Biden to cancel the Keystone pipeline via executive action on 1st day, Trudeau already complaining, conservatives like Ann Coulter already pouncing!

[Moonglow]

The Keystone pipeline system, an addition to which has been the subject of environmental protests for years, leaked about 383,000 gallons of crude oil in North Dakota, covering an estimated half-acre of wetland, state environmental regulators said.

Keystone Pipeline Leaks 383,000 Gallons of Oil in North Dakota (Published 2019)

The spill in the northeastern part of the state, which occurred along a different stretch than the controversial XL pipeline addition, coated an estimated half-acre of wetland, officials said.

www.nytimes.com

.


HISTORY OF SPILLS: TransCanada’s Keystone pipeline (21 SPILLS: 2010-19)

Keystone Pipeline Spill History | Bold Nebraska

Keystone pipeline spill #23 near Fort Ransom, N.D., April 8, 2025 (Photo: South Bow) TC Energy oil spill PR oil discharge into Mill Creek near Washington, Kansas, Dec. 9, 2022 (Photo: U.S. EPA) Site of 380,000-gallon tarsands oil spill from Keystone pipeline in northeastern North Dakota on...

boldnebraska.org

Your photo is of a 1/2 an acre...
Exxon Valdez eventually affected 1,300 miles (2,100 km) of coastline, of which 200 miles (320 km) were heavily or moderately oiled.

Exxon Valdez oil spill - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Thanks to a drunk.

 

[BlindBoo]

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil,

Imports from Canada do not effect domestic production. Imports from Canada are not going to stop and Canada is by far our number one supplier of crude oil.

ON a side note looks like we are importing more from Russia than Saudi Arabia.

U.S. Total Crude Oil and Products Imports

 

[Uncensored2008]

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil,

Imports from Canada do not effect domestic production. Imports from Canada are not going to stop and Canada is by far our number one supplier of crude oil.

ON a side note looks like we are importing more from Russia than Saudi Arabia.

U.S. Total Crude Oil and Products Imports

Why do you think Quid Pro is attacking domestic oil production?

Domestic oil in the USA hurts Russia, Iran, and Venezuela - Biden's three main backers except China. (China is #1, always)

 

[Desperado]

..he said it today--one of America's biggest and most important problems--it's everywhere and affects everything:



WHITE SUPREMACY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If democrats can only come up with a final solution to the white people problem....

They are trying their best.... that is why they are pushing mixed marriages

 

[BlindBoo]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil, particularly Russia, Iran, and Venezuela - three countries closely aligned with the democrat party who have been decimated by the resurgence of American energy independence.

Beijing Biden took action to repay the three sponsor nations for years of support they have provided to him and to the democrat party.

Biden is working to make OPEC great again.

That is about the dumbest damn post I have ever seen. Did the United States annex Canada and I missed it? And I got news for you, that oil that was going to flow through that pipeline has never been intended for the US. Well yeah, the oil was suppose to go the US refineries,, to be processed in to diesel fuel TO EXPORT Meanwhile, the redirection of that oil, from refineries in the Mid-west that do not have access to ports to export their products, to refineries in the Gulf, that do, would result in an increase in gas prices for US consumers. Hell, Transcanada sells oil to those Midwest refineries at a three dollar a barrel discount. It is right there in their business plan, Keystone will eliminate that three dollar discount.

I mean who gives a shit about the environmental risk of Keystone. It takes a bonafide full-fledged flippin IDIOT to support Canada pipelining directly to the Gulf some of the nastiest forms of oil known to man. Send it here so it can be processed here and then sent off to some foreign country. They get the fuel, diesel prices drop in India, and CHINA, and we get stuck with the toxic waste and toxic fumes created while processing that nasty shit. Canada gets more money for their oil. Canada wins. China wins. India wins. And we get stuck with a big fat shit sandwich. You retards need to pull your heads out of your asses, learn something about the oil market, gas prices, hell maybe even understand that Canada has not even hit capacity on the currently existing pipelines. They want to use that nasty ass shit to process in to diesel fuel for China and India they can build their own damn refineries.

Keystone XL Will Increase Gas Prices: Explained | The Nation

The fact is we are doing that already. The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline. They were use to processing heavy crude from Venezuela anyway. The refining industry is booming, naturally. Also, a lot of Americans work in those Canadian oil fields.

 

[BlindBoo]

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil,

Imports from Canada do not effect domestic production. Imports from Canada are not going to stop and Canada is by far our number one supplier of crude oil.

ON a side note looks like we are importing more from Russia than Saudi Arabia.

U.S. Total Crude Oil and Products Imports

Why do you think Quid Pro is attacking domestic oil production?

Domestic oil in the USA hurts Russia, Iran, and Venezuela - Biden's three main backers except China. (China is #1, always)

The 60 day moratorium on new lease sales on federal land, imho, is a political move to placate the base. It will have little effect on domestic production especially in Texas.

 

[Recce4]

Follow the money:

You Won't Believe Who Wins BIG With Keystone Cancellation ⋆ Politicrossing

Remember folks, ALWAYS follow the money.

politicrossing.com

 

[healthmyths]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil, particularly Russia, Iran, and Venezuela - three countries closely aligned with the democrat party who have been decimated by the resurgence of American energy independence.

Beijing Biden took action to repay the three sponsor nations for years of support they have provided to him and to the democrat party.

Biden is working to make OPEC great again.

That is about the dumbest damn post I have ever seen. Did the United States annex Canada and I missed it? And I got news for you, that oil that was going to flow through that pipeline has never been intended for the US. Well yeah, the oil was suppose to go the US refineries,, to be processed in to diesel fuel TO EXPORT Meanwhile, the redirection of that oil, from refineries in the Mid-west that do not have access to ports to export their products, to refineries in the Gulf, that do, would result in an increase in gas prices for US consumers. Hell, Transcanada sells oil to those Midwest refineries at a three dollar a barrel discount. It is right there in their business plan, Keystone will eliminate that three dollar discount.

I mean who gives a shit about the environmental risk of Keystone. It takes a bonafide full-fledged flippin IDIOT to support Canada pipelining directly to the Gulf some of the nastiest forms of oil known to man. Send it here so it can be processed here and then sent off to some foreign country. They get the fuel, diesel prices drop in India, and CHINA, and we get stuck with the toxic waste and toxic fumes created while processing that nasty shit. Canada gets more money for their oil. Canada wins. China wins. India wins. And we get stuck with a big fat shit sandwich. You retards need to pull your heads out of your asses, learn something about the oil market, gas prices, hell maybe even understand that Canada has not even hit capacity on the currently existing pipelines. They want to use that nasty ass shit to process in to diesel fuel for China and India they can build their own damn refineries.

Keystone XL Will Increase Gas Prices: Explained | The Nation

The fact is we are doing that already. The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline. They were use to processing heavy crude from Venezuela anyway. The refining industry is booming, naturally. Also, a lot of Americans work in those Canadian oil fields.

So if the oil is being shipped through other sections, why stop Keystone? OH right... because this might happen!
1/2 acre where Keystone leaked less than 1,000 barrels almost all recovered.

 

[BlindBoo]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil, particularly Russia, Iran, and Venezuela - three countries closely aligned with the democrat party who have been decimated by the resurgence of American energy independence.

Beijing Biden took action to repay the three sponsor nations for years of support they have provided to him and to the democrat party.

Biden is working to make OPEC great again.

That is about the dumbest damn post I have ever seen. Did the United States annex Canada and I missed it? And I got news for you, that oil that was going to flow through that pipeline has never been intended for the US. Well yeah, the oil was suppose to go the US refineries,, to be processed in to diesel fuel TO EXPORT Meanwhile, the redirection of that oil, from refineries in the Mid-west that do not have access to ports to export their products, to refineries in the Gulf, that do, would result in an increase in gas prices for US consumers. Hell, Transcanada sells oil to those Midwest refineries at a three dollar a barrel discount. It is right there in their business plan, Keystone will eliminate that three dollar discount.

I mean who gives a shit about the environmental risk of Keystone. It takes a bonafide full-fledged flippin IDIOT to support Canada pipelining directly to the Gulf some of the nastiest forms of oil known to man. Send it here so it can be processed here and then sent off to some foreign country. They get the fuel, diesel prices drop in India, and CHINA, and we get stuck with the toxic waste and toxic fumes created while processing that nasty shit. Canada gets more money for their oil. Canada wins. China wins. India wins. And we get stuck with a big fat shit sandwich. You retards need to pull your heads out of your asses, learn something about the oil market, gas prices, hell maybe even understand that Canada has not even hit capacity on the currently existing pipelines. They want to use that nasty ass shit to process in to diesel fuel for China and India they can build their own damn refineries.

Keystone XL Will Increase Gas Prices: Explained | The Nation

The fact is we are doing that already. The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline. They were use to processing heavy crude from Venezuela anyway. The refining industry is booming, naturally. Also, a lot of Americans work in those Canadian oil fields.

So if the oil is being shipped through other sections, why stop Keystone? OH right... because this might happen!
1/2 acre where Keystone leaked less than 1,000 barrels almost all recovered.
View attachment 449258

For the record I'm for finishing this leg of the pipeline. We import millions of barrels of oil from Canada per month and it is the most efficient way to transport the oil.

 

[Winston]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil, particularly Russia, Iran, and Venezuela - three countries closely aligned with the democrat party who have been decimated by the resurgence of American energy independence.

Beijing Biden took action to repay the three sponsor nations for years of support they have provided to him and to the democrat party.

Biden is working to make OPEC great again.

That is about the dumbest damn post I have ever seen. Did the United States annex Canada and I missed it? And I got news for you, that oil that was going to flow through that pipeline has never been intended for the US. Well yeah, the oil was suppose to go the US refineries,, to be processed in to diesel fuel TO EXPORT Meanwhile, the redirection of that oil, from refineries in the Mid-west that do not have access to ports to export their products, to refineries in the Gulf, that do, would result in an increase in gas prices for US consumers. Hell, Transcanada sells oil to those Midwest refineries at a three dollar a barrel discount. It is right there in their business plan, Keystone will eliminate that three dollar discount.

I mean who gives a shit about the environmental risk of Keystone. It takes a bonafide full-fledged flippin IDIOT to support Canada pipelining directly to the Gulf some of the nastiest forms of oil known to man. Send it here so it can be processed here and then sent off to some foreign country. They get the fuel, diesel prices drop in India, and CHINA, and we get stuck with the toxic waste and toxic fumes created while processing that nasty shit. Canada gets more money for their oil. Canada wins. China wins. India wins. And we get stuck with a big fat shit sandwich. You retards need to pull your heads out of your asses, learn something about the oil market, gas prices, hell maybe even understand that Canada has not even hit capacity on the currently existing pipelines. They want to use that nasty ass shit to process in to diesel fuel for China and India they can build their own damn refineries.

Keystone XL Will Increase Gas Prices: Explained | The Nation

The fact is we are doing that already. The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline. They were use to processing heavy crude from Venezuela anyway. The refining industry is booming, naturally. Also, a lot of Americans work in those Canadian oil fields.

So if the oil is being shipped through other sections, why stop Keystone? OH right... because this might happen!
1/2 acre where Keystone leaked less than 1,000 barrels almost all recovered.
View attachment 449258

For the record I'm for finishing this leg of the pipeline. We import millions of barrels of oil from Canada per month and it is the most efficient way to transport the oil.

Did you not even bother to read my initial post in this thread? And I am quite sure you ignored the link. That oil is not destined for Americans. We get the waste products, the fumes, and take all the environmental risk, not to mention the Midwest loses their three dollar a barrel discount. China, India, and European countries get cheaper diesel fuel. The only thing that makes Americans is SUCKERS. What happened to America first? Or was that just a scam all along.

 

[BlindBoo]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil, particularly Russia, Iran, and Venezuela - three countries closely aligned with the democrat party who have been decimated by the resurgence of American energy independence.

Beijing Biden took action to repay the three sponsor nations for years of support they have provided to him and to the democrat party.

Biden is working to make OPEC great again.

That is about the dumbest damn post I have ever seen. Did the United States annex Canada and I missed it? And I got news for you, that oil that was going to flow through that pipeline has never been intended for the US. Well yeah, the oil was suppose to go the US refineries,, to be processed in to diesel fuel TO EXPORT Meanwhile, the redirection of that oil, from refineries in the Mid-west that do not have access to ports to export their products, to refineries in the Gulf, that do, would result in an increase in gas prices for US consumers. Hell, Transcanada sells oil to those Midwest refineries at a three dollar a barrel discount. It is right there in their business plan, Keystone will eliminate that three dollar discount.

I mean who gives a shit about the environmental risk of Keystone. It takes a bonafide full-fledged flippin IDIOT to support Canada pipelining directly to the Gulf some of the nastiest forms of oil known to man. Send it here so it can be processed here and then sent off to some foreign country. They get the fuel, diesel prices drop in India, and CHINA, and we get stuck with the toxic waste and toxic fumes created while processing that nasty shit. Canada gets more money for their oil. Canada wins. China wins. India wins. And we get stuck with a big fat shit sandwich. You retards need to pull your heads out of your asses, learn something about the oil market, gas prices, hell maybe even understand that Canada has not even hit capacity on the currently existing pipelines. They want to use that nasty ass shit to process in to diesel fuel for China and India they can build their own damn refineries.

Keystone XL Will Increase Gas Prices: Explained | The Nation

The fact is we are doing that already. The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline. They were use to processing heavy crude from Venezuela anyway. The refining industry is booming, naturally. Also, a lot of Americans work in those Canadian oil fields.

So if the oil is being shipped through other sections, why stop Keystone? OH right... because this might happen!
1/2 acre where Keystone leaked less than 1,000 barrels almost all recovered.
View attachment 449258

For the record I'm for finishing this leg of the pipeline. We import millions of barrels of oil from Canada per month and it is the most efficient way to transport the oil.

Did you not even bother to read my initial post in this thread? And I am quite sure you ignored the link. That oil is not destined for Americans. We get the waste products, the fumes, and take all the environmental risk, not to mention the Midwest loses their three dollar a barrel discount. China, India, and European countries get cheaper diesel fuel. The only thing that makes Americans is SUCKERS. What happened to America first? Or was that just a scam all along.

I did. Scam all along. Like I said when I responded to you. " The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline."

Shipping it across the border on railcars is more dangerous to the environment than through a pipeline.

 

[Godboy]

The Keystone pipeline system, an addition to which has been the subject of environmental protests for years, leaked about 383,000 gallons of crude oil in North Dakota, covering an estimated half-acre of wetland, state environmental regulators said.

Keystone Pipeline Leaks 383,000 Gallons of Oil in North Dakota (Published 2019)

The spill in the northeastern part of the state, which occurred along a different stretch than the controversial XL pipeline addition, coated an estimated half-acre of wetland, officials said.

www.nytimes.com

.


HISTORY OF SPILLS: TransCanada’s Keystone pipeline (21 SPILLS: 2010-19)

Keystone Pipeline Spill History | Bold Nebraska

Keystone pipeline spill #23 near Fort Ransom, N.D., April 8, 2025 (Photo: South Bow) TC Energy oil spill PR oil discharge into Mill Creek near Washington, Kansas, Dec. 9, 2022 (Photo: U.S. EPA) Site of 380,000-gallon tarsands oil spill from Keystone pipeline in northeastern North Dakota on...

boldnebraska.org

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

 

[healthmyths]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

Potential destruction of the ground water and water tables for indigineous peoples' communities along the route. The entire Keystone pipeline route endangers groundwater and the water tables in every state it passes through. There have already been leaks.

The obvious solution is to cut your oil useage. Millions of jobs will be created in the change over. Billions of dollars to be made.

Then you should cut the usage of oil to provide the following goods :

 

[Winston]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil, particularly Russia, Iran, and Venezuela - three countries closely aligned with the democrat party who have been decimated by the resurgence of American energy independence.

Beijing Biden took action to repay the three sponsor nations for years of support they have provided to him and to the democrat party.

Biden is working to make OPEC great again.

That is about the dumbest damn post I have ever seen. Did the United States annex Canada and I missed it? And I got news for you, that oil that was going to flow through that pipeline has never been intended for the US. Well yeah, the oil was suppose to go the US refineries,, to be processed in to diesel fuel TO EXPORT Meanwhile, the redirection of that oil, from refineries in the Mid-west that do not have access to ports to export their products, to refineries in the Gulf, that do, would result in an increase in gas prices for US consumers. Hell, Transcanada sells oil to those Midwest refineries at a three dollar a barrel discount. It is right there in their business plan, Keystone will eliminate that three dollar discount.

I mean who gives a shit about the environmental risk of Keystone. It takes a bonafide full-fledged flippin IDIOT to support Canada pipelining directly to the Gulf some of the nastiest forms of oil known to man. Send it here so it can be processed here and then sent off to some foreign country. They get the fuel, diesel prices drop in India, and CHINA, and we get stuck with the toxic waste and toxic fumes created while processing that nasty shit. Canada gets more money for their oil. Canada wins. China wins. India wins. And we get stuck with a big fat shit sandwich. You retards need to pull your heads out of your asses, learn something about the oil market, gas prices, hell maybe even understand that Canada has not even hit capacity on the currently existing pipelines. They want to use that nasty ass shit to process in to diesel fuel for China and India they can build their own damn refineries.

Keystone XL Will Increase Gas Prices: Explained | The Nation

The fact is we are doing that already. The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline. They were use to processing heavy crude from Venezuela anyway. The refining industry is booming, naturally. Also, a lot of Americans work in those Canadian oil fields.

So if the oil is being shipped through other sections, why stop Keystone? OH right... because this might happen!
1/2 acre where Keystone leaked less than 1,000 barrels almost all recovered.
View attachment 449258

For the record I'm for finishing this leg of the pipeline. We import millions of barrels of oil from Canada per month and it is the most efficient way to transport the oil.

Did you not even bother to read my initial post in this thread? And I am quite sure you ignored the link. That oil is not destined for Americans. We get the waste products, the fumes, and take all the environmental risk, not to mention the Midwest loses their three dollar a barrel discount. China, India, and European countries get cheaper diesel fuel. The only thing that makes Americans is SUCKERS. What happened to America first? Or was that just a scam all along.

I did. Scam all along. Like I said when I responded to you. " The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline."

Shipping it across the border on railcars is more dangerous to the environment than through a pipeline.

That makes no sense. If Canada was able to ship that nasty shit to the Gulf Coast they wouldn't need the Keystone pipeline. If they were already getting it there there would be no need for the three dollar a barrel discount that they are giving us now. I am not arguing that some of that nasty shit is being transported by rail. But to actually take the position that the oil is coming anyway, at the same volume, by rail or by pipeline, is ignorant. Bottom line, within the very proposal from TransCanada for the pipeline the primary purpose listed is an increase in the price of the oil they send to the United States of three dollars a barrel. That, in and of itself, should be reason enough to deny them that pipeline. I mean you yahoos don't know jackshit about economics.

 

[BlindBoo]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil, particularly Russia, Iran, and Venezuela - three countries closely aligned with the democrat party who have been decimated by the resurgence of American energy independence.

Beijing Biden took action to repay the three sponsor nations for years of support they have provided to him and to the democrat party.

Biden is working to make OPEC great again.

That is about the dumbest damn post I have ever seen. Did the United States annex Canada and I missed it? And I got news for you, that oil that was going to flow through that pipeline has never been intended for the US. Well yeah, the oil was suppose to go the US refineries,, to be processed in to diesel fuel TO EXPORT Meanwhile, the redirection of that oil, from refineries in the Mid-west that do not have access to ports to export their products, to refineries in the Gulf, that do, would result in an increase in gas prices for US consumers. Hell, Transcanada sells oil to those Midwest refineries at a three dollar a barrel discount. It is right there in their business plan, Keystone will eliminate that three dollar discount.

I mean who gives a shit about the environmental risk of Keystone. It takes a bonafide full-fledged flippin IDIOT to support Canada pipelining directly to the Gulf some of the nastiest forms of oil known to man. Send it here so it can be processed here and then sent off to some foreign country. They get the fuel, diesel prices drop in India, and CHINA, and we get stuck with the toxic waste and toxic fumes created while processing that nasty shit. Canada gets more money for their oil. Canada wins. China wins. India wins. And we get stuck with a big fat shit sandwich. You retards need to pull your heads out of your asses, learn something about the oil market, gas prices, hell maybe even understand that Canada has not even hit capacity on the currently existing pipelines. They want to use that nasty ass shit to process in to diesel fuel for China and India they can build their own damn refineries.

Keystone XL Will Increase Gas Prices: Explained | The Nation

The fact is we are doing that already. The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline. They were use to processing heavy crude from Venezuela anyway. The refining industry is booming, naturally. Also, a lot of Americans work in those Canadian oil fields.

So if the oil is being shipped through other sections, why stop Keystone? OH right... because this might happen!
1/2 acre where Keystone leaked less than 1,000 barrels almost all recovered.
View attachment 449258

For the record I'm for finishing this leg of the pipeline. We import millions of barrels of oil from Canada per month and it is the most efficient way to transport the oil.

Did you not even bother to read my initial post in this thread? And I am quite sure you ignored the link. That oil is not destined for Americans. We get the waste products, the fumes, and take all the environmental risk, not to mention the Midwest loses their three dollar a barrel discount. China, India, and European countries get cheaper diesel fuel. The only thing that makes Americans is SUCKERS. What happened to America first? Or was that just a scam all along.

I did. Scam all along. Like I said when I responded to you. " The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline."

Shipping it across the border on railcars is more dangerous to the environment than through a pipeline.

That makes no sense. If Canada was able to ship that nasty shit to the Gulf Coast they wouldn't need the Keystone pipeline. If they were already getting it there there would be no need for the three dollar a barrel discount that they are giving us now. I am not arguing that some of that nasty shit is being transported by rail. But to actually take the position that the oil is coming anyway, at the same volume, by rail or by pipeline, is ignorant. Bottom line, within the very proposal from TransCanada for the pipeline the primary purpose listed is an increase in the price of the oil they send to the United States of three dollars a barrel. That, in and of itself, should be reason enough to deny them that pipeline. I mean you yahoos don't know jackshit about economics.

It's not a question of if. Yes, they want to ship more.

The 1,700 new miles of pipeline would offer two sections of expansion. First, a southern leg would connect Cushing, Oklahoma, where there is a current bottleneck of oil, with the Gulf Coast of Texas, where oil refineries abound. That leg went into operation in January 2014.

The southern leg of the Keystone XL ties into the existing Keystone pipeline that already runs to Canada, bringing up to 700,000 barrels of oil a day to refineries in Texas. At peak capacity, the pipeline will deliver 830,000 barrels of oil per day.

Keystone XL pipeline halted as Biden moves to cancel permit

The 1,700-mile (2,735-kilometer) pipeline was planned to carry roughly 800,000 barrels of oil a day from Alberta to the Texas Gulf Coast, passing through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma.

www.pbs.org

 

[Dana7360]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

That's very easy.

Water.

Nothing living on this planet can live without it.

We don't have that pipeline and have no benefit from it yet so we won't be losing anything.

Only those who invested in it will lose.

That pipeline is allowed to cross The Ogallala Aquifer, America's largest aquifer.

Which is located in what is called "America's Bread Basket." Millions of farms depend on that water. Millions of Americans depend on that water.

It is beyond stupid to allow that pipeline to come anywhere near that aquifer. Especially since it's not even tar sand from America. It's tar sand from Canada. Let Canada put their environment at risk. Oh yeah, Canada won't do that.

The fact that you even have to ask is insulting to every intelligent person on this board.

 

[healthmyths]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil, particularly Russia, Iran, and Venezuela - three countries closely aligned with the democrat party who have been decimated by the resurgence of American energy independence.

Beijing Biden took action to repay the three sponsor nations for years of support they have provided to him and to the democrat party.

Biden is working to make OPEC great again.

That is about the dumbest damn post I have ever seen. Did the United States annex Canada and I missed it? And I got news for you, that oil that was going to flow through that pipeline has never been intended for the US. Well yeah, the oil was suppose to go the US refineries,, to be processed in to diesel fuel TO EXPORT Meanwhile, the redirection of that oil, from refineries in the Mid-west that do not have access to ports to export their products, to refineries in the Gulf, that do, would result in an increase in gas prices for US consumers. Hell, Transcanada sells oil to those Midwest refineries at a three dollar a barrel discount. It is right there in their business plan, Keystone will eliminate that three dollar discount.

I mean who gives a shit about the environmental risk of Keystone. It takes a bonafide full-fledged flippin IDIOT to support Canada pipelining directly to the Gulf some of the nastiest forms of oil known to man. Send it here so it can be processed here and then sent off to some foreign country. They get the fuel, diesel prices drop in India, and CHINA, and we get stuck with the toxic waste and toxic fumes created while processing that nasty shit. Canada gets more money for their oil. Canada wins. China wins. India wins. And we get stuck with a big fat shit sandwich. You retards need to pull your heads out of your asses, learn something about the oil market, gas prices, hell maybe even understand that Canada has not even hit capacity on the currently existing pipelines. They want to use that nasty ass shit to process in to diesel fuel for China and India they can build their own damn refineries.

Keystone XL Will Increase Gas Prices: Explained | The Nation

The fact is we are doing that already. The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline. They were use to processing heavy crude from Venezuela anyway. The refining industry is booming, naturally. Also, a lot of Americans work in those Canadian oil fields.

So if the oil is being shipped through other sections, why stop Keystone? OH right... because this might happen!
1/2 acre where Keystone leaked less than 1,000 barrels almost all recovered.
View attachment 449258

For the record I'm for finishing this leg of the pipeline. We import millions of barrels of oil from Canada per month and it is the most efficient way to transport the oil.

Did you not even bother to read my initial post in this thread? And I am quite sure you ignored the link. That oil is not destined for Americans. We get the waste products, the fumes, and take all the environmental risk, not to mention the Midwest loses their three dollar a barrel discount. China, India, and European countries get cheaper diesel fuel. The only thing that makes Americans is SUCKERS. What happened to America first? Or was that just a scam all along.

I did. Scam all along. Like I said when I responded to you. " The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline."

Shipping it across the border on railcars is more dangerous to the environment than through a pipeline.

That makes no sense. If Canada was able to ship that nasty shit to the Gulf Coast they wouldn't need the Keystone pipeline. If they were already getting it there there would be no need for the three dollar a barrel discount that they are giving us now. I am not arguing that some of that nasty shit is being transported by rail. But to actually take the position that the oil is coming anyway, at the same volume, by rail or by pipeline, is ignorant. Bottom line, within the very proposal from TransCanada for the pipeline the primary purpose listed is an increase in the price of the oil they send to the United States of three dollars a barrel. That, in and of itself, should be reason enough to deny them that pipeline. I mean you yahoos don't know jackshit about economics.

I know this:
Exxon Valdez eventually affected 1,300 miles (2,100 km) of coastline, of which 200 miles (320 km) were heavily or moderately oiled.

Exxon Valdez oil spill - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

They are still after 32 years still cleaning up just.
Chemicals used to clean up spills have harmed marine wildlife, response workers and coastal residents. The EPA must act.
Some reports estimated the total economic loss from the Exxon Valdez oil spill to be as much as $2.8 billion. A 2001 study found oil contamination remaining at more than half of the 91 beach sites...

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill - 1989, Effects & Location | HISTORY

The Exxon Valdez oil spill dumped 11 million gallons of crude oil into Alaska's Prince William Sound in 1989, damagin...

www.history.com

 

[healthmyths]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

That's very easy.

Water.

Nothing living on this planet can live without it.

We don't have that pipeline and have no benefit from it yet so we won't be losing anything.

Only those who invested in it will lose.

That pipeline is allowed to cross The Ogallala Aquifer, America's largest aquifer.

Which is located in what is called "America's Bread Basket." Millions of farms depend on that water. Millions of Americans depend on that water.

It is beyond stupid to allow that pipeline to come anywhere near that aquifer. Especially since it's not even tar sand from America. It's tar sand from Canada. Let Canada put their environment at risk. Oh yeah, Canada won't do that.

The fact that you even have to ask is insulting to every intelligent person on this board.

If you are so intelligent... why not read what an Ogallala Aquifer has to say?
UNL expert: Ogallala Aquifer has little risk of Keystone pipeline oil spills
FACTS... NOT guesses!!
Scattered around the state are close to 6,000 holes each about 5 inches in diameter drilled to the base of the Ogallala Aquifer. During the 1970s, Goeke drilled about 1,000 of those holes in the deepest part of the aquifer.
Seventy-five to 80 percent of the aquifer lies west of the proposed pipeline route. The aquifer is sloped downward going east. If there were a spill, that entire section is unavailable to be harmed because water cannot move uphill. The 15 to 20 percent left, Goeke says, is in very little risk thanks to abundant fine-grain clays, sediment and sandstone separating the aquifer and potential contaminants from the pipeline.
While Goeke agrees 20 percent would be a problem, he thinks the chances of a leak reaching the aquifer are very minimal.
“It can’t get down to the water table because of the nature of the sediments in the unsaturated zone,” he said.
Goeke likens pipelines to the fear of flying.

The only area of concern regarding water pollution, according to Goeke, occurs where the pipeline will have to be pulled under the Platte River and through the 12-mile-wide valley, where the water table is high or near the earth’s surface.

UNL expert: Ogallala Aquifer has little risk of Keystone pipeline oil spills

When James Goeke stood in western Nebraska for the first time, he thought it was the most desolate and desperate place he’d ever been.

www.dailynebraskan.com

But experts like you haven't I guessed realized that 1 mile of pipe contains less than 700 barrels of oil.
Each mile of pipe has 16 monitors to detect leaks.

But again experts like you haven't shown any proof though...Goeke who has lived on the Ogallala Aquifer for over 30 years... I think has just a little more expertise!

 

[BlindBoo]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

That's very easy.

Water.

Nothing living on this planet can live without it.

We don't have that pipeline and have no benefit from it yet so we won't be losing anything.

Only those who invested in it will lose.

That pipeline is allowed to cross The Ogallala Aquifer, America's largest aquifer.

Which is located in what is called "America's Bread Basket." Millions of farms depend on that water. Millions of Americans depend on that water.

It is beyond stupid to allow that pipeline to come anywhere near that aquifer. Especially since it's not even tar sand from America. It's tar sand from Canada. Let Canada put their environment at risk. Oh yeah, Canada won't do that.

The fact that you even have to ask is insulting to every intelligent person on this board.

Do you know how many pipelines already cross the Ogallala? Producing oil wells?

https://www.tcenergy.com/siteassets/operations/oil-and-liquids/keystone-xl/tc-keystone-xl-ogallala-aquifer-map-2019.pdf

 

[Winston]

I'm asking that question because from my understanding of critics of Keystone, the danger of oil spills damaging the environment is the number one reason. Do all of you that oppose Keystone agree? What other reason can there possibly be?

OK... so let's consider the damage that COULD be done if Keystone is not completed.
The pipeline, which has been in development for more than a decade, aims to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta tar sands in Canada to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. Faced with lawsuits and strong opposition from environmental groups, the project was rejected by the Obama-Biden administration in 2015 over “environmental concerns” – a decision reversed by Donald Trump in 2017.

So as an alternative Canada’s government is also expanding the state-owned Trans Mountain line by 590,000 bpd to 890,000 bpd. That line terminates at the Port of Vancouver, where it should be able to deliver
1,000,000 barrels via tankers per day to the United States.

Even without Keystone XL, U.S. set for record Canadian oil imports

The Keystone XL pipeline project may be dead, but the United States is still poised to pull in record imports of Canadian oil in coming years through other pipelines that are in the midst of expanding.

www.reuters.com

So delivering oil by tankers to the USA using the open oceans seems to be an alternative.

HMMM... let's see.. 1,000,000 barrels traveling on the open ocean down to USA is safer than 830,000 barrels traveling 1,700 miles or less than 500 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land through pipes with 16 monitors per mile.
Hmmm... which would be more dangerous? Remember 1989 Exxon Valdez?

Please someone explain how environmentalists can be in favor of 1 million barrels traveling on the open ocean?

By attacking the Keystone pipeline, Xi's man significantly and dramatically lowers domestic energy production. This shifts dependence back to foreign oil, particularly Russia, Iran, and Venezuela - three countries closely aligned with the democrat party who have been decimated by the resurgence of American energy independence.

Beijing Biden took action to repay the three sponsor nations for years of support they have provided to him and to the democrat party.

Biden is working to make OPEC great again.

That is about the dumbest damn post I have ever seen. Did the United States annex Canada and I missed it? And I got news for you, that oil that was going to flow through that pipeline has never been intended for the US. Well yeah, the oil was suppose to go the US refineries,, to be processed in to diesel fuel TO EXPORT Meanwhile, the redirection of that oil, from refineries in the Mid-west that do not have access to ports to export their products, to refineries in the Gulf, that do, would result in an increase in gas prices for US consumers. Hell, Transcanada sells oil to those Midwest refineries at a three dollar a barrel discount. It is right there in their business plan, Keystone will eliminate that three dollar discount.

I mean who gives a shit about the environmental risk of Keystone. It takes a bonafide full-fledged flippin IDIOT to support Canada pipelining directly to the Gulf some of the nastiest forms of oil known to man. Send it here so it can be processed here and then sent off to some foreign country. They get the fuel, diesel prices drop in India, and CHINA, and we get stuck with the toxic waste and toxic fumes created while processing that nasty shit. Canada gets more money for their oil. Canada wins. China wins. India wins. And we get stuck with a big fat shit sandwich. You retards need to pull your heads out of your asses, learn something about the oil market, gas prices, hell maybe even understand that Canada has not even hit capacity on the currently existing pipelines. They want to use that nasty ass shit to process in to diesel fuel for China and India they can build their own damn refineries.

Keystone XL Will Increase Gas Prices: Explained | The Nation

The fact is we are doing that already. The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline. They were use to processing heavy crude from Venezuela anyway. The refining industry is booming, naturally. Also, a lot of Americans work in those Canadian oil fields.

So if the oil is being shipped through other sections, why stop Keystone? OH right... because this might happen!
1/2 acre where Keystone leaked less than 1,000 barrels almost all recovered.
View attachment 449258

For the record I'm for finishing this leg of the pipeline. We import millions of barrels of oil from Canada per month and it is the most efficient way to transport the oil.

Did you not even bother to read my initial post in this thread? And I am quite sure you ignored the link. That oil is not destined for Americans. We get the waste products, the fumes, and take all the environmental risk, not to mention the Midwest loses their three dollar a barrel discount. China, India, and European countries get cheaper diesel fuel. The only thing that makes Americans is SUCKERS. What happened to America first? Or was that just a scam all along.

I did. Scam all along. Like I said when I responded to you. " The oil or bitumen slurry, is being shipped across the border on railcars, then sent to the gulf coast and other refineries through the completed section of the pipeline."

Shipping it across the border on railcars is more dangerous to the environment than through a pipeline.

That makes no sense. If Canada was able to ship that nasty shit to the Gulf Coast they wouldn't need the Keystone pipeline. If they were already getting it there there would be no need for the three dollar a barrel discount that they are giving us now. I am not arguing that some of that nasty shit is being transported by rail. But to actually take the position that the oil is coming anyway, at the same volume, by rail or by pipeline, is ignorant. Bottom line, within the very proposal from TransCanada for the pipeline the primary purpose listed is an increase in the price of the oil they send to the United States of three dollars a barrel. That, in and of itself, should be reason enough to deny them that pipeline. I mean you yahoos don't know jackshit about economics.

It's not a question of if. Yes, they want to ship more.

The 1,700 new miles of pipeline would offer two sections of expansion. First, a southern leg would connect Cushing, Oklahoma, where there is a current bottleneck of oil, with the Gulf Coast of Texas, where oil refineries abound. That leg went into operation in January 2014.

The southern leg of the Keystone XL ties into the existing Keystone pipeline that already runs to Canada, bringing up to 700,000 barrels of oil a day to refineries in Texas. At peak capacity, the pipeline will deliver 830,000 barrels of oil per day.

Keystone XL pipeline halted as Biden moves to cancel permit

The 1,700-mile (2,735-kilometer) pipeline was planned to carry roughly 800,000 barrels of oil a day from Alberta to the Texas Gulf Coast, passing through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma.

www.pbs.org

Well I don't give two shits what Canada wants. America first, right? Tell me, if the pipeline is built Americans pay more for gas, take on the environmental risk of pipeline leaks, the environmental damage of the refining process, and the only positive is a few thousand temporary jobs, how is that America first? Keystone has been about nothing but exporting diesel, period. Refineries begin ramping up their production capabilities almost ten years ago in expectation. Margins on diesel for export are twice that of gasoline for domestic consumption, it takes a fool to believe that Keystone would lower gasoline prices.

And what dumbass nation exports diesel? That makes no damn sense. It is a critical commodity that impacts the cost of almost everything else. Remember when diesel was cheaper than gasoline? Why you think it costs more now? EXPORTS. And how much more do you pay for everything from produce to cars because of the higher cost of diesel. America first my damn ass. Wake up. By the way, the United States is the world's biggest exporter of diesel fuel, helluva stupid.