Oil Transported Through Keystone Will Be Consumed in the US

[SwimExpert]

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.

Pssst, look at the OP, where TransCanada's CEO made the claim that the oil will be consumed in the US. This is quite the conundrum you've fallen into and the point that you are going to hammer home until it kills you is fully in line with the argument that TransCanada's CEO is lying.

 

[Toro]

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

Who said it wasn't controversial?

First, simply because the BC government has rejected it now doesn't mean it's not going to happen. It will happen if the concerns can be met, constituencies are paid, and if it is economical. There is an even stronger environmental lobby in British Columbia than there is the American Midwest, and much of the proposed northern route runs through native lands. The other west coast proposal runs along a route already built with a pipeline. The environmentalists, and the BC government, are - legitimately - concerned about the affects of an oil spill off the coast. That area of the world is one of the most spectacular on earth. If there was a spill, heavy crude sinks to the bottom of the ocean and is difficult to clean up, unlike light crude which can be skimmed off the top of the water. Plus, it is difficult to build through mountain ranges.

There is already a pipeline which runs east to Quebec called Energy East. That pipeline will be converted to haul heavy crude, and a new pipeline will be built through Quebec and New Brunswick. There, it will be put on tankers and transported down the US East Coast into the Gulf, and dock in Galveston where it will be taken off and moved to the same refiners in Texas where Keystone would haul it anyways.

And you know the ironic part of the story you posted? If the crude is transported through Energy East to New Brunswick rather than BC, Americans will be taking that risk of a tanker spill as the crude that would have gone through Keystone is instead sailed past the most populous areas of the US, and past the coast of Florida which relies heavily on tourism.

 

[Toro]

It has everything to do with the OP and nothing to do with the failure to get the KXL passed. You just don't want to admit that the primary reason for the KXL is EXPORT even when your government comes right out and says so!!!!!

The Canadian government saying that it should diversify its markets is not the same thing as saying most or all of Keystone's product will be sold abroad.

This isn't hard.

look HoHo, we get it. You're anti American and Pro French... and no amount of logic, or factual evidence will ever chance that.

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

 

[Bfgrn]

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

Who said it wasn't controversial?

First, simply because the BC government has rejected it now doesn't mean it's not going to happen. It will happen if the concerns can be met, constituencies are paid, and if it is economical. There is an even stronger environmental lobby in British Columbia than there is the American Midwest, and much of the proposed northern route runs through native lands. The other west coast proposal runs along a route already built with a pipeline. The environmentalists, and the BC government, are - legitimately - concerned about the affects of an oil spill off the coast. That area of the world is one of the most spectacular on earth. If there was a spill, heavy crude sinks to the bottom of the ocean and is difficult to clean up, unlike light crude which can be skimmed off the top of the water. Plus, it is difficult to build through mountain ranges.

There is already a pipeline which runs east to Quebec called Energy East. That pipeline will be converted to haul heavy crude, and a new pipeline will be built through Quebec and New Brunswick. There, it will be put on tankers and transported down the US East Coast into the Gulf, and dock in Galveston where it will be taken off and moved to the same refiners in Texas where Keystone would haul it anyways.

And you know the ironic part of the story you posted? If the crude is transported through Energy East to New Brunswick rather than BC, Americans will be taking that risk of a tanker spill as the crude that would have gone through Keystone is instead sailed past the most populous areas of the US, and past the coast of Florida which relies heavily on tourism.

"We didn't inherit this land from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children."
Lakota Sioux Proverb

America has legitimate environmental concerns spelled out in my previous post #235 Toro...

#235-http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/10225459/

Plus TransCanada has lied before about jobs that will be created, why should we believe them now?

Jobs Gained, Jobs Lost by the Construction of Keystone XL
A report by Cornell University global labor institute

Main Findings

The main points in this briefing paper can be summarized as follows:

• The industry’s US jobs claims are linked to a $7 billion KXL project budget. However, the budget for KXL that will have a bearing on US jobs figures is dramatically lower—only around $3 to $4 billion. A lower project budget means fewer jobs.

• The project will create no more than 2,500-4,650 temporary direct construction jobs for two years, according to TransCanada’s own data supplied to the State Department.

• The company’s claim that KXL will create 20,000 direct construction and manufacturing jobs in the U.S is not substantiated.

• There is strong evidence to suggest that a large portion of the primary material input for KXL—steel pipe—will not even be produced in the United States. A substantial amount of pipe has already been manufactured in advance of pipeline permit issuance.

• The industry’s claim that KXL will create 119,000 total jobs (direct, indirect, and induced) is based on a flawed and poorly documented study commissioned by TransCanada (The Perryman Group study). Perryman wrongly includes over $1 billion in spending and over 10,000 person-years of employment for a section of the Keystone project in Kansas and Oklahoma that is not part of KXL and has already been built.

• KXL will not be a major source of US jobs, nor will it play any substantial role at all in putting Americans back to work. Even if the Perryman figures were accurate, and all of the workers for the next phase of the project were hired immediately, the US seasonally adjusted unemployment rate would remain at 9.1%—exactly where it is now.

• KXL will divert Tar Sands oil now supplying Midwest refineries, so it can be sold at higher prices to the Gulf Coast and export markets. As a result, consumers in the Midwest could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel fuel. These additional costs (estimated to total $2–4 billion) will suppress other spending and will therefore cost jobs.

• Pipeline spills incur costs and therefore kill jobs. Clean-up operations and permanent pipeline spill damage will divert public and private funds away from productive economic activity. In 2010 US pipeline spills and explosions killed 22 people, released over 170,000 barrels of petroleum into the environment, and caused $1 billion dollars worth of damage in the United States.

• Rising carbon emissions and other pollutants from the heavy crude transported by Keystone XL will also incur increased health care costs. Emissions also increase both the risk and costs of further climate instability.

• By helping to lock in US dependence on fossil fuels, Keystone XL will impede progress toward green and sustainable economic renewal and will have a chilling effect on green investments and green jobs creation. The green economy has already generated 2.7 million jobs in the US and could generate many more.

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_012312_FIN.pdf

 

[Toro]

It has everything to do with the OP and nothing to do with the failure to get the KXL passed. You just don't want to admit that the primary reason for the KXL is EXPORT even when your government comes right out and says so!!!!!

The Canadian government saying that it should diversify its markets is not the same thing as saying most or all of Keystone's product will be sold abroad.

This isn't hard.

Again, ONLY if we are willing to pay higher prices for whatever amount is sold here.

That's true of any transaction, oil or not.

 

[Toro]

America has legitimate environmental concerns spelled out in my previous post #235 Toro...

Of course America has legitimate concerns. There are legitimate concerns for any of the thousands of miles of pipelines that have been built in the US.

But this thread was about the claims that oil sands crude transported through Keystone will either entirely or almost entirely be exported. That claim made by leftists, environmentalists and Obama is false.

 

[billyerock1991]

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

just like the alaska pipe line huh 95% of the oil is sold out of country and the res is sold in the us ... can't wait to see the gas prices goes down 5%

 

[Toro]

In other words, at least half of the oil that is refined on the Gulf Coast stays in the United States.

This is not knowable yet. It may be refined in Texas or Louisiana, but may then be headed to Mexico, Central America, South America. Whomever pays the highest price.

Once again:

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

I guess nothing is knowable in the future, is it? Yet, the Left seems to speak with high confidence of the future when they say that it will all be exported.

If most of the refining capacity on the Gulf is used for product that stays in the US, it is most likely the refined product will stay in the US. Thus, to say with certainty that it will all be exported is bunk.

 

[Toro]

If that happens, then environmentalists won't have to worry about a pipeline leak. Instead, they can worry about a tanker spill and crude washing up into New York Harbor or the beaches of Florida.

Because those are the only oil tankers on the high seas?

We've been living with that threat for decades.

As we have with pipelines.

 

[Silhouette]

Of course America has legitimate concerns. There are legitimate concerns for any of the thousands of miles of pipelines that have been built in the US.

But this thread was about the claims that oil sands crude transported through Keystone will either entirely or almost entirely be exported. That claim made by leftists, environmentalists and Obama is false.

OK, then Canada builds refineries and we truck it into the US.

 

[Ravi]

In other words, at least half of the oil that is refined on the Gulf Coast stays in the United States.

This is not knowable yet. It may be refined in Texas or Louisiana, but may then be headed to Mexico, Central America, South America. Whomever pays the highest price.

Once again:

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

I guess nothing is knowable in the future, is it? Yet, the Left seems to speak with high confidence of the future when they say that it will all be exported.

If most of the refining capacity on the Gulf is used for product that stays in the US, it is most likely the refined product will stay in the US. Thus, to say with certainty that it will all be exported is bunk.

But! If there is a profit to be made, it will be exported. Or some other product will be exported in its place.

The guy in the Op does not seem credible making the claims he is making.

 

[tinydancer]

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.

So he was charged and there was no trial and no conviction? Link?

 

[Dot Com]

But! If there is a profit to be made, it will be exported. Or some other product will be exported in its place.

The guy in the Op does not seem credible making the claims he is making.

^ that

 

[Ravi]

But! If there is a profit to be made, it will be exported. Or some other product will be exported in its place.

The guy in the Op does not seem credible making the claims he is making.

^ that

I was just reading that the guy, Russ Girling, is a proven liar. He's claimed the pipeline will provide 42,000 ongoing jobs when in reality it will create about 50 ongoing jobs in maintenance.

Scratch his partisan bullshit.

 

[Dot Com]

I was just reading that the guy, Russ Girling, is a proven liar. He's claimed the pipeline will provide 42,000 ongoing jobs when in reality it will create about 50 ongoing jobs in maintenance.

Scratch his partisan bullshit.

yep. OP needs to stop his charade

 

[Ravi]

I was just reading that the guy, Russ Girling, is a proven liar. He's claimed the pipeline will provide 42,000 ongoing jobs when in reality it will create about 50 ongoing jobs in maintenance.

Scratch his partisan bullshit.

yep. OP needs to stop his charade

LOL, he's not a bad guy but he often overlooks his own partisanship.

 

[tinydancer]

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.

Well there's a big flaw in your argument. Keystone is just a pipeline. TransCanada doesn't own the oil.

They can't do what you are saying they will do.

 

[Kosh]

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....

Hence this irony impaired far left Obama drone proves my comments!

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I'll believe the vast amounts of reports saying the same thing President Obama is saying over the self-serving, lone comment from an oil corporation executive, thank you very much.

You might have a point if Obama wasn't a known LIAR.

 

[tinydancer]

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

When? Keystone I and Keystone II are fully operational. Keystone XL southern phase has been built and delivering crude to the Gulf since January 2014?

Gas prices have been steadily declining. So how in hell is this driving up the price of gas?

 

[BlindBoo]

Once the Bitumen is purchase by refiners TransCanada has no say in what they do with the refined product.