Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
If Trans Canada did not use or have to use eminent domain to make citizens relinquish their land and were willing to pay land owners whatever it took to buy them out for the pipeline, that would be one step in the right direction of making this happen imho....and maybe they should just run this wider pipe along side Keystone 1,2,3 instead of this new xl route near the aqua-fir?
The other scary part about this is tar sand oil... it is heavier than water, so with any spill, it is not an easy clean up, with the oil floating on top of water....this stuff sinks so the potential of a great disaster to our soil and water resources is huge...
On the other hand...
Some day in the future, our Nation could need this dirty tar sand oil from Canada...so we probably should not burn our bridges before we cross them...
It is not oil. It is diluted bitumen. Oil transported in the US is subject to a fee for each barrel that goes to a fund used for spill cleanup. The bitumen does not required that fee.
That can be readily fixed.
If Trans Canada did not use or have to use eminent domain to make citizens relinquish their land and were willing to pay land owners whatever it took to buy them out for the pipeline, that would be one step in the right direction of making this happen imho....and maybe they should just run this wider pipe along side Keystone 1,2,3 instead of this new xl route near the aqua-fir?
The other scary part about this is tar sand oil... it is heavier than water, so with any spill, it is not an easy clean up, with the oil floating on top of water....this stuff sinks so the potential of a great disaster to our soil and water resources is huge...
On the other hand...
Some day in the future, our Nation could need this dirty tar sand oil from Canada...so we probably should not burn our bridges before we cross them...
It is not oil. It is diluted bitumen. Oil transported in the US is subject to a fee for each barrel that goes to a fund used for spill cleanup. The bitumen does not required that fee.
That can be readily fixed.
Lots of things could be easily fixed. The house could have easily brought the bipartisan border security bill to a vote, but there is little chance of the right wing doing either. Also, my point was that diluted bitumen is not oil. It doesn't have the same environmental damage potential as oil.
If Trans Canada did not use or have to use eminent domain to make citizens relinquish their land and were willing to pay land owners whatever it took to buy them out for the pipeline, that would be one step in the right direction of making this happen imho....and maybe they should just run this wider pipe along side Keystone 1,2,3 instead of this new xl route near the aqua-fir?
The other scary part about this is tar sand oil... it is heavier than water, so with any spill, it is not an easy clean up, with the oil floating on top of water....this stuff sinks so the potential of a great disaster to our soil and water resources is huge...
On the other hand...
Some day in the future, our Nation could need this dirty tar sand oil from Canada...so we probably should not burn our bridges before we cross them...
It is not oil. It is diluted bitumen. Oil transported in the US is subject to a fee for each barrel that goes to a fund used for spill cleanup. The bitumen does not required that fee.
That can be readily fixed.
Lots of things could be easily fixed. The house could have easily brought the bipartisan border security bill to a vote, but there is little chance of the right wing doing either. Also, my point was that diluted bitumen is not oil. It doesn't have the same environmental damage potential as oil.
That doesn't make sense, if it is bi-partisan then why wouldn't they bring it to a vote? Maybe they will and the working class will be screwed once again. Seems to me that the stripes of the RNC are changing overnight.
Potential? Sorry honey, that ship has sailed.If Trans Canada did not use or have to use eminent domain to make citizens relinquish their land and were willing to pay land owners whatever it took to buy them out for the pipeline, that would be one step in the right direction of making this happen imho....and maybe they should just run this wider pipe along side Keystone 1,2,3 instead of this new xl route near the aqua-fir?
The other scary part about this is tar sand oil... it is heavier than water, so with any spill, it is not an easy clean up, with the oil floating on top of water....this stuff sinks so the potential of a great disaster to our soil and water resources is huge...
On the other hand...
Some day in the future, our Nation could need this dirty tar sand oil from Canada...so we probably should not burn our bridges before we cross them...
You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
We built the freeways, not a Russian company.You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
Forcing Americans to sell their land to a Canadian company is like forcing Americans to sell land for infrastructure? How so?
The pipeline is not going to be part of an American infrastructure for Americans to use/enjoy.
Matthew GOP has been against land grabs that would benefit Americans. Why attack without explaining?
Little Dainty Boy doesn't understand the difference between paying for a right of way and purchasing land, most of the land in question is agricultural and the pipeline will have very little impact on the lands usage.
The land still belongs to the land owners and should not have it stolen from them for any reason.
Stolen, where are they going to take it. They are not taking the land, they are paying for subsurface use, virtually every tract of land in this country contains a right of way in one form or another. You lefties are real drama queens.
No. Every tract of land does not have a right of way on it. Are you aware that a right of way limits the things that the surface of that land can be used for? This would be the first time that a foreign country has been given the use of immanent domain in this country.
You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
We built the freeways, not a Russian company.
Forcing Americans to sell their land to a Canadian company is like forcing Americans to sell land for infrastructure? How so?
The pipeline is not going to be part of an American infrastructure for Americans to use/enjoy.
Matthew GOP has been against land grabs that would benefit Americans. Why attack without explaining?
Little Dainty Boy doesn't understand the difference between paying for a right of way and purchasing land, most of the land in question is agricultural and the pipeline will have very little impact on the lands usage.
The land still belongs to the land owners and should not have it stolen from them for any reason.
Stolen, where are they going to take it. They are not taking the land, they are paying for subsurface use, virtually every tract of land in this country contains a right of way in one form or another. You lefties are real drama queens.
No. Every tract of land does not have a right of way on it. Are you aware that a right of way limits the things that the surface of that land can be used for? This would be the first time that a foreign country has been given the use of immanent domain in this country.
More fucking drama and lies, This is the last time I'm going to splain it to ya. You keep putting words in other peoples mouth, I said virtually every tract of land has a right of way, not EVERY tract. My land has a right of way on all 4 sides, and Trans Canada has other pipe lines in the US, do you really believe that no immanent domain was used on any of it?
Wake up and get a freaking clue there hillbilly, you'll make yourself look less of a fool.
You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
Freeways are for the use of everybody. That pipeline is for the use of a foreign company. You don't see the difference?
You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
Little Dainty Boy doesn't understand the difference between paying for a right of way and purchasing land, most of the land in question is agricultural and the pipeline will have very little impact on the lands usage.
The land still belongs to the land owners and should not have it stolen from them for any reason.
Stolen, where are they going to take it. They are not taking the land, they are paying for subsurface use, virtually every tract of land in this country contains a right of way in one form or another. You lefties are real drama queens.
No. Every tract of land does not have a right of way on it. Are you aware that a right of way limits the things that the surface of that land can be used for? This would be the first time that a foreign country has been given the use of immanent domain in this country.
More fucking drama and lies, This is the last time I'm going to splain it to ya. You keep putting words in other peoples mouth, I said virtually every tract of land has a right of way, not EVERY tract. My land has a right of way on all 4 sides, and Trans Canada has other pipe lines in the US, do you really believe that no immanent domain was used on any of it?
Wake up and get a freaking clue there hillbilly, you'll make yourself look less of a fool.
Immanent domain is used much more often than it should be, but it has never been given to a foreign country.
You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
Freeways are for the use of everybody. That pipeline is for the use of a foreign company. You don't see the difference?
"The Keystone XL Pipeline Project is a proposed 1,179-mile (1,897 km), 36-inch-diameter crude oil pipeline, beginning in Hardisty, Alta., and extending south to Steele City, Neb. This pipeline is a critical infrastructure project for the energy security of the United States and for strengthening the American economy.
Along with transporting crude oil from Canada, the Keystone XL Pipeline will also support the significant growth of crude oil production in the United States from producers in the Bakken region of Montana and North Dakota.
This pipeline will allow Canadian and American oil producers more access to the large refining markets found in the American Midwest and along the U.S. Gulf Coast."
- See more at: Keystone XL Pipeline Maps and Information Keystone XL Pipeline
The land still belongs to the land owners and should not have it stolen from them for any reason.
Stolen, where are they going to take it. They are not taking the land, they are paying for subsurface use, virtually every tract of land in this country contains a right of way in one form or another. You lefties are real drama queens.
No. Every tract of land does not have a right of way on it. Are you aware that a right of way limits the things that the surface of that land can be used for? This would be the first time that a foreign country has been given the use of immanent domain in this country.
More fucking drama and lies, This is the last time I'm going to splain it to ya. You keep putting words in other peoples mouth, I said virtually every tract of land has a right of way, not EVERY tract. My land has a right of way on all 4 sides, and Trans Canada has other pipe lines in the US, do you really believe that no immanent domain was used on any of it?
Wake up and get a freaking clue there hillbilly, you'll make yourself look less of a fool.
Immanent domain is used much more often than it should be, but it has never been given to a foreign country.
What ever, dudette, the individual states exercise their immanent domain, not the company.
And I agree, it is used way too often.
You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
Freeways are for the use of everybody. That pipeline is for the use of a foreign company. You don't see the difference?
"The Keystone XL Pipeline Project is a proposed 1,179-mile (1,897 km), 36-inch-diameter crude oil pipeline, beginning in Hardisty, Alta., and extending south to Steele City, Neb. This pipeline is a critical infrastructure project for the energy security of the United States and for strengthening the American economy.
Along with transporting crude oil from Canada, the Keystone XL Pipeline will also support the significant growth of crude oil production in the United States from producers in the Bakken region of Montana and North Dakota.
This pipeline will allow Canadian and American oil producers more access to the large refining markets found in the American Midwest and along the U.S. Gulf Coast."
- See more at: Keystone XL Pipeline Maps and Information Keystone XL Pipeline
So oil companies will be able to put some of their US production into the line as well. How does the average citizen have use for that, and how does that require the line to go all the way to Canada? Not the same as freeways at all.
You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
Freeways are for the use of everybody. That pipeline is for the use of a foreign company. You don't see the difference?
"The Keystone XL Pipeline Project is a proposed 1,179-mile (1,897 km), 36-inch-diameter crude oil pipeline, beginning in Hardisty, Alta., and extending south to Steele City, Neb. This pipeline is a critical infrastructure project for the energy security of the United States and for strengthening the American economy.
Along with transporting crude oil from Canada, the Keystone XL Pipeline will also support the significant growth of crude oil production in the United States from producers in the Bakken region of Montana and North Dakota.
This pipeline will allow Canadian and American oil producers more access to the large refining markets found in the American Midwest and along the U.S. Gulf Coast."
- See more at: Keystone XL Pipeline Maps and Information Keystone XL Pipeline
So oil companies will be able to put some of their US production into the line as well. How does the average citizen have use for that, and how does that require the line to go all the way to Canada? Not the same as freeways at all.
Merely pointing out that the pipeline is not only for the use of a foreign country. And the oil is going to refineries in the US. Perhaps you can figure out how that benefits the Americans that work building the pipeline, work in the Bakken region producing the oil and at the refineries in the Midwest and the Gulf Coast. If you can't, I feel sorry for you.
You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
Freeways are for the use of everybody. That pipeline is for the use of a foreign company. You don't see the difference?
"The Keystone XL Pipeline Project is a proposed 1,179-mile (1,897 km), 36-inch-diameter crude oil pipeline, beginning in Hardisty, Alta., and extending south to Steele City, Neb. This pipeline is a critical infrastructure project for the energy security of the United States and for strengthening the American economy.
Along with transporting crude oil from Canada, the Keystone XL Pipeline will also support the significant growth of crude oil production in the United States from producers in the Bakken region of Montana and North Dakota.
This pipeline will allow Canadian and American oil producers more access to the large refining markets found in the American Midwest and along the U.S. Gulf Coast."
- See more at: Keystone XL Pipeline Maps and Information Keystone XL Pipeline
So oil companies will be able to put some of their US production into the line as well. How does the average citizen have use for that, and how does that require the line to go all the way to Canada? Not the same as freeways at all.
Merely pointing out that the pipeline is not only for the use of a foreign country. And the oil is going to refineries in the US. Perhaps you can figure out how that benefits the Americans that work building the pipeline, work in the Bakken region producing the oil and at the refineries in the Midwest and the Gulf Coast. If you can't, I feel sorry for you.
You would of went crazy when we built the freeways. Sometimes, a nation needs to build infrastructure.
Freeways are for the use of everybody. That pipeline is for the use of a foreign company. You don't see the difference?
"The Keystone XL Pipeline Project is a proposed 1,179-mile (1,897 km), 36-inch-diameter crude oil pipeline, beginning in Hardisty, Alta., and extending south to Steele City, Neb. This pipeline is a critical infrastructure project for the energy security of the United States and for strengthening the American economy.
Along with transporting crude oil from Canada, the Keystone XL Pipeline will also support the significant growth of crude oil production in the United States from producers in the Bakken region of Montana and North Dakota.
This pipeline will allow Canadian and American oil producers more access to the large refining markets found in the American Midwest and along the U.S. Gulf Coast."
- See more at: Keystone XL Pipeline Maps and Information Keystone XL Pipeline
So oil companies will be able to put some of their US production into the line as well. How does the average citizen have use for that, and how does that require the line to go all the way to Canada? Not the same as freeways at all.
Merely pointing out that the pipeline is not only for the use of a foreign country. And the oil is going to refineries in the US. Perhaps you can figure out how that benefits the Americans that work building the pipeline, work in the Bakken region producing the oil and at the refineries in the Midwest and the Gulf Coast. If you can't, I feel sorry for you.
Trans Canada themselves said there would be only about 35 permanent jobs created with the line. The few temporary construction jobs from the lower half of the line had no effect on the jobless rate, and the proposed half will have no more effect. The refineries are already capable of the increased production, and only require a few numbers changed on the computer in the control room. The steel for the pipe isn't even domestic steel. Now, where is that big benefit for the public?
Freeways are for the use of everybody. That pipeline is for the use of a foreign company. You don't see the difference?
"The Keystone XL Pipeline Project is a proposed 1,179-mile (1,897 km), 36-inch-diameter crude oil pipeline, beginning in Hardisty, Alta., and extending south to Steele City, Neb. This pipeline is a critical infrastructure project for the energy security of the United States and for strengthening the American economy.
Along with transporting crude oil from Canada, the Keystone XL Pipeline will also support the significant growth of crude oil production in the United States from producers in the Bakken region of Montana and North Dakota.
This pipeline will allow Canadian and American oil producers more access to the large refining markets found in the American Midwest and along the U.S. Gulf Coast."
- See more at: Keystone XL Pipeline Maps and Information Keystone XL Pipeline
So oil companies will be able to put some of their US production into the line as well. How does the average citizen have use for that, and how does that require the line to go all the way to Canada? Not the same as freeways at all.
Merely pointing out that the pipeline is not only for the use of a foreign country. And the oil is going to refineries in the US. Perhaps you can figure out how that benefits the Americans that work building the pipeline, work in the Bakken region producing the oil and at the refineries in the Midwest and the Gulf Coast. If you can't, I feel sorry for you.
Trans Canada themselves said there would be only about 35 permanent jobs created with the line. The few temporary construction jobs from the lower half of the line had no effect on the jobless rate, and the proposed half will have no more effect. The refineries are already capable of the increased production, and only require a few numbers changed on the computer in the control room. The steel for the pipe isn't even domestic steel. Now, where is that big benefit for the public?
“Seventy-five per cent of the pipe used to build Keystone XL in the U.S. would come from North American mills, including half made by U.S. workers in Arkansas,” said Alex Pourbaix, TransCanada’s president, Energy and Oil Pipelines. “In addition, we have already sourced goods for the pipeline valued at approximately $800 million from U.S. manufacturers.”
Stolen, where are they going to take it. They are not taking the land, they are paying for subsurface use, virtually every tract of land in this country contains a right of way in one form or another. You lefties are real drama queens.
No. Every tract of land does not have a right of way on it. Are you aware that a right of way limits the things that the surface of that land can be used for? This would be the first time that a foreign country has been given the use of immanent domain in this country.
More fucking drama and lies, This is the last time I'm going to splain it to ya. You keep putting words in other peoples mouth, I said virtually every tract of land has a right of way, not EVERY tract. My land has a right of way on all 4 sides, and Trans Canada has other pipe lines in the US, do you really believe that no immanent domain was used on any of it?
Wake up and get a freaking clue there hillbilly, you'll make yourself look less of a fool.
Immanent domain is used much more often than it should be, but it has never been given to a foreign country.
What ever, dudette, the individual states exercise their immanent domain, not the company.
And I agree, it is used way too often.
Eminent domain is designed to transfer control of property to the government for the public good. Exactly how is this line be for the public good? It's not for the jobs, because there are few, it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market. Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public
No. Every tract of land does not have a right of way on it. Are you aware that a right of way limits the things that the surface of that land can be used for? This would be the first time that a foreign country has been given the use of immanent domain in this country.
More fucking drama and lies, This is the last time I'm going to splain it to ya. You keep putting words in other peoples mouth, I said virtually every tract of land has a right of way, not EVERY tract. My land has a right of way on all 4 sides, and Trans Canada has other pipe lines in the US, do you really believe that no immanent domain was used on any of it?
Wake up and get a freaking clue there hillbilly, you'll make yourself look less of a fool.
Immanent domain is used much more often than it should be, but it has never been given to a foreign country.
What ever, dudette, the individual states exercise their immanent domain, not the company.
And I agree, it is used way too often.
Eminent domain is designed to transfer control of property to the government for the public good. Exactly how is this line be for the public good? It's not for the jobs, because there are few, it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market. Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public
Ok, I'm going to address your talking points one more time.
1. "Exactly how is this line be for the public good?"
It will increase the supply of energy on the world market.
2. "It's not for the jobs, because there are few,"
There will 10s of thousands of short term construction jobs, and many refining and distribution jobs for the product produced.
3. "it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market."
It will aid in energy independence because it will also transport oil from at least 3 US States, OK, WY and ND.
4. "It will not lower our price for gas, but could possibly increase it in some areas of the country."
Why do you think gas prices are falling in the WHOLE country now, can you say supply is greater than demand, not just in the US, but world wide.
5. "Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public"
The land use for 99.9% of the area involved will not change after the line is in, so how are they taking anything? Like I said earlier any additional supply will improve the quality of life of all citizens with lower energy cost.
"The steepening drop in gasoline prices in recent weeks — spurred by soaring domestic energy production and Saudi discounts for crude oil at a time of faltering global demand — is set to provide the United States economy with a multibillion-dollar boost through the holiday season and beyond."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/14/business/economy/lower-oil-prices-give-a-lift-to-the-american-economy.html?_r=0[URL='http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/14/business/economy/lower-oil-prices-give-a-lift-to-the-american-economy.html?_r=0[/QUOTE'][/QUOTE[/URL]]
1. How will it increase the supply on the world market by going through the US any more than it would increase it going across Canadian land to a port?
2. Bullshit. The first half didn't supply 1/10 of the jobs you claim. My brother worked on it. Refineries are already scaled up for it, and might add one or two maintenance men, but it's mostly a matter of changing a few numbers on the computers in the control room. There will be no increase of workers in the refineries. All the claims of great job increases are lies.
3.If they want a line to transport domestic oil, they can lay one, or use existing lines. That doesn't require building a line to Canada.
4. The price drop might last a year or two, but if it gets much lower, many of the small producers will close down the wells and sell out to the big producers who will limit production and run the price back up. There is a glut of oil already without the bitumen. The price can't drop much more if at all.
5. That's just too dumb to bother with an answer. Obviously you have never seen what happens when a pipeline is laid.
The only boost will be from a very few temporary jobs. The only real measurable advantage will be for a Canadian company, and the refineries on the Gulf Coast. Not the workers at the refineries, just the refineries themselves.
Your claims are crap and have been proven to be crap many times.
More fucking drama and lies, This is the last time I'm going to splain it to ya. You keep putting words in other peoples mouth, I said virtually every tract of land has a right of way, not EVERY tract. My land has a right of way on all 4 sides, and Trans Canada has other pipe lines in the US, do you really believe that no immanent domain was used on any of it?
Wake up and get a freaking clue there hillbilly, you'll make yourself look less of a fool.
Immanent domain is used much more often than it should be, but it has never been given to a foreign country.
What ever, dudette, the individual states exercise their immanent domain, not the company.
And I agree, it is used way too often.
Eminent domain is designed to transfer control of property to the government for the public good. Exactly how is this line be for the public good? It's not for the jobs, because there are few, it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market. Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public
Ok, I'm going to address your talking points one more time.
1. "Exactly how is this line be for the public good?"
It will increase the supply of energy on the world market.
2. "It's not for the jobs, because there are few,"
There will 10s of thousands of short term construction jobs, and many refining and distribution jobs for the product produced.
3. "it's not for energy independence, because the refined products from the bitumen will be sold on the world market."
It will aid in energy independence because it will also transport oil from at least 3 US States, OK, WY and ND.
4. "It will not lower our price for gas, but could possibly increase it in some areas of the country."
Why do you think gas prices are falling in the WHOLE country now, can you say supply is greater than demand, not just in the US, but world wide.
5. "Exactly how does taking privately owned land to increase profits for a foreign company benefit our public"
The land use for 99.9% of the area involved will not change after the line is in, so how are they taking anything? Like I said earlier any additional supply will improve the quality of life of all citizens with lower energy cost.
"The steepening drop in gasoline prices in recent weeks — spurred by soaring domestic energy production and Saudi discounts for crude oil at a time of faltering global demand — is set to provide the United States economy with a multibillion-dollar boost through the holiday season and beyond."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/14/business/economy/lower-oil-prices-give-a-lift-to-the-american-economy.html?_r=0[/QUOTE]
1. How will it increase the supply on the world market by going through the US any more than it would increase it going across Canadian land to a port?
2. Bullshit. The first half didn't supply 1/10 of the jobs you claim. My brother worked on it. Refineries are already scaled up for it, and might add one or two maintenance men, but it's mostly a matter of changing a few numbers on the computers in the control room. There will be no increase of workers in the refineries. All the claims of great job increases are lies.
3.If they want a line to transport domestic oil, they can lay one, or use existing lines. That doesn't require building a line to Canada.
4. The price drop might last a year or two, but if it gets much lower, many of the small producers will close down the wells and sell out to the big producers who will limit production and run the price back up. There is a glut of oil already without the bitumen. The price can't drop much more if at all.
5. That's just too dumb to bother with an answer. Obviously you have never seen what happens when a pipeline is laid.
The only boost will be from a very few temporary jobs. The only real measurable advantage will be for a Canadian company, and the refineries on the Gulf Coast. Not the workers at the refineries, just the refineries themselves.
Your claims are crap and have been proven to be crap many times.
