Why Obama Killed the Keystone Pipeline

[uscitizen]

Why would completing the Keystone pipeline cause oil prices to rise here in the US? Has to be cheaper than importing it from overseas.

It will divert Canadian crude away from the Chicago PADD and be used to create refined product which will be exported. Or at least that's what an energy analyst with 40 years of experience said a few days ago.

TransCanada Pipelines executives testified in the Canadian Parliament that it would accrue $5 billion to Canadian producers at the expense of American consumers. As a Canadian, I'm A-OK with that. Plus, its possible they could have been exaggerating to get the pipeline approved in Canada. But the Canadians definitely see it as a profit center by raising US prices.

I can see how it will allow Canada & North Dakota to make more on their oil. I do not see how it would raise prices on American Consumers. It should lower prices at the Gas Pumps for most Americans.

Just who do you think will pay for the increased prices that Canada and North Dakota get for their oil?

 

[American Horse]

Only after in an election year Obama has faced a shitstorm of criticism from even his beloved unions.

It's transparent as Hell.

It's going through cuz Obama can't stop it. No federal boundary is crossed, so he is basically taking credit for allowing part of the pipeline to be built that he couldn't stop.

Anyone with knowledge of the proposed pipeline knew this before he blocked the northern part. The President did say he was cutting some of the red tape to get it going faster. That's not how some newcasters have framed it, but that is all he did.

Actually he let it happen by not directly stopping it with some kind of EPA action involving red tape. Those oil men standing there listening to him speak in OK knew what he meant.

 

[Trajan]

He killed because it because

1. The environmentalists in his party wanted it killed
2. There is evidence that it would cause oil prices in America to rise
3. Even if prices didn't rise in America, prices probably would have risen in Chicago and the midwest.

you really think he killed it for reasons 2 and 3?seriously?

we refine heavy Venezuelan crude in those refineries the effect is the same , except, we send the money to a friendly nation that borders us.

 

[uscitizen]

He killed because it because

1. The environmentalists in his party wanted it killed
2. There is evidence that it would cause oil prices in America to rise
3. Even if prices didn't rise in America, prices probably would have risen in Chicago and the midwest.

you really think he killed it for reasons 2 and 3?seriously?

we refine heavy Venezuelan crude in those refineries the effect is the same , except, we send the money to a friendly nation that borders us.

If Canada is able to run their oil thru the pipeline for export they will get more money for their oil just like VZ does.

 

[Clementine]

Keystone is not dead. The first extension is going from Ok to the Gulf Coast. And likely after the election the next part that will come in from Canada will be approved.

A pipeline is going up between two states, but the pipeline from Canada, the one that would create the jobs, has been shot down by Obama. It wasn't up to him to approve the line between states, so gets zero credit for that. He is trying to make it sound like he's behind this project when he is not. He killed it and has no intention of letting it happen. If he does, he'll lose donations from some of the wealthiest Americans.

 

[francoHFW]

He followed the law, not imaginary Pubcrappe. And he'll approve the northern half when they have a route that makes sense, probably in a few months. Total Pubcrappe AGAIN! Don't dittoheads EVER get tired of being duped? JFC....

 

[rdean]

Been thinking about this ever since he did it. Seems odd doesn't it, to turn down a project that the unions wanted, thousands of new, good-paying jobs, and importing oil from a freindly neighbor rather than an unfriendly country elsewhere. Well, maybe we now have the answer, the rest of the story. It comes from a San Francisco newspaper story a month back, basically says it was about money.

snippet:

Now we know that the decision to reject the Keystone pipeline really came down to the desires of one ultra-wealthy person: Susie Tompkins Buell, a leading donor to Democrats:
Buell, a co-founder of the Esprit clothing company, has donated millions of dollars to Democratic causes and presidential candidates, including Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Al Gore and her good friend, Hillary Rodham Clinton. In the past 10 years, she has given $25 million to progressive political and charitable causes and has raised $10 million for candidates and committees, her office said.
.
.
So Ms. Buell took to the streets (very tidy, upscale streets, to be sure) to protest:
In October, Buell made headlines after she led a protest of monied Democrats in San Francisco against the controversial 1,700-mile Keystone XL oil pipeline. Her fellow protesters outside an Obama fundraiser included Michael Kieschnick, co-founder of CREDO Mobile and Working Assets, which has donated $75 million to progressive causes; IT executive David desJardins; and Anna Hawken McKay, wife of Rob McKay, a wealthy philanthropist whose father founded Taco Bell.

The Democrats, who could have easily afforded the $5,000-a-plate Obama fundraiser, stood on the curb outside the W Hotel as Buell delivered a tough assessment of the president: “I don’t know where he stands on anything,” she said.

And, like magic, that was the end of Keystone:
Kieschnick said Buell’s decision to take an aggressive stance was pivotal to the eventual outcome – a White House announcement last month that the application for the pipeline from the Canadian province of Alberta to Texas refineries would be rejected.

“Before her involvement, the powers that be clearly dismissed our concerns” about the long-term environmental impacts of the pipeline, said Kieschnick, who has known Buell for 20 years. People inside the White House “clearly noticed,” he said. “Then they realized this was not only bad policy, this was bad politics.”

Obama losing financial backing of big S.F. donor

What's you favorite color?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why Obama Killed the Keystone Pipeline

He didn't. He just made a couple of changes so that the US profits (now) instead of Canada.

He has done more to increase production than any other president. He has issued more permits that any other president.

But, you rw's can't know that because you get your "news" from such as faux, limb-a-a-a-a and CryBaby Beck.

 

[KissMy]

It will divert Canadian crude away from the Chicago PADD and be used to create refined product which will be exported. Or at least that's what an energy analyst with 40 years of experience said a few days ago.

TransCanada Pipelines executives testified in the Canadian Parliament that it would accrue $5 billion to Canadian producers at the expense of American consumers. As a Canadian, I'm A-OK with that. Plus, its possible they could have been exaggerating to get the pipeline approved in Canada. But the Canadians definitely see it as a profit center by raising US prices.

I can see how it will allow Canada & North Dakota to make more on their oil. I do not see how it would raise prices on American Consumers. It should lower prices at the Gas Pumps for most Americans.

Just who do you think will pay for the increased prices that Canada and North Dakota get for their oil?

Most Americans are already paying $20 more for oil off the ships coming from foreign OPEC countries other than Canada. So if the oil price in 6 US states & Canada goes up $10 & the oil the other 44 US states are actually using goes down $10 it is a win-win. The main thing is that OPEC oil price stops rising & goes down. This makes the US dollar worth more overseas.

 

[Trajan]

He killed because it because

1. The environmentalists in his party wanted it killed
2. There is evidence that it would cause oil prices in America to rise
3. Even if prices didn't rise in America, prices probably would have risen in Chicago and the midwest.

you really think he killed it for reasons 2 and 3?seriously?

we refine heavy Venezuelan crude in those refineries the effect is the same , except, we send the money to a friendly nation that borders us.

If Canada is able to run their oil thru the pipeline for export they will get more money for their oil just like VZ does.

and how many corp. cross overs, ala Canadian and amercian investment ties via money markets etc. do you think exist between Venezuela and us? as compared to Canada? the money just doesn't evaporate.

 

[Wiseacre]

He killed because it because

1. The environmentalists in his party wanted it killed
2. There is evidence that it would cause oil prices in America to rise
3. Even if prices didn't rise in America, prices probably would have risen in Chicago and the midwest.

Why would completing the Keystone pipeline cause oil prices to rise here in the US? Has to be cheaper than importing it from overseas.

It will divert Canadian crude away from the Chicago PADD and be used to create refined product which will be exported. Or at least that's what an energy analyst with 40 years of experience said a few days ago.

TransCanada Pipelines executives testified in the Canadian Parliament that it would accrue $5 billion to Canadian producers at the expense of American consumers. As a Canadian, I'm A-OK with that. Plus, its possible they could have been exaggerating to get the pipeline approved in Canada. But the Canadians definitely see it as a profit center by raising US prices.

This makes no sense. At all. I'd rather pay the Canadians for their oil than Hugo Chavez or anyone else really. I see absolutely no logic in assuming the price for US consumers will go up due to oil coming over a pipeline instead of shipping it halfway around the world. If anything, it should be cheaper for us due to less delivery expense. How in the hell you or anyone else thinks the price of gas will go up here from using the pipeline instead of oveerseas oil is nonsense.

Let's work an example:

Say the price of oil world wide is $100 a barrel. If we ship it from the middle east somewhere we pay an additional delivery cost, say it's $40/barrel. But from Canada it's much less expensive to get it here over the pipeline, so our delivery cost is $10/barrel instead of $40. There's no way our price at the pump goes up if the price of delivered oil is lower.

Now if the Canadians are charging us $130/barrel instead of the $100, then we're not getting any benefit, right? But they won't get many takers for their oil at $130/barrel plus the $40 shipping cost on top of that to China or the rest of the world. Not when the rest of the world can buy it from the ME for $100, right? Unless you want to tell me we gotta pay them $130 but everyone else gets it for $100, somehow I don't think that's gonna happen.

 

[Toro]

Why would completing the Keystone pipeline cause oil prices to rise here in the US? Has to be cheaper than importing it from overseas.

It will divert Canadian crude away from the Chicago PADD and be used to create refined product which will be exported. Or at least that's what an energy analyst with 40 years of experience said a few days ago.

TransCanada Pipelines executives testified in the Canadian Parliament that it would accrue $5 billion to Canadian producers at the expense of American consumers. As a Canadian, I'm A-OK with that. Plus, its possible they could have been exaggerating to get the pipeline approved in Canada. But the Canadians definitely see it as a profit center by raising US prices.

I can see how it will allow Canada & North Dakota to make more on their oil. I do not see how it would raise prices on American Consumers. It should lower prices at the Gas Pumps for most Americans.

There is no national market for energy in the United States. Instead, there are regional markets. California, for example, is a different market than the rest of the country because much of its crude comes from Alaska and from within California, and the Alaska crude is heavier and denser so the refiners in CA are more complex than elsewhere. In the Midwestern PADD (PADD 2), there is an excess of pipeline capacity coming into the region from Canada that is not matched by the capacity leaving the region to other parts of the US, so prices tend to be lower (all else being equal) in PADD 2. The rationale for the Keystone pipeline is to move product out of PADD 2 south so it can be refined, which would mean higher prices in the Midwest, and most likely exported. This would mean higher prices for Canadian producers. Or at least that's what Canadian energy executives told a Parliamentary committee in testimony on the approval of the pipeline.

The analyst also said that given the technological innovation and the ability to harness shale resources, the US is becoming a net exporter of energy. Thus - and this is true - higher energy prices would be a net beneficiary to the US economy, not a drag as it has been in the past.

 

[Toro]

Why would completing the Keystone pipeline cause oil prices to rise here in the US? Has to be cheaper than importing it from overseas.

It will divert Canadian crude away from the Chicago PADD and be used to create refined product which will be exported. Or at least that's what an energy analyst with 40 years of experience said a few days ago.

TransCanada Pipelines executives testified in the Canadian Parliament that it would accrue $5 billion to Canadian producers at the expense of American consumers. As a Canadian, I'm A-OK with that. Plus, its possible they could have been exaggerating to get the pipeline approved in Canada. But the Canadians definitely see it as a profit center by raising US prices.

This makes no sense. At all. I'd rather pay the Canadians for their oil than Hugo Chavez or anyone else really. I see absolutely no logic in assuming the price for US consumers will go up due to oil coming over a pipeline instead of shipping it halfway around the world. If anything, it should be cheaper for us due to less delivery expense. How in the hell you or anyone else thinks the price of gas will go up here from using the pipeline instead of oveerseas oil is nonsense.

Let's work an example:

Say the price of oil world wide is $100 a barrel. If we ship it from the middle east somewhere we pay an additional delivery cost, say it's $40/barrel. But from Canada it's much less expensive to get it here over the pipeline, so our delivery cost is $10/barrel instead of $40. There's no way our price at the pump goes up if the price of delivered oil is lower.

Now if the Canadians are charging us $130/barrel instead of the $100, then we're not getting any benefit, right? But they won't get many takers for their oil at $130/barrel plus the $40 shipping cost on top of that to China or the rest of the world. Not when the rest of the world can buy it from the ME for $100, right? Unless you want to tell me we gotta pay them $130 but everyone else gets it for $100, somehow I don't think that's gonna happen.

I'm just telling you what I have been hearing from energy analysts and from the Canadian companies. I'm a supporter of the Keystone pipeline but what I'm hearing is that it will mean higher consumer prices in the Midwest (not the rest of the country). I agree I'd rather buy Canadian crude than crude from PdVSA. But if the finished product gets exported rather than staying in the country, then that means a net loss for US consumers.

BTW, there is no one price of oil in the world. There are many different prices, depending on the density, level of sulfur, refining capacity, inventory, transportation infrastructure, etc. What you see in the press is a benchmark price, the price of West Texas Intermediate at storage in Cushing OK. What matters is the economics of getting the stuff out of the ground, transporting, refining and delivering it to the final end user at an appropriate rate of return on capital.

 

[Toro]

He killed because it because

1. The environmentalists in his party wanted it killed
2. There is evidence that it would cause oil prices in America to rise
3. Even if prices didn't rise in America, prices probably would have risen in Chicago and the midwest.

you really think he killed it for reasons 2 and 3?seriously?

we refine heavy Venezuelan crude in those refineries the effect is the same , except, we send the money to a friendly nation that borders us.

Sure. As a Canadian I'm all for that. And as a soon-to-be American, I'd rather pay our friends than our enemies. But in Obama's home market, it will most likely mean higher prices at the pump. You wouldn't have expected Reagan to have supported a policy which caused gas prices to increase in California (and nowhere else), or Clinton to support a policy that increased gas prices in the South (and nowhere else), so why would we expect Obama to support it? Especially given that his base is so passionate about it and he's disappointed them on many other issues.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the energy analysts are wrong and the Canadian oil companies were exaggerating about the profitability accruing to Canadian companies. I don't know. But that's what I've been hearing.

 

[uscitizen]

Why would completing the Keystone pipeline cause oil prices to rise here in the US? Has to be cheaper than importing it from overseas.

It will divert Canadian crude away from the Chicago PADD and be used to create refined product which will be exported. Or at least that's what an energy analyst with 40 years of experience said a few days ago.

TransCanada Pipelines executives testified in the Canadian Parliament that it would accrue $5 billion to Canadian producers at the expense of American consumers. As a Canadian, I'm A-OK with that. Plus, its possible they could have been exaggerating to get the pipeline approved in Canada. But the Canadians definitely see it as a profit center by raising US prices.

This makes no sense. At all. I'd rather pay the Canadians for their oil than Hugo Chavez or anyone else really. I see absolutely no logic in assuming the price for US consumers will go up due to oil coming over a pipeline instead of shipping it halfway around the world. If anything, it should be cheaper for us due to less delivery expense. How in the hell you or anyone else thinks the price of gas will go up here from using the pipeline instead of oveerseas oil is nonsense.

Let's work an example:

Say the price of oil world wide is $100 a barrel. If we ship it from the middle east somewhere we pay an additional delivery cost, say it's $40/barrel. But from Canada it's much less expensive to get it here over the pipeline, so our delivery cost is $10/barrel instead of $40. There's no way our price at the pump goes up if the price of delivered oil is lower.

Now if the Canadians are charging us $130/barrel instead of the $100, then we're not getting any benefit, right? But they won't get many takers for their oil at $130/barrel plus the $40 shipping cost on top of that to China or the rest of the world. Not when the rest of the world can buy it from the ME for $100, right? Unless you want to tell me we gotta pay them $130 but everyone else gets it for $100, somehow I don't think that's gonna happen.

Delivery costs do not seem to figure in much in the global oil market.

Or gas for that matter. In eastern KY I will pay more for gas 40 miles from the refinery than I will 125 miles away.

 

[KissMy]

It will divert Canadian crude away from the Chicago PADD and be used to create refined product which will be exported. Or at least that's what an energy analyst with 40 years of experience said a few days ago.

TransCanada Pipelines executives testified in the Canadian Parliament that it would accrue $5 billion to Canadian producers at the expense of American consumers. As a Canadian, I'm A-OK with that. Plus, its possible they could have been exaggerating to get the pipeline approved in Canada. But the Canadians definitely see it as a profit center by raising US prices.

I can see how it will allow Canada & North Dakota to make more on their oil. I do not see how it would raise prices on American Consumers. It should lower prices at the Gas Pumps for most Americans.

Just who do you think will pay for the increased prices that Canada and North Dakota get for their oil?

Obama's buddies in Chicago will pay more. The thing is once Enbridge turns around all the pumps along the Seaway Pipeline to reverse the flow of oil. It will transport oil from (PADD-2 to PADD-3) Cushing, Oklahoma to the Gulf of Mexico the same way as the Keystone Pipeline would. This means that the price of oil is going up in the Mid USA in a couple of months anyway.

 

[KissMy]

Delivery costs do not seem to figure in much in the global oil market.

Or gas for that matter. In eastern KY I will pay more for gas 40 miles from the refinery than I will 125 miles away.

That is likely because the East Coast is starved for oil & the Central US is awash with oil. Eastern KY borders East Coast States & the North & West of KY is firmly in Central US PAAD-2 that has excess oil capacity.

 

[francoHFW]

Whatever. He will approve it later this year when they propose a good route. Total Pubcrappe.

 

[bripat9643]

Whatever. He will approve it later this year when they propose a good route. Total Pubcrappe.

There was nothing wrong with the original proposed route. The claim that there was is just propaganda from Obama and his drones.

 

[Wiseacre]

It will divert Canadian crude away from the Chicago PADD and be used to create refined product which will be exported. Or at least that's what an energy analyst with 40 years of experience said a few days ago.

TransCanada Pipelines executives testified in the Canadian Parliament that it would accrue $5 billion to Canadian producers at the expense of American consumers. As a Canadian, I'm A-OK with that. Plus, its possible they could have been exaggerating to get the pipeline approved in Canada. But the Canadians definitely see it as a profit center by raising US prices.

This makes no sense. At all. I'd rather pay the Canadians for their oil than Hugo Chavez or anyone else really. I see absolutely no logic in assuming the price for US consumers will go up due to oil coming over a pipeline instead of shipping it halfway around the world. If anything, it should be cheaper for us due to less delivery expense. How in the hell you or anyone else thinks the price of gas will go up here from using the pipeline instead of oveerseas oil is nonsense.

Let's work an example:

Say the price of oil world wide is $100 a barrel. If we ship it from the middle east somewhere we pay an additional delivery cost, say it's $40/barrel. But from Canada it's much less expensive to get it here over the pipeline, so our delivery cost is $10/barrel instead of $40. There's no way our price at the pump goes up if the price of delivered oil is lower.

Now if the Canadians are charging us $130/barrel instead of the $100, then we're not getting any benefit, right? But they won't get many takers for their oil at $130/barrel plus the $40 shipping cost on top of that to China or the rest of the world. Not when the rest of the world can buy it from the ME for $100, right? Unless you want to tell me we gotta pay them $130 but everyone else gets it for $100, somehow I don't think that's gonna happen.

Delivery costs do not seem to figure in much in the global oil market.

Or gas for that matter. In eastern KY I will pay more for gas 40 miles from the refinery than I will 125 miles away.

That makes no sense at all, the closer you are to the refinery the lower the transportation costs are, and the lower the price will be. Now, maybe he closer refinery has to pay extra to meet EPA req'ts that the more distant one does not, or maybe it refines 'dirtier' oil, as opposed to cleaner Brent crude, and therefore it the costs are higher.

You'll also pay a lot more for oil and gas if it gets shipped half way around the world as opposed to right next door through a pipeline. I think you are greatly underestimated the shipping costs of oil. Which is after allt he main driver of the price of gas.