you can not drill your way out of this problem. oil is a finite resource, as it become more scare and demand increases, prices go up. thus renewable technologies such as solar, wind and hydropower must be explored. since youre referring the keystone pipeline, the southern section is actually being build. Obama never said he wouldnt approve the north section, but when the GOP push for an answer on a condensed timetable he said no. since the people of the state of nebraska (a GOP controlled state btw) said that it could have a negative affect on a huge aquifer. now, keystone is free to resubmit their application showing the route as well as the environmental impact, but it needs to be studied. look up all the oil spill associated with tar sands pipeline and the disasters is has caused to the environment. a little research and reading comprehension could do you well. i havent seen any stories or articles stating building the pipeline would increase prices at the pump, but it wouldnt do much to lower them either, at least in the short term. if canada really want to build the pipeline the shorter route is actually west to the pacific, but environmentalists in canada are worried about the environmental impact to the ecosystem and nixed that idea. hmmmm i wonder why
Oh my GAWD. There's possibly two things happening here. Either this was written by a third grader (which I'm leaning more towards given the mastery of spelling, punctuation, and the English language) or you're making it up as you go along. Given TruthMatters and rdean's threads, this is certainly not out of the realm of possibility for those on the left. You should NEVER regurgitate information concerning an industry you know NOTHING about. Especially when you get that information from Salon.com, Think Progress, or the Daily Kos. Let's examine what's wrong with just the above reply regarding energy.
The southern half of the Keystone pipeline is NOT BEING BUILT. There are currently two proposals on the board. The first is from Cushing, OK to Houston. It is called the Wrangler pipeline and has a capacity of approx. 800,000 barrels of oil a day. Two American companies, Enterprise Products Partners LP and Enbridge Inc are partnered up to work on that project. TransCanada Corp. and Magellan Midstream Partners' Longhorn pipeline would bypass Cushing and bring oil from revived oil fields in west Texas to Houston. It's capacity is around 225,000 barrels a day. Since you heard the name of TransCanada Corp (the proponents of the Keystone pipeline) here's where you got confused. But let's remember that the Keystone pipeline would bring oil from the tar sands in Canada to the refineries on the gulf coast. Since Barry and his screw-ups have no input here, look to the states of Oklahoma and Texas to okay both pipelines. Thank God. But of course, if you buy the crap I have seen on this website from the left, look for prices at the pump to increase after those two pipelines are built (insert heavy sarcasm).
Barry and his people (who had NO thought of approving the Keystone pipeline to appease the environ-wackos on the left) had THREE YEARS to study the pipeline. When the governor of Nebraska asked TransCanada to reroute the pipeline, there was no problem. Barry still doesn't like it, he won't like it, and he will NEVER authorize it's construction because he wants to keep the tree-huggers happy.
There have been three ruptures of pipelines over the past couple years that have involved tar sands oil. One in North Dakota, one in Michigan and one in Colorado. The one in Michigan was the worst with almost 800,000 gallons spilled. At room temperature, the tar sands oil is almost solid. To move it along current pipelines, you have to add flamable liquids to the mix. The current pipelines were not built to carry such a mixture and there is thought that the corrosiveness of the oil is creating these incidents. You need to strengthen the lines designed to carry this crude. Otherwise, you're going to have these issues over and over again. The Keystone XL will be built with this mixture in mind.
And lastly, I have to absolutely LAUGH at your last couple of sentences. You're absolutely right, the shortest route for Canada and the one that would keep the oil in Canada, would be west to the pacific ocean. But to think that Canadian environmentalists nixed that idea is ridiculous. Of the 60,000 MILES of pipeline currently under the United States, how many miles carrying CRUDE OIL does the United States and Canada have that travels east and west across the rocky mountains? I can answer that: NONE. To lay a pipeline from the plains to the west coast, going up 15,000 feet would require a pumping station about every 1,000 or so yards. Too expensive. That is why tankers still go through the Panama Canal carrying refined products from the gulf coast to the west coast.
You know, off and on I've been involved somewhat with the oil and gas industry in this country for over 35 years. Thanks to fracking, I've opened up six old wells on my ranch. They don't produce much, but they do produce a little. I am amazed at the absolute LACK OF INTELLIGENCE and KNOWLEDGE that I read on this website and the crap that spews from peoples mouths when they read something on some far left website. You're little blurb is a case in point.
Now go sit down so the grown ups can decide what to do to save this country... You can come back when you learn how to type and what is actually happening.
ohhh so those Canadian environmentalists that dont exist didnt say this:
"Canadian environmentalists are voicing similar concerns about the alternative route. The Toronto Star reports that the western route faces fierce opposition from environmentalists in Canada who say that pipeline leaks or a tanker spill would endanger some of the world's most pristine forests and coastal areas and that the proposal "has already galvanized unprecedented concern in the green movement."
Canada seeks alternative route for Keystone XL pipeline
"Fear of pipeline leaks or a tanker spill that would foul some of the world’s most pristine forests and coastal areas has already galvanized unprecedented concern in the green movement, with some groups calling it the “defining environmental battle” of modern times. The army of opponents includes environmentalists from around North America, more than 100 aboriginal groups and thousands of other B.C. citizens. Star power will also be brought into play from the likes of Robert Redford and Leonardo DiCaprio."
"This outpouring of interest in the hearings was partly facilitated by green activists, who used social media to help sign up people to testify. The Victoria-based Dogwood Initiative alone takes credit for facilitating testimony by 1,600 of the 4,000-plus people who are stepping forward to comment on the proposed pipeline."
Canada News: Titanic clash looms over proposed Northern Gateway pipeline - thestar.com
if youve been involved in the oil and gas industry as long as you claim, then you would know that most oil pipeline are in fact made from 40' sections of steel and either bolted or welded together at the joints. some of these pipes run above ground, some run below ground. it is at these joints that failures most commonly happen due to erosion of the bolts and gaskets or erosion of the weld.
here are also examples of what can happen due to tar sands spills.
Canada seeks alternative route for Keystone XL pipeline
"ItÂ’s been like this since last July 25, when more than 800,000 gallons of crude spilled from a pipeline into a creek that feeds the Kalamazoo River, about 100 miles upriver from Lake Michigan. The EPA ranks it as the largest spill in Midwestern history, but even so, officials say that oil from a typical disaster of that size would have been cleaned up long ago: skimmed, soaked, and vacuumed from the surface.
But this was no typical oil spill. The pipeline owned by the Canadian company Enbridge carried mostly heavy, viscous crude from tar sands fields in Alberta, Canada, bound for Midwestern refineries. Raw tar sands oil, or bitumen, is so thick that it has to be mixed with a thinning compound, or diluent -- a highly volatile derivative of natural gas that includes large amounts of benzene and other toxic chemicals -- in order to make it liquid enough to pump through pipelines."
if you actually knew a lot of oil and gas industry as you claim, then you would know the tar sand are not piped in solid form, they are in fact mixed with chemical (bitumen) to make it more viscous so that it in fact can be transported through pipes. you can not transmit a solid through a pipe without a medium with which to assist it. or did they not teach you that during your tenure?
maybe you should go back to school and work on the education you claim to have. you can obviously see that you have no clue what you are talking about, as much as you would like to think so.
