The Keystone pipeline would not require a dime of stimulus funding. All it needed was Obama's approval to be built. I suggest that it would lower the price of oil. It is a lot cheaper and safer to move oil in a pipeline than by the railroad tankers that are owned by a billionaire contributer to the Obama campaign.
It would actually RAISE the price of oil in the US by diverting the tar sand from mid-west refineries that could only be sold in the US to the gulf where it can be exported and sold on the world market. Less oil supplies sold in the US means higher prices in the US, exactly what the GOP and Canada want.
I noticed you didn't mention stimulus money.
The few refineries in the midwest by my estimate need less than 10% of the crude coming from tar sands and the billionaire that donates to Obama and owns the railroad and oil tank cars could easily supply the much shorter routes.
It is a lot closer to Illinois or Indiana from North Dakota or Canada than to Texas or Louisiana. The savings in transportation costs would offset some of the cost.
You're still missing the economic argument here.
The problem for the extraction companies is that they could produce large amounts of oil, but it couldn't be taken to market efficiently.
So, as economics dictates, when there is large volume prices are lower. That is why oil prices in the US Midwest were low. And, that is the problem the Keystone pipeline solves.
Again, the ENTIRE reason for the pipeline is to get the high volume to the Gulf coast where it is then available on the world market - which means the extraction companies get to ask the world market price and make a LOT more money due to the higher price. They then don't have to sell to the US Midwest refineries at the lower price.
The economic stimulus of having some temporary pipeline building jobs is a temporary sidelight. Rail doesn't satisfy the extraction companies, because it isn't high enough volume to maximize their profits.
Finally, Canadians don't want the pipeline in Canada, because of the environmental risk - THEY want it in America, rather than going to the Pacific (through enlarging the pipeline they have that goes to British Columbia).
Keystone: US citizens pay more money for oil and its products. US environment is at risk instead of Canada's environment. And, extraction companies (probably mostly in Canada) make higher profits.
What's not to like - Eh?
