Republicans stop pipeline then lie and say it was Obama. Business as usual.

[rdean]

Bottom lines:

The US Number One Export is Gasoline.

If Republicans scream "Obama stopped the pipeline", Obama can show he was bipartisan working with Nebraska Republicans and their state's rights.

Independent studies show the maximum number of jobs would be 65 hundred. (Imagine forcing it through, then finding only 65 hundred? Republicans would look as stupid as fuck. Again? So close to an election?)

 

[Intense]

Bottom lines:

The US Number One Export is Gasoline.

If Republicans scream "Obama stopped the pipeline", Obama can show he was bipartisan working with Nebraska Republicans and their state's rights.

Independent studies show the maximum number of jobs would be 65 hundred. (Imagine forcing it through, then finding only 65 hundred? Republicans would look as stupid as fuck. Again? So close to an election?)

Your studies are flawed. High gasoline reserves will effect every industry touched by it. You want legitimate argument about Tar Sands, question the toxins in the oil and what effect it will have on the life expectancy of the pipeline itself, what effect on us? What is the detox plan for removing the contaminants and how costly is it? Why can't it be refined in Nebraska or Montana, or the Dakota's, instead of Texas? Reasonable questions, politely stated.

 

[Vast LWC]

I know that....the Keystone people were actively looking for an alternate route around Nebraska...Obama jumped the gun and didn't even wait for them to find one! He vetoed it before they could find or offer an alternate route...so in other word...Obama didn't want it and didn't even give them a chance! He screwed at least 20,000 people out of a job ... Aren't you proud?

Congressional Deadline

"Obama acted before a Feb. 21 deadline Congress set after he postponed a decision to allow for a review of of a revised route through Nebraska. TransCanada said the 1,661-mile (2,673- kilometer) project would carry 700,000 barrels of crude a day from Alberta’s oil sands to refineries on the U.S. Gulf of Mexico coast, crossing six states and creating an estimated 20,000 jobs."
Keystone XL Pipeline Seen Moving Ahead on Alternative Route - The Washington Post

Psst, this is from the "National Review", of all places, so I'm sure you won't be claiming bias:

No, what’s surprising and impressive is how Senate Republicans pushed Obama to the wall by attaching to the bill approving the pipeline a provision requiring the president to sign on in 60 days or publicly declare the pipeline was not “in the national interest.”

It was Congress that forced the issue, not the president.

 

[Vast LWC]

From your article:

"His administration invited TransCanada to reapply, an overture the Calgary-based company promptly said it would accept."

Looks like an application for an alternate route will be accepted by the Obama administration, so his rejection didn't permanently kill anything, as you seem to imply in your post.

Actually, the word "stop" does not necessarily imply permanency.

One can stop, and then go.

 

[Vast LWC]

You're right...it's not permanently killed. But it is at least put off for a year. That's ANOTHER year alot of people are going to have to wait for work!

"Denying the permit pushes a final decision on the pipeline into 2013, safely past this year’s presidential election. John Stephenson, who helps manage $2.7 billion for First Asset Management Inc. in Toronto, said he bought 350,000 shares yesterday as TransCanada fell the most in 18 months."

What's his reason for putting it off like this? Is he hoping to be re-elected then he can reject these jobs permantly? Why is he making people wait to get jobs that they need NOW?

Because, and let me make this perfectly clear:

The people of Nebraska asked the President to do so, because they didn't want to take the chance that their entire water supply might be poisoned.

I'm not really sure how you all think 20,000 jobs trumps the possible poisoning of nearly the entire population of Nebraska.

This is really a no-brainer.

 

[Mr. H.]

"Entire water supply poisoned..."



Nebraska's lands have been poisoned by agriculture for decades.

Chew on that.

 

[Vast LWC]

A point.

It seems to me that this whole thing is to get the Federal government to say that transCanada has the right to take your property to build this pipeline and you have no say in the matter.

Instead of acting like a private business venture and dealing with each landowner and going around them if an agreement is not reached.
That is non government interference capitalism in action.

The question is not the land. The question is the water supply. Therefore the issue is one of public safety, not land ownership.

 

[Care4all]

if the pipeline people were so environmentally concerned as they SAY they are on the webside that was given by another poster, then WHY OH WHY did the plan the pipeline to go over this Aquifer in the first place? Why didn't they plan around it to start?

 

[Vast LWC]

"Entire water supply poisoned..."



Nebraska's lands have been poisoned by agriculture for decades.

Chew on that.

So, your bright idea is to risk poisoning it even more?

Great. Perhaps you can explain the fact that you just didn't want to move the pipeline to the children that have cancer in a few years.

 

[Vast LWC]

if the pipeline people were so environmentally concerned as they SAY they are on the webside that was given by another poster, then WHY OH WHY did the plan the pipeline to go over this Aquifer in the first place? Why didn't they plan around it to start?

An excellent point.

The only thing I would say though is: This isn't an environmental issue, it is a public health issue.

 

[Trajan]

Permits denied by whom? The feds or the states?

And that article speaks of permit applications not acted on in a timely manner not the same thing as denied.

Kinda like me "denying" thousands of women of my sexual favors.
Just not got around to them yet, I did not deny them.
So far none of them have sued me yet though.

you are being disingenuous again....

Obama grants first deepwater drilling permit after BP spill - Feb. 28, 2011

and you didn't answer the question- is it your position that the obama admin. sppts. fossil fuel exploration, marketing and use?

I think the latest count for offshore drilling permits is close to 300 for the Obama admin.
And yes Obama supports big business. He has not called for investigations into Big oils profits or possible price fixing has he?
And was I correct of not did that article speak of denied permits or just delayed approvals and such?

and most do not understand the linkage of Palins pipeline to this project.

wow. so this is where you choose to restart the conversation?




[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXDFbFbNXOs&feature=related]The Chris Rock Show -Nigga Please Cereal - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Trajan]

if the pipeline people were so environmentally concerned as they SAY they are on the webside that was given by another poster, then WHY OH WHY did the plan the pipeline to go over this Aquifer in the first place? Why didn't they plan around it to start?

I posted this a few pages back care, because they counted on common sense, there is already 25K miles of pipelines over the aquifer.....here ya go....

bigger version here...

http://heartland.org/sites/default/files/ogallala_aquifer_map.pdf

 

[Care4all]

if the pipeline people were so environmentally concerned as they SAY they are on the webside that was given by another poster, then WHY OH WHY did the plan the pipeline to go over this Aquifer in the first place? Why didn't they plan around it to start?

I posted this a few pages back care, because they counted on common sense, there is already 25K miles of pipelines over the aquifer.....here ya go....

bigger version here...

http://heartland.org/sites/default/files/ogallala_aquifer_map.pdf

then why did the governor and citizens of the state reject it initially?

 

[Vast LWC]

I posted this a few pages back care, because they counted on common sense, there is already 25K miles of pipelines over the aquifer.....here ya go....

bigger version here...

http://heartland.org/sites/default/files/ogallala_aquifer_map.pdf

Of course there is. There's always some pipeline running over any populated region, to bring gas and oil to the homes and businesses of the residents therein.

The question here is VOLUME.

If any of those little pipes burst or leaked, the damage would be minimal.

If the proposed super-pipeline sprung a leak, it would be an entirely different story.

It's like comparing a few speedboats that occasionally leak oil, to a giant supertanker sinking.

 

[Mr. H.]

"Entire water supply poisoned..."



Nebraska's lands have been poisoned by agriculture for decades.

Chew on that.

So, your bright idea is to risk poisoning it even more?

Great. Perhaps you can explain the fact that you just didn't want to move the pipeline to the children that have cancer in a few years.

Pipelines cause cancer. Now I've heard it all.

You've got a mighty convoluted sense of reason.

If you're so concerned about such health issues, start a thread about agricultural contamination of groundwater.

You're a petrophobe. Hell, I'll throw in racist just for good measure.

 

[Vast LWC]

And how are you people suddenly supporting the Federal Government over State's Rights anyway?

What, the Federal Government should only stay out of state's rights issues when it conflicts with corporate interests? Otherwise, it's suddenly OK?

 

[Vast LWC]

Pipelines cause cancer. Now I've heard it all.

You've got a mighty convoluted sense of reason.

If you're so concerned about such health issues, start a thread about agricultural contamination of groundwater.

You're a petrophobe. Hell, I'll throw in racist just for good measure.

Yes, crude oil contains a mixture of substances dangerous to human health, including chemicals such as benzene, that are known to cause cancer in humans, and others that are toxic to the brain and central nervous system, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

So, yes, pipelines, when they leak into the water supply, do in fact cause cancer.

Any other questions?

 

[Trajan]

I posted this a few pages back care, because they counted on common sense, there is already 25K miles of pipelines over the aquifer.....here ya go....

bigger version here...

http://heartland.org/sites/default/files/ogallala_aquifer_map.pdf

Of course there is. There's always some pipeline running over any populated region, to bring gas and oil to the homes and businesses of the residents therein.

The question here is VOLUME.

If any of those little pipes burst or leaked, the damage would be minimal.

If the proposed super-pipeline sprung a leak, it would be an entirely different story.

It's like comparing a few speedboats that occasionally leak oil, to a giant supertanker sinking.

yes I see your point, and, if you had a point vis a vis different safety/handling/response risk based on a history you would really have a point....*sigh*, why don't ya'll read the thread, you are asking questions that have been asked and answered, in say the last 2-3 pages 2, especially yours.

 

[Vast LWC]

yes I see your point, and, if you had a point vis a vis different safety/handling/response risk based on a history you would really have a point....*sigh*, why don't ya'll read the thread, you are asking questions that have been asked and answered, in say the last 2-3 pages 2, especially yours.

Ummm, you brought up the subject again by posting that map.

And, strangely enough, you previously posting your opinion on a subject, does not constitute the matter being settled.

 

[Vast LWC]

Let us compare this proposed pipeline to the Aleskaya Pipeline in Alaska.

In 1978, 16,000 Barrels were spilled.
In 2001, 6,100 Barrels were spilled.
In 2006, 6,300 Barrels were spilled.
In 2010, "several thousand" Barrels were spilled.

Fortunately, these spills occurred in little populated areas, and certainly not over a much-used water supply.