Ask Me Help Desk - Keystone XL Pipeline

well there you have it . The Canadians got tired of waiting for the waffling emperor and decided to instead approve the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline to their west coast. This is a half year since Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird said "the time for Keystone is now.
Who is really driving this decision ? Warren Buffet ,who's trains bring the crude from the Dakotas to the refineries ? Or Tom Steyer ,Dem donor who's fortune is invested in alt energy ?
So now instead of heading to American refineries ,for Americans to produce ,the Canadian crude will ship to Asia for refining. That's 42,000 jobs lost between construction and production according to the emperor's own State Dept.

Satan really does live in a White House.

Keystone Pipeline Jobs - How Many Would Be Created

Pipe Dreams: How Many Jobs Will Be Created By Keystone XL? - Forbes

Keystone XL refineries already exporting 60 percent of their gasoline - The Price of Oil

Quote:

Satan really does live in a White House.

There is no such thing as satan, it's a made-up construct to keep people frightened.

That's not the opinion of Iran they see the nation of USA as satan but back to the OP americans should be glad of this decision it strikes an important blow for the environment

nonsense . The oil will be refined with less controls .

Tal ,it's your emperor's State Dept that says the pipeline creates 42,000 jobs. All you envirowackos are Luddites .

yes but it won't be piped through sensitive environmental areas and those areas won't be distrubed by pipeline construction. Meanwhile the pristine rockies will suffer some degregation but as noone lives there noone will see it which is much like the rest of Canada. Now I know there is a certain senselessness in the decision since oil is already exported from this source to the US by pipeline but Canada is in charge of its own destiny. As far as the questions of emissions at the refinery, in keeping with your other policies in pollution exportation where would you like them to be emitted?

Quote:

yes but it won't be piped through sensitive environmental areas and those areas won't be distrubed by pipeline construction

instead it's transported by rail . You think that's safer ? This was a month ago.
Virginia train crash and explosion sends crude oil spilling into James River

Either way ,the oil will still be transported by pipeline through environmentally sensitive areas . But now it will be shipped as crude to be refined elsewhere.

exactly, it was being shipped hundreds even thousands of miles to be refined then shipped out, now it will be piped hundreds of miles then shipped out. I really don't see the difference expect the US doesn't get to wet its beak. You are complaining you lost some business, that's what procrastination will do and it seems to me that obstructionism can work both ways, who would have thought? Either way it will get the oil off US rail so you have a win, reduced risk for you, reduced environmental problems for you and yet you are not happy

I am unhappy with the emperor who is hostile to jobs because he is catering to a small extremist wacko constituency . This decision will burn his party ;a party that used to care about the working person.

Neither party cares about you, haven't you figured that out yet? They promise you the moon during the election cycle then once in they cater to the corporate/special interest groups that line their pockets. This has been going on for decades.

yeah that's always the last line of defense here .....' both sides do it'. But unlike the libs here ;I take on both parties

Quote:

yeah that's always the last line of defense here .....' both sides do it'.

No that's your line of defense. My point is that your efforts should be better spent trying to change that system.

Quote:

;I take on both parties

LOL, no you don't. You're a fanatical right-winger that only seeks to besmirch all that is not ultra-conservative.

when the Repubics act like big government libs I take them on. The libs here never criticize their own. They are a bunch of cheerleading Obots.

This place a big conservative echo chamber. That's why you like it here.

this gets more seriel as time goew by Tom critising the conservatives

wrong again clete . Did not say I criticize conservatives . But you have seen me take on Republican polices frequently .

I think you are more flexible, and pragmatic than the average conservative Tom. There is hope for you. I suspect your free market ideology makes you forget the human equation in your stated positions though. I just feel the system is rigged in many unfair ways, and was designed to be from the start.

the human equation is all I'm thinking of . The pipeline allows us to EXPORT oil . That jobs for humans and it also helps the trade balance which also benefits humans .

Tom pragmatic? he just flip flops now and again

It's not a matter of pragmatism . I'm true to my convictions . If the Repubics do the right thing I'm on board . But they don't always do so. Too often they are big government Democrat lite. It makes sense from their point of view. They are dependent on the system for their perpetual employment in the beltway . I say term limit the whole group of them.

No Tom term limit everybody, kick those do nothing reps out and kick those do nothing senators out along with them, it's probable you have reached the point where you can't afford to have a President for more than one term too

Keystone related, the congress both dem and repubs are joining forces against the president's trade policies.

Democrats and Republicans pick a trade fight with Obama. | Trade Reform: News and Opinion on Trade and the EconomyTrade Reform: News and Opinion on Trade and the Economy

This is huge folks, bigger than a pipeline. And also brewing below the radar,

http://www.tradereform.org/2014/06/s...cy-provisions/

Now we are getting down to the real stuff.

We ship gas in pipe lines all over the Untied States. Anyone ever discussed building the refineries in the Dakotas and shipping the gas from there?

why don't they build a refinery in canada

Am I wrong in my assumption that there isn't any oil in the Balkans in the Dakotas? My brother-in-law has been out there somewhere running at least 3 trucks 24/7 and is just one of many. Please correct me if my assumption is wrong. My feeling is if the oil we have here is not going to serve the US and Canadian populations, then why make the pipeline. The US citizens are tired of being the "elevator people" -promised the elevator and ending up with the shaft. Let me see now, is it NAFTA or SHAFTA? Some of the Arab countries pay a fraction for the cost of their oil and gas that we do. Imagine what $1.50 a gallon gas and fuel would do for our own economy. I can't run the numbers for you, but I suspect it would have a larger affect than the jobs building the pipeline would and for all sections of the country, not the affected states and a little spill over. Why make just the Texans rich? I don't have an issue with building the pipeline, but let's get the benefits of the risk involved. Let's go for the elevator this time around.

not easy to build new refineries in the US with all the regulations .
But a 200,000 bbl /day refinery broke ground in N Dakota last year .Before this one ,the last new refinery built to do 100,000 bbl /day was in 1977 . Some of the old refineries have been upgraded ;and a lesser capacity refinery was completed in Wyoming in 2008 . But as of today ,there are only 143 refineries operating in the US . When the Dems talk of infrastructure investment though you never hear them mention the need to increase refining capacity . Instead ,they are now considering exporting crude instead of refining it here . I'm sure all those foreign refineries have the safe guards that US refineries have .

Quote:

Imagine what $1.50 a gallon gas and fuel would do for our own economy. I can't run the numbers for you, but I suspect it would have a larger affect than the jobs building the pipeline would and for all sections of the country,

100% correct . Our economic growth would double with lower energy costs .

However ,it is not just a supply and demand issue . A major part of our costs are tied to loose monetary polices. When the dollar is devalued to the value of monopoly money ,there has to be an inflationary affect.

I agree with you there. I'll be blunt. The big boys, Democrats and Republicans don't really give a %$#@ about you, me and the rest of the general population. The 6 figure paycheck that we provide doesn't even pay the rent for most of them.

I like blunt and agree that both of the parties in power suck. The only difference between them is that the Repubs think that they would be more efficient managers of the nanny state . But both of them live and die in support of big government .

My good old dad always told me to follow the money. It takes a billion dollars to elect a president and almost that much to the guy who lost. If that doesn't put out an odor you can't neglect, then I guess my farts don't stink either.

If I didn't care about this country, I would probably do a favor or two for a group of guys who put up a billion dollars to make me famous(and rich). I might even be inclined to let one or two of them be in my cabinet. Of course if you can't afford the billion, I will let my sweetheart give you a tour and a free nights stay at the old white mansion for a quality donation. IF I get a $100,000 for speaking at your university, I might be persuaded to get the IRS off your back in the deal providing you teach my agenda as the truth. Of Course I would never hold a grudge and sig my minions after you for not agreeing with me, why that would be treasonous and surely unethical. By the way, what does unethical mean? I never learned that term at Harvard. They told me it is a term for the little people and not to worry about it.

The meaning of the words liars and traitors need to be modified in Webster's big book, otherwise we would be jailing a lot of important people. Now we can't put billionaires in jail can we?

High School Civics, 1965 home work.
Oh yeah, the word unethical is the term the white house press secretary has to know forward and backward just in case there is an intelligent little person listening to his spew he can dispel any doubt and cast disparity on the opposition. Sure is good word though. I wrote it down once, but the dog ate my homework! That's the truth and I am sticking to it.

Hey guys stop griping and recognise you brought this on yourselves, you wanted to tell us all about free trade and level playing fields and where did this get you, the least cost option, which for the uninformed, and the great unwashed, means that people in underdeveloped countries get all the new refineries and to make all those great gadgets for the rest of us lazy loafers. You can blame your politicians all you want but you don't stop buying cheap shoddy goods from Asia.

Fact is; you did drink the Koolaid

having crude refined overseas does nothing to help the consumer cost of energy . In fact ,just the opposite .But even more important ;energy independence is a national security matter . And if we also end up being a net exporter of refined petroleum then it is also good for the trade balance. There is no down side to domestic refining ;unless you are an enviro-wacko.

tell it to the oil companies, Tom you see where rampant capitalism gets you, your government by international treaty cannot enforce domestic refining or give preference to it