which confirms my assertion that it would raise ol prices of oil in the midwest.

As I've posted earlier- the pipeline would bring crude prices up to parity with prices in other local markets around the country. Midwest crude is currently discounted because of a glut of inventory. In Illinois as an example, producers are paid $8.40 LESS than NYMEX.

The XL pipeline may alleviate this "spread" but not to the tune of $8.40 a barrel.
My guess is $2 to $5. And how would that translate at the pump? A nickle a gallon?

You're going to fucking bitch and moan about an extra 5 cents when federal, state, and local governments are alread gouging you 47 cents/gallon?

Get real.

Bloated inventories are inefficient and counterproductive.

One other thing here?

Guess what OUR #1 EXPORT is right now?

In a first, gas and other fuels are top US export


How did that happen?

 

[Truthseeker420]

I'm not opposed to eminent domain if it is in the best interest of the public(American) which I believe in this cse it is not.

So a project that would employ thousands of people for several years for a pipeline that would ship oil to the US that we can refine rather than buying it already refined from countries that hate us at a steep premium is not good for the United States?

I think he is trying to tell us that the envirowhackos won't allow it.

No, I am telling them that the temporary jobs might not even go to Americans nor is there any plan for the oil going to America and the additional cost of oil could be a net job loss in a bad economy. Let alone the eminent domain and environmental issues.

 

[percysunshine]

What information did you want me to look at? I would be happy to look a it but doubt it would be more credible than the link fom TrnsCanada report I posted 3 times.

So you have a synapse on the grassy knoll?

The 'taking property' argument is as silly as a jelly bean and the safety/environment argument falls flat on its face because there are already millions of existing pipelines in the US.

Bring on that grassy knoll synapse again.

Eminent domain is just a side issue from my original point but they aRe planning on building new pipe and it is going(as proposed) through private and public land.

And I do have thoughts on the Assasination JFK But I'll save that for another thread.

Eminent domain means that private use of a property is superceded and denied by public use.

This is a pipeline buried 20 feet under a corn field. The farmer can still grow his corn, and the pipeline company is paying the farmer for ...well...nothing.

Please build one of these free cash machines under my corn field. (Yes, I actually have a corn field)

 

[Crackerjack]

I have posted this link agin to TransCnada report. which i would assume to be more biased in favor of the project.

https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/li...ecision.pdf?nodeid=604637&vernum=0&redirect=3

What else were you hoping to have addressed that hasn't already been?

I posted three links and you seeed to dimiss my first link as,I assume, biased so I posted a link directly to TransCanda report which confirms my assertion that it would raise ol prices of oil in the midwest.

You cherry-picked the findings of Purvin and Gertz, the single group to have such a finding. PGI nevertheless still found the pipeline to be a good idea, as it reduces the US's reliance on foreign oil.

I thought the left wanted us to reduce our reliance on foreign oil.

 

[The Infidel]

One other thing here?

Guess what OUR #1 EXPORT is right now?

In a first, gas and other fuels are top US export


How did that happen?

It was aliens

 

[The T]

One other thing here?

Guess what OUR #1 EXPORT is right now?

In a first, gas and other fuels are top US export


How did that happen?

It was aliens

No harm, no foul.

 

[Truthseeker420]

I posted three links and you seeed to dimiss my first link as,I assume, biased so I posted a link directly to TransCanda report which confirms my assertion that it would raise ol prices of oil in the midwest.

As I've posted earlier- the pipeline would bring crude prices up to parity with prices in other local markets around the country. Midwest crude is currently discounted because of a glut of inventory. In Illinois as an example, producers are paid $8.40 LESS than NYMEX.

The XL pipeline may alleviate this "spread" but not to the tune of $8.40 a barrel.
My guess is $2 to $5. And how would that translate at the pump? A nickle a gallon?

You're going to fucking bitch and moan about an extra 5 cents when federal, state, and local governments are alread gouging you 47 cents/gallon?

Get real.

Bloated inventories are inefficient and counterproductive.

One other thing here?

Guess what OUR #1 EXPORT is right now?

In a first, gas and other fuels are top US export


How did that happen?

Jobs?

 

[The T]

So a project that would employ thousands of people for several years for a pipeline that would ship oil to the US that we can refine rather than buying it already refined from countries that hate us at a steep premium is not good for the United States?

I think he is trying to tell us that the envirowhackos won't allow it.

No, I am telling them that the temporary jobs might not even go to Americans nor is there any plan for the oil going to America and the additional cost of oil could be a net job loss in a bad economy. Let alone the eminent domain and environmental issues.

WHY are WE exporting petrol?

 

[tinydancer]

I'm trying to wrap my brain about a pipeline going to the Gulf to sell Canadian oil to China.

Ok. Now my brain really hurts. I've seen this argument before from individuals who obviously have no concept of geography.

Why would we go all the way to the Gulf to sell oil to China?

If the line isn't built? the OIL will go to China.

Damn straight it will, but the line will only have to head south a smidge and hang west for a smidge and then tankers can come to a dock in BC.

I'm amazed at the ignorance of so many on this T.

I'm on the fly making spaghetti sauce so I hope my basic figures are close off the top of my head here.

Even if the envirotwits were concerned about the aquifer in Nebraska and as you know I am a major conservationist so I was relieved when I heard Trans Canada was willing to move the line, guess what the figures were?

I stroked out because everyone was screaming about Keystone which would have gone approx 256 miles across the aquifer.

Then I find out there's already 20,000 miles of pipeline across the same aquifer.

Aye carumba. Give me a break. I'm still glad they are willing to move it, but sheesh.

 

[percysunshine]

It is illegal to export crude oil from the US.

What moron came up with that idea?

Like...how would china survive if it was illegal to export plasma TVs to the US? When they export a barrel of plasma TVs, we send something of value in return.

 

[Truthseeker420]

What else were you hoping to have addressed that hasn't already been?

I posted three links and you seeed to dimiss my first link as,I assume, biased so I posted a link directly to TransCanda report which confirms my assertion that it would raise ol prices of oil in the midwest.

You cherry-picked the findings of Purvin and Gertz, the single group to have such a finding. PGI nevertheless still found the pipeline to be a good idea, as it reduces the US's reliance on foreign oil.

I thought the left wanted us to reduce our reliance on foreign oil.

Cherry pick? I gave you a link to their report. But I will check out your link.

 

[The T]

I'm trying to wrap my brain about a pipeline going to the Gulf to sell Canadian oil to China.

Ok. Now my brain really hurts. I've seen this argument before from individuals who obviously have no concept of geography.

Why would we go all the way to the Gulf to sell oil to China?

If the line isn't built? the OIL will go to China.

Damn straight it will, but the line will only have to head south a smidge and hang west for a smidge and then tankers can come to a dock in BC.

I'm amazed at the ignorance of so many on this T.

I'm on the fly making spaghetti sauce so I hope my basic figures are close off the top of my head here.

Even if the envirotwits were concerned about the aquifer in Nebraska and as you know I am a major conservationist so I was relieved when I heard Trans Canada was willing to move the line, guess what the figures were?

I stroked out because everyone was screaming about Keystone which would have gone approx 256 miles across the aquifer.

Then I find out there's already 20,000 miles of pipeline across the same aquifer.

Aye carumba. Give me a break. I'm still glad they are willing to move it, but sheesh.

It's because YOU took the oppritunity to investigate, whereas the detractors...didn't.

 

[Crackerjack]

I posted three links and you seeed to dimiss my first link as,I assume, biased so I posted a link directly to TransCanda report which confirms my assertion that it would raise ol prices of oil in the midwest.

It will raise the price of gasoline for the whole country. What is it about the words "finite refining capacity" that you people do not get? That pipeline oil is not coming here for our use. It will be refined in our refineries and the products sold overseas. That means less refined gas for us you dolts! "Less supply equals higher prices" ring a bell???? Anyone working on this pipeline or promoting it should be shot for treason....after a fair trial of course.

What are you talking about. Huggy you already have two Keystone pipelines. No shit.

One to Illinois and one to Oklahoma. This is all bullshit hype you've been fed. For true.

We're ignoring him because he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

 

[Mr. H.]

So you have a synapse on the grassy knoll?

The 'taking property' argument is as silly as a jelly bean and the safety/environment argument falls flat on its face because there are already millions of existing pipelines in the US.

Bring on that grassy knoll synapse again.

Eminent domain is just a side issue from my original point but they aRe planning on building new pipe and it is going(as proposed) through private and public land.

And I do have thoughts on the Assasination JFK But I'll save that for another thread.

Eminent domain means that private use of a property is superceded and denied by public use.

This is a pipeline buried 20 feet under a corn field. The farmer can still grow his corn, and the pipeline company is paying the farmer for ...well...nothing.

Please build one of these free cash machines under my corn field. (Yes, I actually have a corn field)

I've been seeing crop acreage around here literally criss-crossed with trenches 20 inches deep, with stacked coils of drainage tile waiting to be buried. Drainage tile that will carry polluted runoff that eventually ends up in the Gulf of Mexico. Farmers are hypocrites.
The landowners who hold out against pipeline access are stubborn, ignorant, morons that are already so filthy rich that no amount of money will change thier minds.