Oil Transported Through Keystone Will Be Consumed in the US

[tinydancer]

Oil Transported Through Keystone Will Be Consumed in the US

Based on everything I've heard and read - that is a LIE.

That is because you read nothing but far left propaganda sites...

Although even the far left Washington Posts says you are wrong!

Fact Checker Not all Canadian oil from Keystone pipeline will leave United States - The Washington Post

In fact, TransCanada refused to support a requirement that oil on Keystone XL be used in the United States in a recent Congressional hearing. Earlier this month, Representative Edward Markey asked TransCanada's President Alex Pourbaix to support a condition that would require the oil on Keystone XL to be used in the United States. Mr. Pourbaix refused, saying that a requirement to keep oil on Keystone XL in the United States would cause refineries to back out of their contracts. That very well may be the case as Valero, one of the largest prospective purchasers of Keystone XL's crude, has already told its investors the its future business is in international export.

Here it is straight from the horses mouth, Trans Canada will make no commitment to sell the oil products in the US at least equal to what they have been selling us.

How in heaven's name could they make that promise?

They don't own the oil. I'm going to hammer this home till it kills me.

They aren't an oil company. They just move the freaking crude. They don't drill it, they don't buy it, they don't freaking refine it.

Tell me how the fuck they can promise to keep oil in the States when all they are is the moving truck for the shit?

They are only and infrastructure company.

Can Warren Buffets railway line promise that Bakken crude won't be exported?

Hell freaking no. It's just a railway line. ETA: actually he probably could on Bakken because I believe you're still not allowed to export homegrown.

But he is not responsible for it. That's just your laws. Just like he wouldn't be responsible for the final destination of anything his railway ships

This is sheer bullshit with you left wing whackos.

 

[Dot Com]

If they keep pushing it, I'd declare war on our friends of the north. Besides, the Koch Bros are heavily invested in the dirty oil (tarsands) in Canada.

 

[tinydancer]

My money is on Toro.

Because he is completely right. The crude's coming baby!

By rail, by truck or pipeline. Pick your poison. You need it. You want it. You buy it.

OK, I pick Canada building refineries and the US trucking it across the border...

What are you talking about?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

If they keep pushing it, I'd declare war on our friends of the north. Besides, the Koch Bros are heavily invested in the dirty oil (tarsands) in Canada.

Another peace loving liberal speaks out

 

[tinydancer]

If they keep pushing it, I'd declare war on our friends of the north. Besides, the Koch Bros are heavily invested in the dirty oil (tarsands) in Canada.

Declare war on us because America wants to import our crude?

Kiss my ass What a freaking stupid statement Dot. Come on. Koch Bros have invested in the tarsands as have many others.

Multi nationals own about 70%.

 

[OnePercenter]

They just make shit up. Leftists, like Muslim terrorists, believe that lying is ok as long as it facilitates the objective. Because they both serve the same devil, it makes sense they follow the same rules.

Billionaire Koch brother sued after he imprisoned and interrogated executive Daily Mail Online

That's your big scandal? I did that to my eleven year old when he and his friends set a trash can fire.

Kidnapping, imprison/interrogate isn't big? These are the guys you and yours are rimming!!!! What's wrong with you?

 

[tinydancer]

They just make shit up. Leftists, like Muslim terrorists, believe that lying is ok as long as it facilitates the objective. Because they both serve the same devil, it makes sense they follow the same rules.

Billionaire Koch brother sued after he imprisoned and interrogated executive Daily Mail Online

That's your big scandal? I did that to my eleven year old when he and his friends set a trash can fire.

Kidnapping, imprison/interrogate isn't big? These are the guys you and yours are rimming!!!! What's wrong with you?

What happened in the trial? I just read your link and the charges were laid in 2012. So what happened?

 

[Politico]

If the oil from this proposed pipeline that the Lakotas have vowed to stop is to be consumed in the US, then Canada can refine it on site and sell it to trucks at the border to bring to various storage facilities here on land. No need whatsoever to have it in Texas ports to be shipped anywhere else.

Problem solved.

Problem solved? Refined on site? By what refineries?

Oh, the same type of refineries that they have in Texas. You know, the ones that were around during the Triassic Era. Oh, wait, no, that's right...men built those.

I guess they don't have men who can build in Canada. My bad.

No they have the midwest refineries they currently use when I said the exact same thing a page ago.

 

[Bfgrn]

It won't be exported, according to the CEO of TransCanada Pipelines.

It certainly seems illogical that an oil pipeline should be elevated to the level of friction now represented by the Keystone XL project. But through one means or another, the project has become a source of real conflict. On Wednesday the CEO of TransCanada Corp. came pretty close to calling the President of the United States a liar. Russ Girling said that “the notion that this oil is going to get exported is pure fabrication by those that are opposed to our project.”

Later, he added: “It’s very highly unlikely that any of this crude leaves North America.”

The timing was important, because Mr. Obama made those very allegations just last week. The pipeline, he said was merely “providing the ability of Canada to pump their oil, send it through our land, down to the Gulf, where it will be sold everywhere else.” He was parroting the latest line in the war against Keystone mounted by U.S. environmentalists, which portrays Canada as a nefarious purveyor of dirty oil, with plans to send shipments across the pristine U.S. to ships in the Gulf, which will immediately transport it to China.

In reality, TransCanada doesn’t own the oil, it just ships it for the oil companies. It gets sent to a refining hub in Texas, which turns it into gasoline. The refiners say less than 10% of the gasoline they refine gets exported. If the refiners did decide, illogically, to export it all, they would have to ship in other oil from Venezuela or elsewhere to replace it, which makes no sense at all. The U.S. State Department, which has assessed Keystone to death, found that pipelines have no impact on U.S. exports, and that Alberta’s oil is likely to stay in the U.S.

The National Post

Hey Toro, If this pipeline is is so non-controversial, why do your own Provinces reject it?

Tar sands supporters suffer setback as British Columbia rejects pipeline

Canadian province rejects plan for Enbridge Northern Gateway, saying company failed to demonstrate adequate clean-up plan

Efforts to expand production from the Alberta tar sands suffered a significant setback on Friday when the provincial government of British Columbia rejected a pipeline project because of environmental shortcomings.

In a strongly worded statement, the government of the province said it was not satisfied with the pipeline company's oil spill response plans.

The rejection of the pipeline – which was to have given Alberta an outlet to Pacific coast ports and markets in China – further raises the stakes on another controversial tar sands pipeline, Keystone XL.

Barack Obama is still weighing a decision on that pipeline, intended to pump tar sands crude to the Texas gulf coast.

...

The Canadian government has lobbied extensively in support of both projects and to prevent restricts on exports from the tar sands. In recent months, the government of Stephen Harper has deployed teams of lobbyists, and dispatched cabinet officials to US and European cities to make the case for tar sands development.

Prices for tar sands crude have been dropping in the absence of a reliable export route.

The Enbridge project, though not as ambitious as Keystone XL had been an important part of Harper's contingent plan. Canadian government officials had argued that if Obama turned down Keystone XL, Canada would simply ship crude to China.

 

[OnePercenter]

What happened in the trial? I just read your link and the charges were laid in 2012. So what happened?

Like everything with the Koch Brothers.......paid it off.

 

[Kosh]

Oil Transported Through Keystone Will Be Consumed in the US

Based on everything I've heard and read - that is a LIE.

That is because you read nothing but far left propaganda sites...

Although even the far left Washington Posts says you are wrong!

Fact Checker Not all Canadian oil from Keystone pipeline will leave United States - The Washington Post

In fact, TransCanada refused to support a requirement that oil on Keystone XL be used in the United States in a recent Congressional hearing. Earlier this month, Representative Edward Markey asked TransCanada's President Alex Pourbaix to support a condition that would require the oil on Keystone XL to be used in the United States. Mr. Pourbaix refused, saying that a requirement to keep oil on Keystone XL in the United States would cause refineries to back out of their contracts. That very well may be the case as Valero, one of the largest prospective purchasers of Keystone XL's crude, has already told its investors the its future business is in international export.

Here it is straight from the horses mouth, Trans Canada will make no commitment to sell the oil products in the US at least equal to what they have been selling us.

How in heaven's name could they make that promise?

They don't own the oil. I'm going to hammer this home till it kills me.

They aren't an oil company. They just move the freaking crude. They don't drill it, they don't buy it, they don't freaking refine it.

Tell me how the fuck they can promise to keep oil in the States when all they are is the moving truck for the shit?

They are only and infrastructure company.

Can Warren Buffets railway line promise that Bakken crude won't be exported?

Hell freaking no. It's just a railway line. ETA: actually he probably could on Bakken because I believe you're still not allowed to export homegrown.

But he is not responsible for it. That's just your laws. Just like he wouldn't be responsible for the final destination of anything his railway ships

This is sheer bullshit with you left wing whackos.

The far left Washington post blog site disagrees with the far left programmed propaganda on this subject!

That in itself speaks volumes.

 

[Kosh]

If they keep pushing it, I'd declare war on our friends of the north. Besides, the Koch Bros are heavily invested in the dirty oil (tarsands) in Canada.

Irony impaired far left troll says what?

 

[tinydancer]

It won't be exported, according to the CEO of TransCanada Pipelines.

It certainly seems illogical that an oil pipeline should be elevated to the level of friction now represented by the Keystone XL project. But through one means or another, the project has become a source of real conflict. On Wednesday the CEO of TransCanada Corp. came pretty close to calling the President of the United States a liar. Russ Girling said that “the notion that this oil is going to get exported is pure fabrication by those that are opposed to our project.”

Later, he added: “It’s very highly unlikely that any of this crude leaves North America.”

The timing was important, because Mr. Obama made those very allegations just last week. The pipeline, he said was merely “providing the ability of Canada to pump their oil, send it through our land, down to the Gulf, where it will be sold everywhere else.” He was parroting the latest line in the war against Keystone mounted by U.S. environmentalists, which portrays Canada as a nefarious purveyor of dirty oil, with plans to send shipments across the pristine U.S. to ships in the Gulf, which will immediately transport it to China.

In reality, TransCanada doesn’t own the oil, it just ships it for the oil companies. It gets sent to a refining hub in Texas, which turns it into gasoline. The refiners say less than 10% of the gasoline they refine gets exported. If the refiners did decide, illogically, to export it all, they would have to ship in other oil from Venezuela or elsewhere to replace it, which makes no sense at all. The U.S. State Department, which has assessed Keystone to death, found that pipelines have no impact on U.S. exports, and that Alberta’s oil is likely to stay in the U.S.

The National Post

Hey Toro, If this pipeline is is so non-controversial, why do your own Provinces reject it?

Tar sands supporters suffer setback as British Columbia rejects pipeline

Canadian province rejects plan for Enbridge Northern Gateway, saying company failed to demonstrate adequate clean-up plan

Efforts to expand production from the Alberta tar sands suffered a significant setback on Friday when the provincial government of British Columbia rejected a pipeline project because of environmental shortcomings.

In a strongly worded statement, the government of the province said it was not satisfied with the pipeline company's oil spill response plans.

The rejection of the pipeline – which was to have given Alberta an outlet to Pacific coast ports and markets in China – further raises the stakes on another controversial tar sands pipeline, Keystone XL.

Barack Obama is still weighing a decision on that pipeline, intended to pump tar sands crude to the Texas gulf coast.

First off we have extraordinary rules and regulations and requirements protecting our environment here. As compared to your other suppliers like Nigeria and Venezuela. We have what I and others consider to be ethical oil.

Secondly, you pulled up and old article from 2013.

BC is making Enbridge's Northern Gateway jump thru hoops. As well they should.

Frankly I would expect nothing less from any Canadian province.

It's been approved by the Feds with 209 conditions. BC has piled on a few more.

Enbridge knows the score and is keeping their stick on the ice. Northern Gateway will be approved in the end.

Northern Gateway pipeline approved with 209 conditions - Politics - CBC News

 

[Kosh]

What happened in the trial? I just read your link and the charges were laid in 2012. So what happened?

Like everything with the Koch Brothers.......paid it off.

Yes no far left organization would ever do such a thing!

BNSF train carrying North Dakota oil derails in Seattle Reuters

Yet the far left drones will not even acknowledge it!

Hint: Warren Buffet owns this!

 

[Bfgrn]

The Impact of Tar Sands Pipeline Spills on Employment and the Economy
A report by Cornell University global labor institute

About this report

This report examines the potentially negative impacts of tar sands oil spills on employment and the economy. It draws attention to economic sectors at risk from a tar sands pipeline spill, particularly in the six states along Keystone XL’s proposed route Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas. This report also shows how Michigan’s Kalamazoo River spill in 2010—to date the largest tar sands oil spill in the U.S.—caused significant economic damage and negatively impacted the quality of life of local communities.

The information was collected from employment and economic data in the pipeline states, as well as from interviews with businesspeople, landowners, farmers, and ranchers who live and work along the proposed route for the Keystone XL or near the Kalamazoo River oil spill.

Main Findings

• The negative impacts on employment and the economy of tar sands pipelines have largely been ignored. To date, a comprehensive spills risk assessment for the proposed Keystone XL pipeline has not been conducted. Such an assessment would provide an independent review of both the risk of spills and their economic consequences.

• The Keystone XL pipeline would cut through America’s breadbasket. Agricultural land and rangeland comprise 79 percent of the land that would be affected by the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. It would cross more than 1,700 bodies of water, including the Missouri and Yellowstone rivers and the Ogallala and Carrizo-Wilcox aquifers. The Ogallala Aquifer alone supplies 30 percent of the groundwater used for irrigation in the U.S. It also supplies two million people with drinking water.

• Farming, ranching, and tourism are major sources of employment along the Keystone XL pipeline’s proposed route. Water contamination resulting from a Keystone XL spill, or the cumulative effect of spills over the lifetime of the pipeline, would have significant economic costs and could result in job loss in these sectors. Approximately 571,000 workers are directly employed in the agricultural sector in the six states along the Keystone XL corridor. Total agricultural output for these states is about $76 billion annually.

• Many of the land areas and bodies of water that Keystone XL will cross provide recreational opportunities vital to the tourism industry. Keystone XL would traverse 90.5 miles of recreation and special interest areas, including federal public lands, state parks and forests, and national historic trails. About 780,000 workers are employed in the tourism sector in the states along the Keystone XL pipeline. Tourism spending in these states totaled more than $67 billion in 2009.

• Recent experience has demonstrated that tar sands spills pose additional dangers to the public and present special challenges in terms of clean up. There is strong evidence that tar sands pipeline spills occur more frequently than spills from pipelines carrying conventional crude oil because of the diluted bitumen’s toxic, corrosive, and heavy composition. Tar sands oil spills have the potential to be more damaging than conventional crude oil spills because they are more difficult and more costly to clean up, and because they have the potential to pose more serious health risks. Therefore both the frequency and particular nature of the spills have negative economic implications.

• The Kalamazoo River tar sands spill affected the health of hundreds of residents, displaced residents, hurt businesses, and caused a loss of jobs. The largest tar sands oil spill in the U.S. occurred on the Kalamazoo River in Michigan in 2010. This spill affected the health of hundreds of residents, displaced residents, hurt businesses, and caused a loss of jobs. The Kalamazoo spill is the most expensive tar sands pipeline oil spill in U.S. history, with overall costs estimated at $725 million.

• The public debate around Keystone XL has focused almost exclusively on job creation from the project, yet existing jobs and economic sectors could suffer significantly from one or more spills from Keystone XL. According to the U.S. State Department, the six states along the pipeline route are expected to gain a total of 20 permanent pipeline operation jobs. Meanwhile, the agricultural and tourism sectors are already a major employer in these states. Potential job losses to these sectors resulting from one or more spills from Keystone XL could be considerable.

• Renewable energy provides a safer route to creating new jobs and a sustainable environment. The U.S. is leading the world in renewable energy investments, and employment in this sector has expanded in recent years.

The full report can be downloaded here: Cornell University - ILR School: Global Labor Institute - Tar Sands Pipeline Spill

 

[OnePercenter]

Yes no far left organization would ever do such a thing!

BNSF train carrying North Dakota oil derails in Seattle Reuters

Yet the far left drones will not even acknowledge it!

Hint: Warren Buffet owns this!

You are comparing a train wreck which happens everyday in the US, vs Kidnapping? Really? Give it up....

 

[Bfgrn]

It won't be exported, according to the CEO of TransCanada Pipelines.

It certainly seems illogical that an oil pipeline should be elevated to the level of friction now represented by the Keystone XL project. But through one means or another, the project has become a source of real conflict. On Wednesday the CEO of TransCanada Corp. came pretty close to calling the President of the United States a liar. Russ Girling said that “the notion that this oil is going to get exported is pure fabrication by those that are opposed to our project.”

Later, he added: “It’s very highly unlikely that any of this crude leaves North America.”

The timing was important, because Mr. Obama made those very allegations just last week. The pipeline, he said was merely “providing the ability of Canada to pump their oil, send it through our land, down to the Gulf, where it will be sold everywhere else.” He was parroting the latest line in the war against Keystone mounted by U.S. environmentalists, which portrays Canada as a nefarious purveyor of dirty oil, with plans to send shipments across the pristine U.S. to ships in the Gulf, which will immediately transport it to China.

In reality, TransCanada doesn’t own the oil, it just ships it for the oil companies. It gets sent to a refining hub in Texas, which turns it into gasoline. The refiners say less than 10% of the gasoline they refine gets exported. If the refiners did decide, illogically, to export it all, they would have to ship in other oil from Venezuela or elsewhere to replace it, which makes no sense at all. The U.S. State Department, which has assessed Keystone to death, found that pipelines have no impact on U.S. exports, and that Alberta’s oil is likely to stay in the U.S.

The National Post

Hey Toro, If this pipeline is is so non-controversial, why do your own Provinces reject it?

Tar sands supporters suffer setback as British Columbia rejects pipeline

Canadian province rejects plan for Enbridge Northern Gateway, saying company failed to demonstrate adequate clean-up plan

Efforts to expand production from the Alberta tar sands suffered a significant setback on Friday when the provincial government of British Columbia rejected a pipeline project because of environmental shortcomings.

In a strongly worded statement, the government of the province said it was not satisfied with the pipeline company's oil spill response plans.

The rejection of the pipeline – which was to have given Alberta an outlet to Pacific coast ports and markets in China – further raises the stakes on another controversial tar sands pipeline, Keystone XL.

Barack Obama is still weighing a decision on that pipeline, intended to pump tar sands crude to the Texas gulf coast.

First off we have extraordinary rules and regulations and requirements protecting our environment here. As compared to your other suppliers like Nigeria and Venezuela. We have what I and others consider to be ethical oil.

Secondly, you pulled up and old article from 2013.

BC is making Enbridge's Northern Gateway jump thru hoops. As well they should.

Frankly I would expect nothing less from any Canadian province.

It's been approved by the Feds with 209 conditions. BC has piled on a few more.

Enbridge knows the score and is keeping their stick on the ice. Northern Gateway will be approved in the end.

Northern Gateway pipeline approved with 209 conditions - Politics - CBC News

Reading without reflecting is like eating without digesting.
Edmund Burke

"First Nations and the democratic majority of B.C. voters oppose Northern Gateway. Despite that, Ottawa still intends to ram it down our throat. Premier Clark’s only politically viable option is to join us in standing up for British Columbia,” spokesman Kai Nagata said in a news release.

Other groups asserted that despite the approval, the pipeline faces too many obstacles to be built.

Protest signs are shown in the town of Kitimat, B.C., on April 12, 2014. Residents of the town voted against the Northern Gateway pipeline project in a blow to Enbridge's efforts to expedite the flow of crude from Canada's landlocked oilsands to high-paying markets in Asia. ( Julie Gordon/Reuters)

"Approving the Northern Gateway pipeline rejects science, disrespects First Nations, ignores the Government of British Columbia and brushes aside the voices of millions of Canadians," Tim Gray, a spokesman for Environmental Defence, said in a news release.

"Despite cabinet’s approval, the pipeline will not be built. These conditions cannot be met — an approval with conditions is as good as a no. Opposition to the project will only grow louder and stronger every day. This project will be challenged in the courts and on the ground."

 

[OnePercenter]

What about the existing pipeline to the Patoka and Cushing? What happens to the availability of gasoline in the Midwest if Keystone bypasses existing refineries and dumps all of it's oil in tankers for export.

 

[Politico]

Again I have repeatedly addressed this. Gas prices go up.

 

[SwimExpert]

So let's recap....

The US gets oil from many places, including Mexico and Venezuela. We are getting our fill. Canadian companies want a piece of the action in the Gulf Coast, because they currently have none of that market. Their inability to tap that market causes them to sell their oil at a discount to the US mid west, because of built up excess. This gives the United States access to discounted oil, and thus lower gas prices. Building the Keystone XL will allow Canadian oil companies to divert oil to the Gulf Coast markets and sell at a higher price, instead of selling at a discount in the mid west. This will result in higher prices for American consumers, as the mid west discount is eliminated.

Sorry, but I like the fact that American consumers can buy Canadian oil at a discount. I have no interest in projects that will eliminate that.

This is typical of the gross over simplification that the lib posters are this site are known for.
In reality things are more complex than that.

No, gross oversimplification is you saying "how can more oil create higher prices?"

Yes why dont you explain how more supply leads to higher prices.
This ought to be good.

I just did, and have been this whole time. There won't be more oil. It's largely a diverting of oil away from the mid west, where Canadian oil is sold at a discount due to excessive supply, so it can displace Mexican oil sold at a higher price at the Gulf Coast.

You need to think that one through a little better.

It would be better if you would bother to actually become acquainted with the facts. Because you sound embarrassingly foolish by demonstrating here your total void of the same.