How YOUR Senator Voted On Keystone XL

[TooTall]

I don't even think they're against it because they care about the environment, they're only fighting it because it's what their liberal whacko masters have instructed them to do. Most of them don't understand any of the details. That's how our whole political system works these days, someone makes some sweeping generalized statement without any fact to back it up, and it's just accepted and repeated by the zombies that will follow whatever they say without any thought.

you're attributing your own motives to others.

you only support it because you know that left-leaners don't want it... even if it has no lasting benefit.

pure spite.

I was just enlightened by a lefty why the pipeline had not been approved. The Koch Brothers own about 25% of the Canadian oil and would make a lot of money if it was completed. Is there any further doubt why Obama and his Senate won't approve it?

The Koch's own a quarter of Canadian oil? I'd be extremely surprised if that were true. Who said that?

Read it here or google Koch brothers canadian oil.
The biggest foreign lease holder in Canada s oil sands isn t Exxon Mobil or Chevron. It s the Koch brothers. - The Washington Post

The article states that the claim that the Koch's own "25% of Canadian oil" isn't true. What it says is that they are one of the largest leaseholders of acreage in the oil sands. Being a leaseholder and "owning 25% of Canadian oil" are two very different things.

Koch’s oil production in northern Alberta is “negligible,” according to industry sources and quarterly publications of the provincial government. ...

Last October, IFG said that Koch owned two million acres in the oil sands; now it says the true figure – based on the Alberta provincial government’s mineral lease records that it links to -- is smaller but still an impressive, industry-leading 1.1 million acres. ...

Suzanne Bayley, a biological sciences professor at the University of Alberta who studies the oil sands, said she was surprised to learn of the Kochs’ holdings, calling them "significant” given the fact that the total leased area in the region amounted to 35 million acres.

Here are some simple facts

• "Leaseholder" of land and "owner of oil" are two very different things.
• The Koch's are producing very little actual oil.
• 1.1 million divided by 35 million isn't 25%. Whoever said that might need to take a remedial math class.
• The oil sands aren't all of Alberta's oil production.

So the claim is factually wrong.

The Kochs are not the owners of these acres, they own the rights to explore the parcels themselves. They are the largest foreign lease holder in the area, and will make a lot of money when they develop the extract the oil. That is what people in the oil business do.

 

[Toro]

BTW.....the Saudis are lowering their price to fuck with US not russia. They're terrified of our fracking and laying money in the hands of Rat Congressmen to get it stopped....they ain't our ally.

Under Obama horizontal fracking setback borders were removed for "Eco-Pad" drilling. That has driven Bakken oil production break-even price down to $58/barrel. Saudi's can't maintain prices that low to run US out of the oil business. Saudi's want to screw Russia for Syria not letting them build the "Silk Road Pipeline"

The Chinese are trying to wipe out the marginal producer in the American shales to reduce production. They will succeed in the near-term as many of these guys are high cost producers, free cash flow negative, and highly leveraged. However, they will not over the intermediate term. It might push back development by 2-4 years.

 

[Toro]

you're attributing your own motives to others.

you only support it because you know that left-leaners don't want it... even if it has no lasting benefit.

pure spite.

I was just enlightened by a lefty why the pipeline had not been approved. The Koch Brothers own about 25% of the Canadian oil and would make a lot of money if it was completed. Is there any further doubt why Obama and his Senate won't approve it?

The Koch's own a quarter of Canadian oil? I'd be extremely surprised if that were true. Who said that?

Read it here or google Koch brothers canadian oil.
The biggest foreign lease holder in Canada s oil sands isn t Exxon Mobil or Chevron. It s the Koch brothers. - The Washington Post

The article states that the claim that the Koch's own "25% of Canadian oil" isn't true. What it says is that they are one of the largest leaseholders of acreage in the oil sands. Being a leaseholder and "owning 25% of Canadian oil" are two very different things.

Koch’s oil production in northern Alberta is “negligible,” according to industry sources and quarterly publications of the provincial government. ...

Last October, IFG said that Koch owned two million acres in the oil sands; now it says the true figure – based on the Alberta provincial government’s mineral lease records that it links to -- is smaller but still an impressive, industry-leading 1.1 million acres. ...

Suzanne Bayley, a biological sciences professor at the University of Alberta who studies the oil sands, said she was surprised to learn of the Kochs’ holdings, calling them "significant” given the fact that the total leased area in the region amounted to 35 million acres.

Here are some simple facts

• "Leaseholder" of land and "owner of oil" are two very different things.
• The Koch's are producing very little actual oil.
• 1.1 million divided by 35 million isn't 25%. Whoever said that might need to take a remedial math class.
• The oil sands aren't all of Alberta's oil production.

So the claim is factually wrong.

The Kochs are not the owners of these acres, they own the rights to explore the parcels themselves. They are the largest foreign lease holder in the area, and will make a lot of money when they develop the extract the oil. That is what people in the oil business do.

They may make a lot of money or they may not. But they don't own 25% of Canadian oil.

Also, Alberta accounts for about 40% of Canadian oil reserves.

 

[jillian]

I don't even think they're against it because they care about the environment, they're only fighting it because it's what their liberal whacko masters have instructed them to do. Most of them don't understand any of the details. That's how our whole political system works these days, someone makes some sweeping generalized statement without any fact to back it up, and it's just accepted and repeated by the zombies that will follow whatever they say without any thought.

you're attributing your own motives to others.

you only support it because you know that left-leaners don't want it... even if it has no lasting benefit.

pure spite.

I was just enlightened by a lefty why the pipeline had not been approved. The Koch Brothers own about 25% of the Canadian oil and would make a lot of money if it was completed. Is there any further doubt why Obama and his Senate won't approve it?

The Koch's own a quarter of Canadian oil? I'd be extremely surprised if that were true. Who said that?

Read it here or google Koch brothers canadian oil.
The biggest foreign lease holder in Canada s oil sands isn t Exxon Mobil or Chevron. It s the Koch brothers. - The Washington Post

The article states that the claim that the Koch's own "25% of Canadian oil" isn't true. What it says is that they are one of the largest leaseholders of acreage in the oil sands. Being a leaseholder and "owning 25% of Canadian oil" are two very different things.

Koch’s oil production in northern Alberta is “negligible,” according to industry sources and quarterly publications of the provincial government. ...

Last October, IFG said that Koch owned two million acres in the oil sands; now it says the true figure – based on the Alberta provincial government’s mineral lease records that it links to -- is smaller but still an impressive, industry-leading 1.1 million acres. ...

Suzanne Bayley, a biological sciences professor at the University of Alberta who studies the oil sands, said she was surprised to learn of the Kochs’ holdings, calling them "significant” given the fact that the total leased area in the region amounted to 35 million acres.

Here are some simple facts

• "Leaseholder" of land and "owner of oil" are two very different things.
• The Koch's are producing very little actual oil.
• 1.1 million divided by 35 million isn't 25%. Whoever said that might need to take a remedial math class.
• The oil sands aren't all of Alberta's oil production.

So the claim is factually wrong.

would you agree that those who own the leaseholds across the oil sands have a fiscal interest in seeing the project go forward:?

 

[jillian]

Its a lose/lose situation both for the land owners and the US in general as we all know where the refined product is ultimately going to be exported to. Texas will refine out all the (toxic?) impurities & do what w/ it? Where will that waste go? Back to Canada? Remain in the U.S.?

Republicans are commsymps. President Xi thanks you & the Repub Congress

The United States is now seen as a less reliable partner. In response, Canada will build a pipeline either to the west or east coasts of Canada even if Keystone is passed. That would not have happened had Keystone was originally approved. Much of that oil will then be sold to China. The Chinese have become more active since Keystone was stalled. The Chinese can thank the American Left for that.

The driver of opposition to Keystone are environmentalists' antipathy towards oil sands development since they believe it is harmful to the atmosphere. But they will fail. The oil sands will be developed regardless of whether Keystone is built or not.

i can't see how it makes the US unreliable for it to not approve a project before all of the environmental studies are complete when the project doesn't benefit the people of this country on a long term basis.

 

[Roadrunner]

We have already sent Russia into recession. China can't or won't bail them out. Huge capital outflows are leaving Russia. Putin is screwed! He should have never messed with Obama or the USA.

Putin is in trouble but now screwed....the slants just bought a shitload of oil from him or he would be in trouble.....he still has Iran on his side and Syria for arms sales. If he was smart he'd keep Crimea and a land bridge to the russian border and call it quits in Ukraine...the sanctions would be lifted within a week.

The USA & Saudi will pound oil down to $58. Russia needs oil at $100. China is not going to pay them anywhere near that. China's growth is continuously slowing. There is going to be no lifeline for Putin unless he does what we want. This KXL pipeline is a threat we are waiving in his face. If he continues to act up we can lower the boom, build KXL & export to his customers. Obama lifted the export ban.

Putin will be around long after Obama goes on tour peddling influence and nailing down millions and millions of dollars.

 

[Toro]

you're attributing your own motives to others.

you only support it because you know that left-leaners don't want it... even if it has no lasting benefit.

pure spite.

I was just enlightened by a lefty why the pipeline had not been approved. The Koch Brothers own about 25% of the Canadian oil and would make a lot of money if it was completed. Is there any further doubt why Obama and his Senate won't approve it?

The Koch's own a quarter of Canadian oil? I'd be extremely surprised if that were true. Who said that?

Read it here or google Koch brothers canadian oil.
The biggest foreign lease holder in Canada s oil sands isn t Exxon Mobil or Chevron. It s the Koch brothers. - The Washington Post

The article states that the claim that the Koch's own "25% of Canadian oil" isn't true. What it says is that they are one of the largest leaseholders of acreage in the oil sands. Being a leaseholder and "owning 25% of Canadian oil" are two very different things.

Koch’s oil production in northern Alberta is “negligible,” according to industry sources and quarterly publications of the provincial government. ...

Last October, IFG said that Koch owned two million acres in the oil sands; now it says the true figure – based on the Alberta provincial government’s mineral lease records that it links to -- is smaller but still an impressive, industry-leading 1.1 million acres. ...

Suzanne Bayley, a biological sciences professor at the University of Alberta who studies the oil sands, said she was surprised to learn of the Kochs’ holdings, calling them "significant” given the fact that the total leased area in the region amounted to 35 million acres.

Here are some simple facts

• "Leaseholder" of land and "owner of oil" are two very different things.
• The Koch's are producing very little actual oil.
• 1.1 million divided by 35 million isn't 25%. Whoever said that might need to take a remedial math class.
• The oil sands aren't all of Alberta's oil production.

So the claim is factually wrong.

would you agree that those who own the leaseholds across the oil sands have a fiscal interest in seeing the project go forward:?

Of course. But let's base the discussion on facts, not shrill hyperbole.

 

[TooTall]

I was just enlightened by a lefty why the pipeline had not been approved. The Koch Brothers own about 25% of the Canadian oil and would make a lot of money if it was completed. Is there any further doubt why Obama and his Senate won't approve it?

The Koch's own a quarter of Canadian oil? I'd be extremely surprised if that were true. Who said that?

Read it here or google Koch brothers canadian oil.
The biggest foreign lease holder in Canada s oil sands isn t Exxon Mobil or Chevron. It s the Koch brothers. - The Washington Post

The article states that the claim that the Koch's own "25% of Canadian oil" isn't true. What it says is that they are one of the largest leaseholders of acreage in the oil sands. Being a leaseholder and "owning 25% of Canadian oil" are two very different things.

Koch’s oil production in northern Alberta is “negligible,” according to industry sources and quarterly publications of the provincial government. ...

Last October, IFG said that Koch owned two million acres in the oil sands; now it says the true figure – based on the Alberta provincial government’s mineral lease records that it links to -- is smaller but still an impressive, industry-leading 1.1 million acres. ...

Suzanne Bayley, a biological sciences professor at the University of Alberta who studies the oil sands, said she was surprised to learn of the Kochs’ holdings, calling them "significant” given the fact that the total leased area in the region amounted to 35 million acres.

Here are some simple facts

• "Leaseholder" of land and "owner of oil" are two very different things.
• The Koch's are producing very little actual oil.
• 1.1 million divided by 35 million isn't 25%. Whoever said that might need to take a remedial math class.
• The oil sands aren't all of Alberta's oil production.

So the claim is factually wrong.

The Kochs are not the owners of these acres, they own the rights to explore the parcels themselves. They are the largest foreign lease holder in the area, and will make a lot of money when they develop the extract the oil. That is what people in the oil business do.

They may make a lot of money or they may not. But they don't own 25% of Canadian oil.

Also, Alberta accounts for about 40% of Canadian oil reserves.

The Koch brothers companies do plan on making a lot of money from their oil leases.

According to research carried out by the left-leaning International Forum on Globalization and confirmed by the Washington Post, Koch Oil Sands Operating (KOSO) controls 1.1 million acres in the oilsands, the single largest patch of land held by a U.S. firm. KOSO is a subsidiary of Koch Industries, which is the U.S.’s largest privately held company, with annual revenues of around $115 billion.

But the Washington Post, citing “industry sources familiar with oil sands leases,” says the Kochs’ acreage could be nearly double that, at around 2 million acres.

That’s considerably more than any other U.S. oil sands operator; Conoco holds roughly 900,000 acres and Exxon Mobil has some 700,000. And it’s more than many major Canadian operators, such as CNRL(115,000 acres) and Syncrude (250,000 acres), though Cenovus holds 1.5 million acres.

But, as the IFG report notes, the Koch brothers are not major producers in the oilsands.

Holding the land “appears to be a long-term investment that could produce tens of thousands of barrels of the region's thick brand of crude oil in the next three years and perhaps hundreds of thousands of barrels a few years after that,” the Washington Post reports.


Koch Brothers Are Largest U.S. Lease-Holders In Oilsands

 

[KissMy]

Its a lose/lose situation both for the land owners and the US in general as we all know where the refined product is ultimately going to be exported to. Texas will refine out all the (toxic?) impurities & do what w/ it? Where will that waste go? Back to Canada? Remain in the U.S.?

Republicans are commsymps. President Xi thanks you & the Repub Congress

The United States is now seen as a less reliable partner. In response, Canada will build a pipeline either to the west or east coasts of Canada even if Keystone is passed. That would not have happened had Keystone was originally approved. Much of that oil will then be sold to China. The Chinese have become more active since Keystone was stalled. The Chinese can thank the American Left for that.

The driver of opposition to Keystone are environmentalists' antipathy towards oil sands development since they believe it is harmful to the atmosphere. But they will fail. The oil sands will be developed regardless of whether Keystone is built or not.

The radical left are Enviro-Natzi's. They would destroy the world economy & kill off billions of humans to save a bird, a fish, etc. Congress would do well to steer clear of those wackos. Reasonable, economical changes to improve the environment are fine by me, but those people are brain dead. They should kill themselves to save the planet.

 

[jillian]

I was just enlightened by a lefty why the pipeline had not been approved. The Koch Brothers own about 25% of the Canadian oil and would make a lot of money if it was completed. Is there any further doubt why Obama and his Senate won't approve it?

The Koch's own a quarter of Canadian oil? I'd be extremely surprised if that were true. Who said that?

Read it here or google Koch brothers canadian oil.
The biggest foreign lease holder in Canada s oil sands isn t Exxon Mobil or Chevron. It s the Koch brothers. - The Washington Post

The article states that the claim that the Koch's own "25% of Canadian oil" isn't true. What it says is that they are one of the largest leaseholders of acreage in the oil sands. Being a leaseholder and "owning 25% of Canadian oil" are two very different things.

Koch’s oil production in northern Alberta is “negligible,” according to industry sources and quarterly publications of the provincial government. ...

Last October, IFG said that Koch owned two million acres in the oil sands; now it says the true figure – based on the Alberta provincial government’s mineral lease records that it links to -- is smaller but still an impressive, industry-leading 1.1 million acres. ...

Suzanne Bayley, a biological sciences professor at the University of Alberta who studies the oil sands, said she was surprised to learn of the Kochs’ holdings, calling them "significant” given the fact that the total leased area in the region amounted to 35 million acres.

Here are some simple facts

• "Leaseholder" of land and "owner of oil" are two very different things.
• The Koch's are producing very little actual oil.
• 1.1 million divided by 35 million isn't 25%. Whoever said that might need to take a remedial math class.
• The oil sands aren't all of Alberta's oil production.

So the claim is factually wrong.

would you agree that those who own the leaseholds across the oil sands have a fiscal interest in seeing the project go forward:?

Of course. But let's base the discussion on facts, not shrill hyperbole.

I agree with you a thousand percent. I do think the problem is both "sides" distrust each other so and see the other as damaging to their interests. That said, rushing willy nilly into it in the face of the potential risks isn't helpful.

 

[jillian]

We have already sent Russia into recession. China can't or won't bail them out. Huge capital outflows are leaving Russia. Putin is screwed! He should have never messed with Obama or the USA.

Putin is in trouble but now screwed....the slants just bought a shitload of oil from him or he would be in trouble.....he still has Iran on his side and Syria for arms sales. If he was smart he'd keep Crimea and a land bridge to the russian border and call it quits in Ukraine...the sanctions would be lifted within a week.

The USA & Saudi will pound oil down to $58. Russia needs oil at $100. China is not going to pay them anywhere near that. China's growth is continuously slowing. There is going to be no lifeline for Putin unless he does what we want. This KXL pipeline is a threat we are waiving in his face. If he continues to act up we can lower the boom, build KXL & export to his customers. Obama lifted the export ban.

Putin will be around long after Obama goes on tour peddling influence and nailing down millions and millions of dollars.

because the US has term limits, not that you've beaten him yet.

but thanks for your "input". please continue to root for petty little dictators like putin.

 

[Dot Com]

The Koch brothers companies do plan on making a lot of money from their oil leases.

According to research carried out by the left-leaning International Forum on Globalization and confirmed by the Washington Post, Koch Oil Sands Operating (KOSO) controls 1.1 million acres in the oilsands, the single largest patch of land held by a U.S. firm. KOSO is a subsidiary of Koch Industries, which is the U.S.’s largest privately held company, with annual revenues of around $115 billion.

But the Washington Post, citing “industry sources familiar with oil sands leases,” says the Kochs’ acreage could be nearly double that, at around 2 million acres.

That’s considerably more than any other U.S. oil sands operator; Conoco holds roughly 900,000 acres and Exxon Mobil has some 700,000. And it’s more than many major Canadian operators, such as CNRL(115,000 acres) and Syncrude (250,000 acres), though Cenovus holds 1.5 million acres.

But, as the IFG report notes, the Koch brothers are not major producers in the oilsands.

Holding the land “appears to be a long-term investment that could produce tens of thousands of barrels of the region's thick brand of crude oil in the next three years and perhaps hundreds of thousands of barrels a few years after that,” the Washington Post reports.


Koch Brothers Are Largest U.S. Lease-Holders In Oilsands

no wonder the Republican puppets are buring the midnight oil (pun intended) to do anything and everything they can do for that corporation even when its aims (short-term profit) go against the well-being of this great nation's citizenry

 

[Dot Com]

The radical left are Enviro-Natzi's. They would destroy the world economy & kill off billions of humans to save a bird, a fish, etc. Congress would do well to steer clear of those wackos. Reasonable, economical changes to improve the environment are fine by me, but those people are brain dead. They should kill themselves to save the planet.

here son. Read-up:
Feinstein Remarks on Keystone XL Pipeline - Press Releases - News Room - United States Senator Dianne Feinstein

According to the National Energy Technology Laboratory, by the time oil from Keystone makes it to a car in the form of gasoline, it has already produced 80 percent—80 percent—more greenhouse gas emissions than typical crude oil.

Here’s how the math works out.

Producing, refining and combusting oil from Keystone will release up to 27 million metric tons more carbon dioxide every year than would be produced from burning the same volume of crude oil.

Those additional emissions are equivalent to the emissions of 5.7 million cars on the road, or eight coal-fired power plants.

 

[TooTall]

The Koch brothers companies do plan on making a lot of money from their oil leases.

According to research carried out by the left-leaning International Forum on Globalization and confirmed by the Washington Post, Koch Oil Sands Operating (KOSO) controls 1.1 million acres in the oilsands, the single largest patch of land held by a U.S. firm. KOSO is a subsidiary of Koch Industries, which is the U.S.’s largest privately held company, with annual revenues of around $115 billion.

But the Washington Post, citing “industry sources familiar with oil sands leases,” says the Kochs’ acreage could be nearly double that, at around 2 million acres.

That’s considerably more than any other U.S. oil sands operator; Conoco holds roughly 900,000 acres and Exxon Mobil has some 700,000. And it’s more than many major Canadian operators, such as CNRL(115,000 acres) and Syncrude (250,000 acres), though Cenovus holds 1.5 million acres.

But, as the IFG report notes, the Koch brothers are not major producers in the oilsands.

Holding the land “appears to be a long-term investment that could produce tens of thousands of barrels of the region's thick brand of crude oil in the next three years and perhaps hundreds of thousands of barrels a few years after that,” the Washington Post reports.


Koch Brothers Are Largest U.S. Lease-Holders In Oilsands

no wonder the Republican puppets are buring the midnight oil (pun intended) to do anything and everything they can do for that corporation even when its aims (short-term profit) go against the well-being of this great nation's citizenry

Reid and Obama have done everything they could to impede the energy independence from the middle east that the pipeline would help bring about. I say that is going against the well-being if this great nation's citizenry. And, it might even allow the two men that Harry Reid rants and raves about from the safety of the Senate floor to make some money.

 

[Dot Com]

*** duplicate post

 

[TooTall]

The radical left are Enviro-Natzi's. They would destroy the world economy & kill off billions of humans to save a bird, a fish, etc. Congress would do well to steer clear of those wackos. Reasonable, economical changes to improve the environment are fine by me, but those people are brain dead. They should kill themselves to save the planet.

here son. Read-up:
Feinstein Remarks on Keystone XL Pipeline - Press Releases - News Room - United States Senator Dianne Feinstein

According to the National Energy Technology Laboratory, by the time oil from Keystone makes it to a car in the form of gasoline, it has already produced 80 percent—80 percent—more greenhouse gas emissions than typical crude oil.

Here’s how the math works out.

Producing, refining and combusting oil from Keystone will release up to 27 million metric tons more carbon dioxide every year than would be produced from burning the same volume of crude oil.

Those additional emissions are equivalent to the emissions of 5.7 million cars on the road, or eight coal-fired power plants.

You do know that refineries in Texas and Louisiana are refining crude from Venezuala don't you?

"compared to selected energy- and resource-intensive crudes, Well-to-Wheels
GHG emissions for Canadian oil sands crudes are within range of heavier crudes
such as Venezuelan Bachaquero and Californian Kern River, as well as lighter
crudes that are produced from operations that flare associated gas."

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42537.pdf

 

[Siete]

The radical left are Enviro-Natzi's. They would destroy the world economy & kill off billions of humans to save a bird, a fish, etc. Congress would do well to steer clear of those wackos. Reasonable, economical changes to improve the environment are fine by me, but those people are brain dead. They should kill themselves to save the planet.

here son. Read-up:
Feinstein Remarks on Keystone XL Pipeline - Press Releases - News Room - United States Senator Dianne Feinstein

According to the National Energy Technology Laboratory, by the time oil from Keystone makes it to a car in the form of gasoline, it has already produced 80 percent—80 percent—more greenhouse gas emissions than typical crude oil.

Here’s how the math works out.

Producing, refining and combusting oil from Keystone will release up to 27 million metric tons more carbon dioxide every year than would be produced from burning the same volume of crude oil.

Those additional emissions are equivalent to the emissions of 5.7 million cars on the road, or eight coal-fired power plants.

You do know that refineries in Texas and Louisiana are refining crude from Venezuala don't you?

"compared to selected energy- and resource-intensive crudes, Well-to-Wheels
GHG emissions for Canadian oil sands crudes are within range of heavier crudes
such as Venezuelan Bachaquero and Californian Kern River, as well as lighter
crudes that are produced from operations that flare associated gas."

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42537.pdf

In the Western Hemisphere, PdVSA operates one of largest refining systems, as well as the largest refinery, the 940,000-bbl/d Paraguana refining complex. Domestic refinery capacity stands at 1.28 million bbl/d. PdVSA’s overall crude oil refinery capacity is over 3 million bbl/d when its operations in the Caribbean, the United States and Europe are included. About one-third of Venezuela's refined product exports, such as reformulated gasoline, are sold to the United States, where they are distributed mainly by Tulsa-based CITGO, PdVSA's wholly-owned U.S. refining and marketing subsidiary, and one of the largest U.S. gasoline retailers. Recently, PdVSA has been looking for partners to increase the company’s ability to refine Venezuela’s heavy and extra heavy crude in order to increase production in coming years.


CITGO .. name the company that Canada owns, refines the oil down to gasoline and sells it here...

you can read the #/s ..

Exclusive Venezuelan refineries operating at 74 percent - internal PDVSA document Reuters

 

[tinydancer]

Its a lose/lose situation both for the land owners and the US in general as we all know where the refined product is ultimately going to be exported to. Texas will refine out all the (toxic?) impurities & do what w/ it? Where will that waste go? Back to Canada? Remain in the U.S.?

Republicans are commsymps. President Xi thanks you & the Repub Congress

The United States is now seen as a less reliable partner. In response, Canada will build a pipeline either to the west or east coasts of Canada even if Keystone is passed. That would not have happened had Keystone was originally approved. Much of that oil will then be sold to China. The Chinese have become more active since Keystone was stalled. The Chinese can thank the American Left for that.

The driver of opposition to Keystone are environmentalists' antipathy towards oil sands development since they believe it is harmful to the atmosphere. But they will fail. The oil sands will be developed regardless of whether Keystone is built or not.

i can't see how it makes the US unreliable for it to not approve a project before all of the environmental studies are complete when the project doesn't benefit the people of this country on a long term basis.

The studies have been going on for five years Jillian. Keystone I and Keystone II are in place and rolling.

Keystone XL from Cushing to the Gulf was endorsed by Obama and is complete and delivering crude.

Here's an informative link for you. And please understand that the opposition to the Keystone XL is based on trying to shut down oil production from the tar sands in Canada.

Which is whacked out beyond words.

"Moreover numerous scientific studies have concluded that Canadian oil is no different than heavier crude we import from say Mexico or Venezuela.

Moreover, it is similar in consistency to Californian crude. Finally, numerous environmental studies have already shown that there is no environmental impact as a result of the pipeline being completed."

Keystone Pipeline - Five Years And Counting - Forbes

 

[Synthaholic]

Its a lose/lose situation both for the land owners and the US in general as we all know where the refined product is ultimately going to be exported to. Texas will refine out all the (toxic?) impurities & do what w/ it? Where will that waste go? Back to Canada? Remain in the U.S.?

Republicans are commsymps. President Xi thanks you & the Repub Congress

The United States is now seen as a less reliable partner. In response, Canada will build a pipeline either to the west or east coasts of Canada even if Keystone is passed. That would not have happened had Keystone was originally approved. Much of that oil will then be sold to China. The Chinese have become more active since Keystone was stalled. The Chinese can thank the American Left for that.

The driver of opposition to Keystone are environmentalists' antipathy towards oil sands development since they believe it is harmful to the atmosphere. But they will fail. The oil sands will be developed regardless of whether Keystone is built or not.

Canada is already building a pipeline to the east (New Brunswick) where they are going to refine and ship across the Atlantic. As it should be. Let them transport their dirty oil and take the risk with Canadian land (although we probably get a lot of water via Canada).

I don't buy the 'less reliable partner' angle. Canada couldn't have a more reliable partner, and vice versa. One issue does not collapse relations.

Look how much is already completed. So why should the U.S. take the risk?

 

[Synthaholic]

Reid and Obama have done everything they could to impede the energy independence from the middle east that the pipeline would help bring about. I say that is going against the well-being if this great nation's citizenry. And, it might even allow the two men that Harry Reid rants and raves about from the safety of the Senate floor to make some money.

They haven't supported alternative/green energy? You sure about that?