Umm, do USMB Republicans understand that the Keystone pipeline will only create 35 permanent jobs?

[Star]

I'm saying it's not worth the risk for sending (nasty sludge) foreign oil down to the Gulf, to be sold on the Global Market. It's not worth the temporary jobs, and it's certainly not worth 35 permanent ones.

I'm saying it's not worth the risk for sending (nasty sludge) foreign oil down to the Gulf,

You mean the stuff that liberal billionaire, Warren Buffett, is currently shipping on his riskier train cars?
Some of his trains pass a few miles from my house.
Why do you allow him to commit this travesty?

So this issue for you hangs on whether the transporting entity is "liberal" or not?

Thanks for coming out.

So this issue for you hangs on whether the transporting entity is "liberal" or not?

No, the issue is that liberal idiots ignore that this oil is moving through the US, now, shipped in train cars by Warren Buffett.
Building the pipeline moves it more safely.

If "safe" is your criterion --- why bring up Warren Buffett's politics?

Having it both ways: Priceless.

Liberal whiners, whining about safety.
Too stupid to understand rail cars are more dangerous than pipelines?
Don't know Buffett owns the rail cars?
Don't know Buffett is liberal?
Liberal ignorance, wide and deep.
Pointing it out: Hilarious.

Are you saying you think a liberal bankrolled the Burger King inversion?
.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm saying it's not worth the risk for sending (nasty sludge) foreign oil down to the Gulf,

You mean the stuff that liberal billionaire, Warren Buffett, is currently shipping on his riskier train cars?
Some of his trains pass a few miles from my house.
Why do you allow him to commit this travesty?

So this issue for you hangs on whether the transporting entity is "liberal" or not?

Thanks for coming out.

So this issue for you hangs on whether the transporting entity is "liberal" or not?

No, the issue is that liberal idiots ignore that this oil is moving through the US, now, shipped in train cars by Warren Buffett.
Building the pipeline moves it more safely.

If "safe" is your criterion --- why bring up Warren Buffett's politics?

Having it both ways: Priceless.

Liberal whiners, whining about safety.
Too stupid to understand rail cars are more dangerous than pipelines?
Don't know Buffett owns the rail cars?
Don't know Buffett is liberal?
Liberal ignorance, wide and deep.
Pointing it out: Hilarious.

Are you saying you think a liberal bankrolled the Burger King inversion?
.

I guess he did.

 

[Star]

Why is the far left against jobs being created?

I like the idea of thousands or millions of jobs. 35 just aren't enough.

The Koch brothers stand to gain millions upon millions of dollars:


""""Based on data from the Alberta provincial energy department, corporations’ annual information forms, information from a mapping firm called GeoScout, data from a Calgary-based exploration services firm called Divestco Geomatics and interviews with industry analysts and executives, here is a list of individual companies’ net acreage lease holdings in oil sands:"""

●Cenovus Energy (Canada) 1.57 million* (includes rights to an air weapons range)

●Athabasca Oil Corp. (Canada) 1.56 million**

●Koch (U.S.) 1.12 million to 1.47 million***

●Canadian Natural Resources (Canada) 1 million*

●Suncor (Canada) 986,000****

Does Koch Industries hold most Canadian oil sands leases It s complicated. - The Washington Post

So what? Whether or not the Keystone XL is built all those companies will still make a fortune.

You are getting the crude no matter what method of transportation one chooses.

Rail, truck or pipeline that crude is flowing to the Gulf. Pick your poison.

Poison is an interesting choice of word - are you finally starting to wipe the tar from your mind's eye?
.

 

[Flopper]

Democrats are going to have a very difficult time explaining to their constituents why they said NO to 47,000 construction jobs that would have lasted an estimated (2 years), which is considered a long time for any construction job, from start to finish, while Obama is handing out 5 million green cards.

I imagine the pay back will be in 2016.

Voting against job creation sure didn't give the Republicans any problem when they voted against the simultaneous bill which saved or created 1.6 million jobs.

 

[Flopper]

Prove it wrong you dope.

I'm rehabilitating a 100 unit apartment complex in the Bronx and I have 70 people on site.

35 people for thousands of miles of pipeline?

Stop snorting the Commie KoolAid

The State Department's final environmental impact report earlier this year found the project would support 42,100 jobs, but it defined those jobs as lasting just one year. In other words, there would be only 21,050 jobs that last the entirety of the two-year construction period — and the majority of those are not construction jobs (there would be no more than 1,950 of those in each of the two years) but rather are "induced" by construction workers spending their earnings on goods and services in the area.

As far as permanent jobs to operate the pipeline, there would be a total of 35 of those, according to the State Department report.

So??even if true,what relevance does that have. I had 8 people building my house,now they are gone,guess I shouldn't have built it,the job only lasted 7 months.

There's a little more to it than that. I wish it were just about jobs. This has to do with property rights, and the fact that the nasty sludge will be going to the Gulf, then loaded onto tankers, to be sold at market value. It's not like we'll be getting it at a discounted rate. We will get very little in return. It's just not worth it.

We are capable of creating jobs!

So you know, that "Sludge" will still be shipped. Only thing is, the pipeline is the safest way to do it.

Do you really think that Canada will stop production without the pipeline? If so, why hasn't it stopped already?

Mark

The break even cost of production of oil from tar sand is about $72/barrel. Right now oil is going for about $76/barrel. Shipping the crude via a pipeline is a lot cheaper than other alternatives which is why it's particularly import now.

There is no way to know how safe the pipeline will be until it operates for years. The clean cost of tar sand oil is huge.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Democrats are going to have a very difficult time explaining to their constituents why they said NO to 47,000 construction jobs that would have lasted an estimated (2 years), which is considered a long time for any construction job, from start to finish, while Obama is handing out 5 million green cards.

I imagine the pay back will be in 2016.

Voting against job creation sure didn't give the Republicans any problem when they voted against the simultaneous bill which saved or created 1.6 million jobs.

Which imaginary bill would have done that?

 

[initforme]

If one drop of that oil is allowed to leave the country then we will have all been shamed by scuzzbucket big oil.

 

[Flopper]

Democrats are going to have a very difficult time explaining to their constituents why they said NO to 47,000 construction jobs that would have lasted an estimated (2 years), which is considered a long time for any construction job, from start to finish, while Obama is handing out 5 million green cards.

I imagine the pay back will be in 2016.

Voting against job creation sure didn't give the Republicans any problem when they voted against the simultaneous bill which saved or created 1.6 million jobs.

Which imaginary bill would have done that?

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Politico]

The plan is to turn it over to the government...that's when the number becomes 350,000.

Or millions depending on who you talk to. Good thing is Landrieu will have an employment opportunity.

 

[Skull Pilot]

All infrastructure building jobs are temporary. When the structure is built, the construction workers go home.

amazingly simple yet incomprehensible to the idiots here

 

[Skull Pilot]

Construction jobs are by definition temporary.

Any idiot knows that but you people are idiots of a particular kind aren't you?

So maybe we should just put the kibosh on ALL construction jobs because none of them are permanent.

Unfuckingbelievable.

What's "Unfuckingbelievable" is how the rightwinger/Republicans tried/trying to pull the wool over the American peoples eyes by touting KXL as an American jobs bill. Not even a half year ago the cowardly Speaker of the House said KXL would create 100,000 jobs, while TransCanada was claiming 20,000 jobs (at least TransCanada didn't say "American" jobs).

But now-----now on this thread, rightwing/Republican's are admitting that enabling the world to burn what many are calling the dirtiest oil in the world is not much of a jobs bill, nor is it an American energy independence bill - in fact, KXL does little, very little, for America except put our land and water at risk of contamination but-----but kochsuckers support it anyway - wtfiwwy?


John Boehner says Keystone XL pipeline would create 100,000 jobs
By Steve Contorno
June 26th, 2014

<snip>

Our ruling
Boehner said Obama’s "delay in approving Keystone is costing Americans more than 100,000 jobs." He was citing a study that experts said was "flawed" and the company in charge of the project, TransCanada, said was "no longer relevant." The State Department estimated a much lower amount, and TransCanada cited that study to PolitiFact.

We rate Boehner’s statement False.

"The nearly six-year delay in approving Keystone is costing Americans more than 100,000 jobs."
— John Boehner on Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 in an op-ed for "USA Today"

.​

It will create jobs here.

I never said how many.

To say that it won't create jobs or that only so called "permanent" jobs are all that matter is an outright lie.

 

[Publius1787]

CNN s Van Jones says Keystone pipeline only creates 35 permanent jobs PunditFact

Contrary To GOP Promises Keystone XL Pipeline Will Only Create 35 Permanent Jobs

Republicans and conservative Democrats have continuously pushed for this pipeline’s approval is due to the huge windfall it will create for oil companies, specifically the Koch Bros. A report completed last year shows that the Kochs stand to make $100 billion from the passage of the Keystone extension. That’s billion, not million.

Republicans can’t just go to the people and say that we need to make sure insanely rich billionaires need to be given an opportunity to become even more insanely wealthy, environmental impacts be damned. Of course not. Therefore, they need to go out and claim that the project will create tons of jobs, help the country’s economy and fulfill its energy needs. Or, in other words, lie. Lie through their teeth.

Fox News host Keystone pipeline would create tens of thousands of jobs PunditFact

Fox News host: Keystone pipeline would create 'tens of thousands of jobs'

As far as new jobs go, the State Department estimates the operation of the pipeline will only create 35 permanent, full-time jobs and 15 temporary contractors. The full-time workers would be "required for annual operations, including routine inspections, maintenance and repair." Some would work in a Nebraska field office.

The lack of many full-time positions makes sense, given that the project is to build a pipeline so that tar sands can travel without the need of rail cars or ships.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, there you have it. Maybe we are "misunderestimating" Republicans. Maybe they mean 35 permanent jobs and tens of thousands of jobs cleaning up the ******* mess.

Another huge GOP disaster looms on the horizon. Will this country never learn?

How many jobs are created in the US via a global increase in crude supply? Now get out your supply and demand curve graph paper and lets determine price class.

 

[tinydancer]

You crack me up. The article didn't say that. It said that was his claim based on his analysis of the State department report.

That's what I just said. I've done the same thing in the past, quoting the same number from the same source. That doesn't make it "my idea".

"35" is an absolute number. It doesn't need "analysis" -- it means "thirty-five", not "twenty -eight" or "forty seven thousand" or any other number.

The State Department report didn't include all the things I listed, it only included the team that directly oversees the pipeline. It's like measuring the size of a church based on the number of people who work in the church office.

That's because they're not relevant to the pipeline. You listed a bunch of people in refining and transporting the end product -- people who are already employed right now doing just that. They don't suddenly get defined as "new jobs" just because a raw material source changes.

So you don't grasp that if there is more oil, more people need to work to process it. Why doesn't that surprise me?

That processing (refining) already operates at max capacity. A fact noted over and over here in this thread as well as others. There is no work "added". All there is is overhead subtracted -- for the oil company. You can't put more water into a full glass.

Pogo. Last January the crude started flowing like crazy to Nederland and the refineries are thrilled to get it.

This was accomplished by the completion of the southern leg of XL.

I don't understand why you think the refineries don't want the crude?



"Gulf Coast Project Begins Delivering Crude Oil to Nederland, Texas

NEDERLAND, TEXAS--(Marketwired - Jan. 22, 2014) - TransCanada Corporation (TSX:TRP) (NYSE:TRP) (TransCanada) announced today that at approximately 10:45 a.m. CST on January, 22, 2014, the Gulf Coast Project began delivering crude oil on behalf of our customers to Texas refineries.

The completion of this US$2.3 billion crude oil pipeline provides a safe and direct connection between the important oil hub in Cushing, Oklahoma and delivery points on the U.S. Gulf Coast.

"This is a very important milestone for TransCanada, our shippers and Gulf Coast refiners who have been waiting for a pipeline to supply oil directly from Cushing," said Russ Girling, president and chief executive officer.

"This project is a critical, modern piece of American energy infrastructure that allows producers to safely connect growing production with the world's most efficient refiners on the U.S. Gulf Coast.

It also provides those American refineries the opportunity to use more of the crude oil produced in both Canada and the United States for decades to come."

Gulf Coast Project Begins Delivering Crude Oil to Nederland Texas

Hello, Canadian oil is "foreign" oil.

I just went thru all the posts you linked to in your reply. No mention that Canadian oil wasn't foreign oil so I don't understand your point.

 

[kaz]

That's what I just said. I've done the same thing in the past, quoting the same number from the same source. That doesn't make it "my idea".

"35" is an absolute number. It doesn't need "analysis" -- it means "thirty-five", not "twenty -eight" or "forty seven thousand" or any other number.

That's because they're not relevant to the pipeline. You listed a bunch of people in refining and transporting the end product -- people who are already employed right now doing just that. They don't suddenly get defined as "new jobs" just because a raw material source changes.

So you don't grasp that if there is more oil, more people need to work to process it. Why doesn't that surprise me?

That processing (refining) already operates at max capacity. A fact noted over and over here in this thread as well as others. There is no work "added". All there is is overhead subtracted -- for the oil company. You can't put more water into a full glass.

Pogo. Last January the crude started flowing like crazy to Nederland and the refineries are thrilled to get it.

This was accomplished by the completion of the southern leg of XL.

I don't understand why you think the refineries don't want the crude?



"Gulf Coast Project Begins Delivering Crude Oil to Nederland, Texas

NEDERLAND, TEXAS--(Marketwired - Jan. 22, 2014) - TransCanada Corporation (TSX:TRP) (NYSE:TRP) (TransCanada) announced today that at approximately 10:45 a.m. CST on January, 22, 2014, the Gulf Coast Project began delivering crude oil on behalf of our customers to Texas refineries.

The completion of this US$2.3 billion crude oil pipeline provides a safe and direct connection between the important oil hub in Cushing, Oklahoma and delivery points on the U.S. Gulf Coast.

"This is a very important milestone for TransCanada, our shippers and Gulf Coast refiners who have been waiting for a pipeline to supply oil directly from Cushing," said Russ Girling, president and chief executive officer.

"This project is a critical, modern piece of American energy infrastructure that allows producers to safely connect growing production with the world's most efficient refiners on the U.S. Gulf Coast.

It also provides those American refineries the opportunity to use more of the crude oil produced in both Canada and the United States for decades to come."

Gulf Coast Project Begins Delivering Crude Oil to Nederland Texas

Hello, Canadian oil is "foreign" oil.

I just went thru all the posts you linked to in your reply. No mention that Canadian oil wasn't foreign oil so I don't understand your point.

If dean actually learns anything he has to use it. I'm sure you can understand that given how infrequently it happens.

 

[rdean]

I think we should let Republicans have it. Right when they begin laying off tens of thousands, it will be time to vote. And even a tiny spill in America's bread basket and it's over. No way they will be able to lie about that. The emperor will have no clothes.

Construction workers know that their jobs are temporary. You don't have a clue about how the real world works do you?

One of my nephews is a crane operator, working on a pipeline (not KXL) in North Dakota. He earns about $10,000/mo. when he works, but because the jobs are temporary, he doesn't always work all month or every month, he's constantly running back and forth to visit his family (just shy of 1,000 miles one way). Because the jobs are not only temporary but transient - the result is, there is little to no housing and what restaurants there are, are packed 24/7. My nephew put it this way: "The pipeline is the only place in America where you can earn over $100K per year and still be sleeping in your truck eating off the McDonald's dollar menu". Hopefully, the Oklahoma welders you cite are living better than that?
.

That's strange. I did a search on "Crane Operators Salary in North Dakota". This is the kind of stuff I got:

Crane Operator jobs in North Dakota
Sort by: relevance - date
Salary Estimate

• $50,000+ (31)
• $80,000+ (1)

and

Company Wide!
Trustland Oilfield Services - New Town, ND 58763
$23 - $28 an hour
Crane Operators- $35 an hour. Operators- Wage DOE. Trustland Oilfield Services is hiring company wide!!...

And a bunch that were very similar.

divide 100,000 by 365 and you get 274 dollars a day.
divide 274 by 28 and you get 9.8 or nearly 10 hours a day, every day of the year to make 100,000

Just sayin'

Maybe his crane was "special". I don't know.

 

[rdean]

I'm rehabilitating a 100 unit apartment complex in the Bronx and I have 70 people on site.

35 people for thousands of miles of pipeline?

Stop snorting the Commie KoolAid

The State Department's final environmental impact report earlier this year found the project would support 42,100 jobs, but it defined those jobs as lasting just one year. In other words, there would be only 21,050 jobs that last the entirety of the two-year construction period — and the majority of those are not construction jobs (there would be no more than 1,950 of those in each of the two years) but rather are "induced" by construction workers spending their earnings on goods and services in the area.

As far as permanent jobs to operate the pipeline, there would be a total of 35 of those, according to the State Department report.

So??even if true,what relevance does that have. I had 8 people building my house,now they are gone,guess I shouldn't have built it,the job only lasted 7 months.

There's a little more to it than that. I wish it were just about jobs. This has to do with property rights, and the fact that the nasty sludge will be going to the Gulf, then loaded onto tankers, to be sold at market value. It's not like we'll be getting it at a discounted rate. We will get very little in return. It's just not worth it.

We are capable of creating jobs!

So you know, that "Sludge" will still be shipped. Only thing is, the pipeline is the safest way to do it.

Do you really think that Canada will stop production without the pipeline? If so, why hasn't it stopped already?

Mark

The break even cost of production of oil from tar sand is about $72/barrel. Right now oil is going for about $76/barrel. Shipping the crude via a pipeline is a lot cheaper than other alternatives which is why it's particularly import now.

There is no way to know how safe the pipeline will be until it operates for years. The clean cost of tar sand oil is huge.

Actually, you can kind of guess based on TransCanada's record:

What the Keystone XL pipeline would mean for the US - What is TransCanada s safety record - CSMonitor.com

That's the right wing conservative Christian Science Monitor which tends to go conservative and even they say:

"The State Department estimates that the maximum the Keystone XL could potentially spill would be 2.8 million gallons along an area of 1.7 miles. By comparison, the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill released 210 million gallons into the environment."

It give the impression of only 2.8 million gallons. Then says over 1.7 miles. Only the pipeline is how long? Over a thousand miles?

And look at the date of the Article. Nov of 2011.

Then look at this one. Jul of 2011. The conservative site doesn't even mention the 840,000 gallons of toxic tar sands dumped into the Kalamazoo River. Why is that?

Kalamazoo one year later Anatomy of a tar sands spill Anthony Swift s Blog Switchboard from NRDC

And from the article:

A year-long effort to clean up the largest tar sands spill in U.S. history has established one thing – raw tar sands crude is unlike anything we’ve had in our pipelines before. Last year, Enbridge’s Lakehead pipeline spilled over 840,000 gallons of raw tar sands into the Kalamazoo River watershed. Since then, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been struggling to deal with the new challenges that a tar sands spill present. EPA originally set a September 2010 deadline to clean up the spill. Ten months later, EPA officials now say that a full cleanup could take years. The Kalamazoo spill is a stark warning of the risks that TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline poses to the Yellowstone River, the Ogallala Aquifer and the nearly two thousand other rivers, streams and water bodies that it would cross.

That's what Republicans are willing to take the chance on. After all, they protected BP over America. So much for patriotism.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I think we should let Republicans have it. Right when they begin laying off tens of thousands, it will be time to vote. And even a tiny spill in America's bread basket and it's over. No way they will be able to lie about that. The emperor will have no clothes.

Construction workers know that their jobs are temporary. You don't have a clue about how the real world works do you?

One of my nephews is a crane operator, working on a pipeline (not KXL) in North Dakota. He earns about $10,000/mo. when he works, but because the jobs are temporary, he doesn't always work all month or every month, he's constantly running back and forth to visit his family (just shy of 1,000 miles one way). Because the jobs are not only temporary but transient - the result is, there is little to no housing and what restaurants there are, are packed 24/7. My nephew put it this way: "The pipeline is the only place in America where you can earn over $100K per year and still be sleeping in your truck eating off the McDonald's dollar menu". Hopefully, the Oklahoma welders you cite are living better than that?
.

That's strange. I did a search on "Crane Operators Salary in North Dakota". This is the kind of stuff I got:

Crane Operator jobs in North Dakota
Sort by: relevance - date
Salary Estimate

• $50,000+ (31)
• $80,000+ (1)

and

Company Wide!
Trustland Oilfield Services - New Town, ND 58763
$23 - $28 an hour
Crane Operators- $35 an hour. Operators- Wage DOE. Trustland Oilfield Services is hiring company wide!!...

And a bunch that were very similar.

divide 100,000 by 365 and you get 274 dollars a day.
divide 274 by 28 and you get 9.8 or nearly 10 hours a day, every day of the year to make 100,000

Just sayin'

Maybe his crane was "special". I don't know.

divide 100,000 by 365 and you get 274 dollars a day.
divide 274 by 28 and you get 9.8 or nearly 10 hours a day, every day of the year to make 100,000

Or you work 12 hours a day, five days a week. 60 hours a week, 20 hours is overtime, time and a half.
Paid 70 hours, $1960 a week or $101,920 a year.
Just sayin'

 

[kaz]

I think we should let Republicans have it. Right when they begin laying off tens of thousands, it will be time to vote. And even a tiny spill in America's bread basket and it's over. No way they will be able to lie about that. The emperor will have no clothes.

Construction workers know that their jobs are temporary. You don't have a clue about how the real world works do you?

One of my nephews is a crane operator, working on a pipeline (not KXL) in North Dakota. He earns about $10,000/mo. when he works, but because the jobs are temporary, he doesn't always work all month or every month, he's constantly running back and forth to visit his family (just shy of 1,000 miles one way). Because the jobs are not only temporary but transient - the result is, there is little to no housing and what restaurants there are, are packed 24/7. My nephew put it this way: "The pipeline is the only place in America where you can earn over $100K per year and still be sleeping in your truck eating off the McDonald's dollar menu". Hopefully, the Oklahoma welders you cite are living better than that?
.

That's strange. I did a search on "Crane Operators Salary in North Dakota". This is the kind of stuff I got:

Crane Operator jobs in North Dakota
Sort by: relevance - date
Salary Estimate

• $50,000+ (31)
• $80,000+ (1)

and

Company Wide!
Trustland Oilfield Services - New Town, ND 58763
$23 - $28 an hour
Crane Operators- $35 an hour. Operators- Wage DOE. Trustland Oilfield Services is hiring company wide!!...

And a bunch that were very similar.

divide 100,000 by 365 and you get 274 dollars a day.
divide 274 by 28 and you get 9.8 or nearly 10 hours a day, every day of the year to make 100,000

Just sayin'

Maybe his crane was "special". I don't know.

You are special. You clearly don't know enough about that particular situation to have any informed opinion. The first thing you need to learn in life is what you don't know. And what you don't know is mind boggling, wow, there is so much of it.

 

[kaz]

That's what Republicans are willing to take the chance on.

When you oppose every energy initiative, you don't get to claim this. When you oppose importing oil, offshore drilling, horizontal fracking, building refineries, drilling in Alaska, expanding oil fields and then the Keystone pipeline, it's clear that all you're going to do is oppose it, so this isn't why you're against it. You would be no matter what. Oh, and Democrats are responsible for lower oil prices. And Saigon asks why people think you people are stupid. LOL.

After all, they protected BP over America. So much for patriotism.

What a disingenuous hack you are.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The State Department's final environmental impact report earlier this year found the project would support 42,100 jobs, but it defined those jobs as lasting just one year. In other words, there would be only 21,050 jobs that last the entirety of the two-year construction period — and the majority of those are not construction jobs (there would be no more than 1,950 of those in each of the two years) but rather are "induced" by construction workers spending their earnings on goods and services in the area.

As far as permanent jobs to operate the pipeline, there would be a total of 35 of those, according to the State Department report.

So??even if true,what relevance does that have. I had 8 people building my house,now they are gone,guess I shouldn't have built it,the job only lasted 7 months.

There's a little more to it than that. I wish it were just about jobs. This has to do with property rights, and the fact that the nasty sludge will be going to the Gulf, then loaded onto tankers, to be sold at market value. It's not like we'll be getting it at a discounted rate. We will get very little in return. It's just not worth it.

We are capable of creating jobs!

So you know, that "Sludge" will still be shipped. Only thing is, the pipeline is the safest way to do it.

Do you really think that Canada will stop production without the pipeline? If so, why hasn't it stopped already?

Mark

The break even cost of production of oil from tar sand is about $72/barrel. Right now oil is going for about $76/barrel. Shipping the crude via a pipeline is a lot cheaper than other alternatives which is why it's particularly import now.

There is no way to know how safe the pipeline will be until it operates for years. The clean cost of tar sand oil is huge.

Actually, you can kind of guess based on TransCanada's record:

What the Keystone XL pipeline would mean for the US - What is TransCanada s safety record - CSMonitor.com

That's the right wing conservative Christian Science Monitor which tends to go conservative and even they say:

"The State Department estimates that the maximum the Keystone XL could potentially spill would be 2.8 million gallons along an area of 1.7 miles. By comparison, the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill released 210 million gallons into the environment."

It give the impression of only 2.8 million gallons. Then says over 1.7 miles. Only the pipeline is how long? Over a thousand miles?

And look at the date of the Article. Nov of 2011.

Then look at this one. Jul of 2011. The conservative site doesn't even mention the 840,000 gallons of toxic tar sands dumped into the Kalamazoo River. Why is that?

Kalamazoo one year later Anatomy of a tar sands spill Anthony Swift s Blog Switchboard from NRDC

And from the article:

A year-long effort to clean up the largest tar sands spill in U.S. history has established one thing – raw tar sands crude is unlike anything we’ve had in our pipelines before. Last year, Enbridge’s Lakehead pipeline spilled over 840,000 gallons of raw tar sands into the Kalamazoo River watershed. Since then, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been struggling to deal with the new challenges that a tar sands spill present. EPA originally set a September 2010 deadline to clean up the spill. Ten months later, EPA officials now say that a full cleanup could take years. The Kalamazoo spill is a stark warning of the risks that TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline poses to the Yellowstone River, the Ogallala Aquifer and the nearly two thousand other rivers, streams and water bodies that it would cross.

That's what Republicans are willing to take the chance on. After all, they protected BP over America. So much for patriotism.

It could potentially?

IOW meaningless speculation.