Keystone Pipeline

[_honorentheos]

Droopy,

It's the idea that in a world where trade-offs are necessary (and I'd agree they are) the primary driver for making decisions regarding these trade-off is expediency and profit-motive.

[_honorentheos]

Rambo -

I think you would find value in reading the first link I provided. The Assistant Sec. of State's testimony will show you that the Obama administration was not planning on vetoing the pipeline but was, instead, working towards resolving concerns that could not be resolved prior to the deadline imposed by the Republican congress in the January tax bill. The Republicans made it an issue of political manuvering. If you want to get angry at anyone, I think they would serve as a more just target.

One item I had not been aware of prior to reading her testimony was that they were awaiting action on the part of Nebraska that would have influenced a rerouting of the pipeline around an area of critical environmental importance. She suggests that had this been allowed to happen, the Department of State was likely to have made a different recommendation regarding the pipeline being in the nation's interest.

[_Droopy]

Droopy,

It's the idea that in a world where trade-offs are necessary (and I'd agree they are) the primary driver for making decisions regarding these trade-off is expediency and profit-motive.

I didn't say anything about "expediency" nor about the profit-motive (without which, in any case, we would still be going to work in horse drawn carriages - if that). What I said was "high living standards" and "economic growth (economic growth - and the jobs and opportunity it provides, being the only real ultimate answer to poverty).

[_Rambo]

I guess the main point is this.

Would you rather have oil come in oil tankers from your enemies and create no jobs. Also probably has the same environmental risk.

Or have oil come from your friends in a pipeline which will create jobs during construction.

Rambo,

This isn't really the issue. For relevant insight, consider the accusations being thrown around during the off-shore oil spill caused by the BP rig. They included complaints that the rigs were permitted on a fast-track system that failed to address key safety and environmental issues. Or how apparent it became that BP did not have an adequate emergency action plan.

If you skim throught the executive summary of the Final EIS the facts become apparent that TC Keystone was not accurately identifying the potential for leaks (a recent example cited in the EIS was another Keystone pipeline that had 14 leaks in one year, two of which escaped or were outside of the capture trench. One of those leaks was 21,000 gallons. One year after operations began) and they did not have an emergency action plan despite proposing a pipeline that will cross one of the most important aquifers in the United States. We don't have a second chance to fix it if this pipeline leaks the estimated 2 million gallon max. cited in the EIS over the Ogallala aquifer. We don't have a second chance at fixing problems caused by Keystone failing to identify potential leaks at other weak points in the system other than the pipeline itself (a key issue identified in the EIS). The State Department's recommendation not to permit was the right one given the issues. We should learn from our past mistakes.

It's about being responsible. When TransCanadian addresses the issues and develops a realistic emergency action plan then we'll see.

This is fair enough horno and I can see what you are saying. You would think that transCanada would've looked at it throughly enough... Anyways, I hear they are planning on building some of the pipeline right now until the other stuff gets approved. Let's hope they put to rest the environmental concerns.

I guess the main thing I am concerned about it that it just does not make sense to me not to buy oil from Canada. If they changed the pipeline's path then it would make even more sense.

I have heard that some people think the middle east is funding some of these environmental groups so they don't buy oil from Canada. I know it's a conspiracy theory but it would make sense for them to do that.

[_Brackite]

Oil prices are high right now. That's helpful to a sparsely populated state that heavily relies on the oil industry to drive its economy. If your economic plan is to have massive oil wealth per capita to exploit, Norway and Qatar have already beaten you to it.

With gas prices still so high now, wouldn’t President Obama having approved of the building of the Keystone Pipeline drive down a little bit of the very high gas prices???

[_krose]

Am I missing something here?

So we grease the skids for a Canadian oil company so it can lay a pipeline down to the Gulf of Mexico, where the oil will then be sold to the highest bidder on the world market.

How does this lower gasoline prices in the US?

[_Bond James Bond]

Am I missing something here?

So we grease the skids for a Canadian oil company so it can lay a pipeline down to the Gulf of Mexico, where the oil will then be sold to the highest bidder on the world market.

How does this lower gasoline prices in the US?

That's the hilarious part. All the work so that we can sell oil to China and India. Let's pass the Keystone Pipeline, with language that says oil that travels the Keystone cannot leave North America.

[_Morley]

Am I missing something here?

So we grease the skids for a Canadian oil company so it can lay a pipeline down to the Gulf of Mexico, where the oil will then be sold to the highest bidder on the world market.

How does this lower gasoline prices in the US?

That's the hilarious part. All the work so that we can sell oil to China and India. Let's pass the Keystone Pipeline, with language that says oil that travels the Keystone cannot leave North America.

It wouldn’t matter. Oil is a fungible asset. Any oil gained from the pipeline would result in other oil that is destined to be sold in the US to then be sold on the open market.

[_krose]

Am I missing something here?

So we grease the skids for a Canadian oil company so it can lay a pipeline down to the Gulf of Mexico, where the oil will then be sold to the highest bidder on the world market.

How does this lower gasoline prices in the US?

That's the hilarious part. All the work so that we can sell oil to China and India.

And the interesting thing is that more oil was exported from the USA last year than was imported. There has actually been some discussion about joining OPEC.