Oil Transported Through Keystone Will Be Consumed in the US

[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

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%

First Alaskan export in a decade just happened in September to South Korea. You should look it up.

Would you like to revisit your statement? I think you better because I'm about to smack you around. Get your cold pack ready for your bruising!



According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, about 2.7% of Alaska oil production was exported to foreign countries from 1996 to 2004, when the practice stopped. South Korea was the largest customer at 46.15 million barrels and the rest – 49.34 million barrels -- went to Japan, China and Taiwan. As of April 2014, no Alaskan oil had been exported since 2004.

The United States in the 1970s made it illegal to export domestically produced crude oil without a license as a way to conserve domestic oil reserves and discourage foreign imports at a time when the Arab oil embargo showed how vulnerable the United States was. In 1996, President Bill Clinton amended the policy to allow exports of crude from the North Slope in Alaska that traveled on the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System to Valdez.

Alaska oil exported for first time in a decade heads to South Korea - LA Times

 

[tinydancer]

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.

Ravi. TransCanada is not an oil producer. They build infrastructure like the Keystone to carry crude. That's all.

He's going on an EIA statement that minimum 80% produced in the Gulf will remain for domestic use.

 

[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.

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.

The claim from the Left is that it will all be exported.

You can make up as many "what if" scenarios as you wish, but Obama's own State Dept disagrees with Obama and agrees with the CEO that the crude will almost certainly not all be exported.

 

[Silhouette]

Ravi. TransCanada is not an oil producer. They build infrastructure like the Keystone to carry crude. That's all.

He's going on an EIA statement that minimum 80% produced in the Gulf will remain for domestic use.

The Canadian government cannot find contractors to build refineries within their borders?

 

[tinydancer]

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.

And where pray tell did you read that the pipeline would provide 42,000 ongoing jobs?

I can't wait to see the link. Because I know for a fact that Trans Canada has never claimed that there would be 42,000 freaking permanent jobs.

Get ready because here comes the truth. Not some distorted piece of bullshit from someone "interpreting" what Trans Canada fucking claims.

I'm just so pissed off at all the liars and lies out there that you end up picking up Ravi. Not blaming you.

But I like to start from a truth and then debate the merits of a situation.

You know who claimed 42,000 supplemental jobs. The freaking US State Department!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here:

Nine Thousand Shovel-Ready Jobs

Keystone XL is the definition of shovel-ready infrastructure project. Almost overnight, Keystone XL could put 9,000 hard-working American men and women directly to work.

The U.S. State Department’s Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (PDF, 4 MB) found that the project would support more than 42,000 direct and indirect jobs nationwide.

Supporting North American Labor

TransCanada has entered into comprehensive Project Labor Agreements with North America’s largest building trades unions, the Laborers International Union of North America, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO, the International Union of Operating Engineers and the Pipeline Contractors Association.

The agreement guarantees TransCanada will have access to the most capable, well-trained and ready workforce in the U.S. to construct Keystone XL.

Millions of Work Hours

During construction, the project is expected to create over seven million hours of labor and over 13,000 new jobs for American workers.

Danny Hendrix, a business manager for Pipeliners Local 798 in Tulsa, Okla., recently told media what these jobs mean to his members and their families

: “They’ve got healthcare for another year, [and] they’ve got a pension credit for when they retire. It means that those families have got healthcare, dental care — so it means a lot. It means they can make a house payment, it means they can send their kids to college.”

- See more at: Jobs Economic Benefits Keystone XL Pipeline

Jobs Economic Benefits Keystone XL Pipeline

 

[tinydancer]

Ravi. TransCanada is not an oil producer. They build infrastructure like the Keystone to carry crude. That's all.

He's going on an EIA statement that minimum 80% produced in the Gulf will remain for domestic use.

The Canadian government cannot find contractors to build refineries within their borders?

Good grief this is the third freaking time I'm going to respond to you directly.

We have our own refineries. Many of them. Do you even have a clue what the Keystone XL is about at all?

Canada
Newfoundland and Labrador

• North Atlantic Refinery, located in Come by Chance (North Atlantic Refining), 115,000 bbl/d (18,300 m3/d)

Nova Scotia

• Imperial Oil Refinery - Dartmouth (Imperial Oil) (closed), 89,000 bbl/d (14,100 m3/d)

New Brunswick

• Saint John (Irving Oil), 300,000 bbl/d (48,000 m3/d)

Quebec

• Montreal East (Shell Canada), 161,000 bbl/d (25,600 m3/d). Montreal East Refinery (Shell Canada). On June 4, 2010, Shell Canada officially announced the commencement to downgrade the refinery into a terminal, following the unsuccessful attempt to find a buyer to take over the plant.[17]
• Montreal (Suncor Energy), 140,000 bbl/d (22,000 m3/d). Formerly Petro-Canada (before Aug 2009) and historically a Petrofina refinery. Montreal Refinery[18]
• Lévis (Ultramar(Valero)), 265,000 bbl/d (42,100 m3/d)[18]

Ontario

• Nanticoke Refinery, Nanticoke - (Imperial Oil), 112,000 bbl/d (17,800 m3/d)
• Sarnia (Imperial Oil), 115,000 bbl/d (18,300 m3/d)
• Sarnia (Suncor Energy), 85,000 bbl/d (13,500 m3/d)
• Corunna (Shell Canada), 72,000 bbl/d (11,400 m3/d)

Lubricant Refinery

• Mississauga (Suncor Energy), 15,600 bbl/d (2,480 m3/d) - aka Clarkson Refinery - base oil production is 13,600 bbl/d (2,160 m3/d) of API Group II capacity and 2,000 bbl/d (320 m3/d) of API Group III capacity. Formerly Petro-Canada (before Aug 2009) and historically a Gulf refinery.

Saskatchewan

• CCRL Refinery Complex, Regina (CRC)), 145,000 bbl/d (23,100 m3/d)

Upgraders (improve the quality of crude for sale at a higher price)

• Husky Lloydminster Refinery, Lloydminster (Husky Energy), 25,000 bbl/d (4,000 m3/d)
• Husky Lloydminster Upgrader Lloydminster (Husky Energy), 75,000 bbl/d (11,900 m3/d)

Alberta

• Strathcona Refinery, Edmonton (Imperial Oil), 187,000 bbl/d (29,700 m3/d)
• Scotford Refinery, Scotford (Shell Canada), 100,000 bbl/d (16,000 m3/d)
• Edmonton (Suncor Energy), 135,000 bbl/d (21,500 m3/d). Formerly Petro-Canada (before Aug 2009)
• North West Redwater Partnership Bitumen Refinery, Alberta Industrial Heartland (45 km NE of Edmonton), (North West Upgrading/Canadian Natural Upgrading). Phase 1: 50,000 bitumen bbl/d (7,900 bitumen m3/d)

Bitumen Upgraders (turn bitumen into synthetic crude, which then must be further refined)

• Scotford Upgrader, Scotford (AOSP - Shell Canada 60%, Chevron Corporation 20%, Marathon Oil 20%), 250,000 bbl/d (40,000 m3/d) (located next to Shell Refinery) raw bitumen
• Horizon Oil Sands, Fort McMurray (Canadian Natural Resources Ltd.), 110,000 bbl/d (17,000 m3/d) raw bitumen
• Long Lake, Fort McMurray (OPTI Canada Inc. 35% and Nexen Inc. 65%), 70,000 bbl/d (11,000 m3/d) raw bitumen
• Syncrude, Fort McMurray (Canadian Oil Sands Trust, Imperial Oil, Suncor, Nexen, Conoco Phillips, Mocal Energy and Murphy Oil), 350,000 bbl/d (56,000 m3/d) raw bitumen
• Suncor, Fort McMurray (Suncor), 350,000 bbl/d (56,000 m3/d) raw bitumen

British Columbia

• Burnaby Refinery, Burnaby (Chevron Corporation), 52,000 bbl/d (8,300 m3/d)
• Prince George Refinery, Prince George (Husky Energy), 12,000 bbl/d (1,900 m3/d)

List of oil refineries - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[SwimExpert]

Ravi. TransCanada is not an oil producer. They build infrastructure like the Keystone to carry crude. That's all.

So then you confirm her position. The CEO's claims are not trustworthy. They don't have any control or say in what will happen with the oil.

 

[Synthaholic]

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.

Other than Jimmy Carter, name the president who told no lies.

 

[tinydancer]

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

I'll take the time to shred this bullshit report today. Man oh man those left wing sons of bitches a Cornell have woven one hell of a freaking fine fairy tale.

Let's look at this portion before I run the dog.


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.

Cornell is full of shit. With these two images I can blow them out of the water. .

Worried about an aquifer are we now? The Ogallala? Someone want to tell Cornell they are late to the freaking party?

And those bias bastards at Cornell who put together this report that they know damn well is a lie managed to come up with a study that could GRUBER the American public.

So Cornell is worried about farmland and tourism?

This bullshit cracks me up. Cornell researchers are in someone's pocket big time.

 

[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.

Other than Jimmy Carter, name the president who told no lies.

Thank you for admitting Obama is a liar.

 

[Synthaholic]

The claim from the Left is that it will all be exported.

No, the claim from the Left is that the risks far outweigh the rewards. The U.S. will take the majority of risk, without the reward of getting the majority of the oil.

 

[Synthaholic]

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.

Other than Jimmy Carter, name the president who told no lies.

Thank you for admitting Obama is a liar.

I didn't admit that.

 

[tinydancer]

Ravi. TransCanada is not an oil producer. They build infrastructure like the Keystone to carry crude. That's all.

So then you confirm her position. The CEO's claims are not trustworthy. They don't have any control or say in what will happen with the oil.

They're going on an EIA report you know YOUR government agency that stated that I think it was 80% of the crude to the Gulf would remain in the states for domestic use.

Just like TransCanada never claimed that 42,000 extra jobs would be created. YOUR government agency known as the state department made that freaking claim.

 

[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.

Other than Jimmy Carter, name the president who told no lies.

Thank you for admitting Obama is a liar.

I didn't admit that.

How many unicorns do you own?

 

[tinydancer]

The claim from the Left is that it will all be exported.

No, the claim from the Left is that the risks far outweigh the rewards. The U.S. will take the majority of risk, without the reward of getting the majority of the oil.

What are your risks Syn? Glad to address them one by one when I get back with the dog.

And please back up your concerns if possible with a link so I can figure out where the lies are coming from .

 

[SwimExpert]

They're going on an EIA report you know YOUR government agency that stated that I think it was 80% of the crude to the Gulf would remain in the states for domestic use.

And how do you know he was referencing any such thing? Seems to me that you're simply turning part apologist, part spokesperson.

Just like TransCanada never claimed that 42,000 extra jobs would be created. YOUR government agency known as the state department made that freaking claim.

Link?

 

[Silhouette]

And why can't Canada build refineries at a fraction of the cost of the pipeline? Then just truck the fuel to the US? Way more jobs would be created this way.

Or is the incentive here quick-liquidation malignant capitalism at the expense of jobs and the environment? Shove that money in offshore accounts and live like a king until your body rots in the ground next to all the waste and pollution you created just for a few rich men?

 

[tinydancer]

And why can't Canada build refineries at a fraction of the cost of the pipeline? Then just truck the fuel to the US? Way more jobs would be created this way.

Or is the incentive here quick-liquidation malignant capitalism at the expense of jobs and the environment? Shove that money in offshore accounts and live like a king until your body rots in the ground next to all the waste and pollution you created just for a few rich men?

Are you just on a repeat cycle?

I'm losing track on how many times I've put it up for you Silhouette.

Canada
Newfoundland and Labrador

• North Atlantic Refinery, located in Come by Chance (North Atlantic Refining), 115,000 bbl/d (18,300 m3/d)

Nova Scotia

• Imperial Oil Refinery - Dartmouth (Imperial Oil) (closed), 89,000 bbl/d (14,100 m3/d)

New Brunswick

• Saint John (Irving Oil), 300,000 bbl/d (48,000 m3/d)

Quebec

• Montreal East (Shell Canada), 161,000 bbl/d (25,600 m3/d). Montreal East Refinery (Shell Canada). On June 4, 2010, Shell Canada officially announced the commencement to downgrade the refinery into a terminal, following the unsuccessful attempt to find a buyer to take over the plant.[17]
• Montreal (Suncor Energy), 140,000 bbl/d (22,000 m3/d). Formerly Petro-Canada (before Aug 2009) and historically a Petrofina refinery. Montreal Refinery[18]
• Lévis (Ultramar(Valero)), 265,000 bbl/d (42,100 m3/d)[18]

Ontario

• Nanticoke Refinery, Nanticoke - (Imperial Oil), 112,000 bbl/d (17,800 m3/d)
• Sarnia (Imperial Oil), 115,000 bbl/d (18,300 m3/d)
• Sarnia (Suncor Energy), 85,000 bbl/d (13,500 m3/d)
• Corunna (Shell Canada), 72,000 bbl/d (11,400 m3/d)

Lubricant Refinery

• Mississauga (Suncor Energy), 15,600 bbl/d (2,480 m3/d) - aka Clarkson Refinery - base oil production is 13,600 bbl/d (2,160 m3/d) of API Group II capacity and 2,000 bbl/d (320 m3/d) of API Group III capacity. Formerly Petro-Canada (before Aug 2009) and historically a Gulf refinery.

Saskatchewan

• CCRL Refinery Complex, Regina (CRC)), 145,000 bbl/d (23,100 m3/d)

Upgraders (improve the quality of crude for sale at a higher price)

• Husky Lloydminster Refinery, Lloydminster (Husky Energy), 25,000 bbl/d (4,000 m3/d)
• Husky Lloydminster Upgrader Lloydminster (Husky Energy), 75,000 bbl/d (11,900 m3/d)

Alberta

• Strathcona Refinery, Edmonton (Imperial Oil), 187,000 bbl/d (29,700 m3/d)
• Scotford Refinery, Scotford (Shell Canada), 100,000 bbl/d (16,000 m3/d)
• Edmonton (Suncor Energy), 135,000 bbl/d (21,500 m3/d). Formerly Petro-Canada (before Aug 2009)
• North West Redwater Partnership Bitumen Refinery, Alberta Industrial Heartland (45 km NE of Edmonton), (North West Upgrading/Canadian Natural Upgrading). Phase 1: 50,000 bitumen bbl/d (7,900 bitumen m3/d)

Bitumen Upgraders (turn bitumen into synthetic crude, which then must be further refined)

• Scotford Upgrader, Scotford (AOSP - Shell Canada 60%, Chevron Corporation 20%, Marathon Oil 20%), 250,000 bbl/d (40,000 m3/d) (located next to Shell Refinery) raw bitumen
• Horizon Oil Sands, Fort McMurray (Canadian Natural Resources Ltd.), 110,000 bbl/d (17,000 m3/d) raw bitumen
• Long Lake, Fort McMurray (OPTI Canada Inc. 35% and Nexen Inc. 65%), 70,000 bbl/d (11,000 m3/d) raw bitumen
• Syncrude, Fort McMurray (Canadian Oil Sands Trust, Imperial Oil, Suncor, Nexen, Conoco Phillips, Mocal Energy and Murphy Oil), 350,000 bbl/d (56,000 m3/d) raw bitumen
• Suncor, Fort McMurray (Suncor), 350,000 bbl/d (56,000 m3/d) raw bitumen

British Columbia

• Burnaby Refinery, Burnaby (Chevron Corporation), 52,000 bbl/d (8,300 m3/d)
  
  List of oil refineries - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[tinydancer]

They're going on an EIA report you know YOUR government agency that stated that I think it was 80% of the crude to the Gulf would remain in the states for domestic use.

And how do you know he was referencing any such thing? Seems to me that you're simply turning part apologist, part spokesperson.

Just like TransCanada never claimed that 42,000 extra jobs would be created. YOUR government agency known as the state department made that freaking claim.

Link?

They are referencing their own "Myths and Facts" at their own website where they have used American Government data to support their facts and shoot down the lies that are out there.

You can follow the links to the EIA, State Department and more. I'm loaded for bear on your own government findings. But start here.

EIA report reinforces case for Keystone XL
The case for building Keystone XL Pipeline is as strong as it was five years ago.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) posted its early release of the Annual Energy Outlook 2014 (PDF, 485 KB) on December 16, 2013. The study simply reinforces what many Americans already know: Keystone XL is needed not only to support the safe and reliable transport of North American energy, but to help reduce the amount of overseas imports from Venezuela and the Middle East.

The report clearly shows that while imports have decreased in recent years, thanks to the boom in domestic production, the United States will continue to import anywhere from five to eight million barrels of oil every day, until 2040. The key for the United States is to make sure those barrels are delivered as safely and securely as possible.

- See more at: EIA report reinforces case for Keystone XL Keystone XL Pipeline

EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2014: This graphs shows that despite huge increases in domestic production the U.S. will still require imports for decades.

The national and energy security benefits of Keystone XL are undeniable. Previous cross-border oil pipelines, such as the first Keystone Pipeline, were approved precisely because they served the national interest of the United States.

“The [State] Department has determined that issuance of the permit to TransCanada Keystone Pipeline LP is in the national interest, in part, because it increases U.S. market access to crude oil supplies from a stable and reliable trading partner, Canada, that is in close proximity to the United States.” – State Department Issuance of Presidential Permit for Keystone Pipeline, March 14, 2008.

Keystone XL means that more of Americans’ energy dollars stay in North America, benefiting governments, workers and local communities. Keystone XL will help modernize the country’s energy infrastructure, built by American workers who are able to earn a good living to provide for their families and their health and retirement benefits.

Keystone XL means that millions of barrels of oil will move to U.S. refineries in the safest, most efficient and environmentally responsible way.
EIA report reinforces case for Keystone XL Keystone XL Pipeline

This will take you to Myths and Facts where they use your government data .

Myths Facts Keystone XL Pipeline

 

[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.

The claim from the Left is that it will all be exported.

You can make up as many "what if" scenarios as you wish, but Obama's own State Dept disagrees with Obama and agrees with the CEO that the crude will almost certainly not all be exported.

I've never heard the claim that it will all be exported. That's as retarded as Girling's claim that none will be exported and THAT is your contention.