Rejection of Keystone XL not yet secured.
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,388
The latest news on Keyston XL from 350.org:
http://www.350.org/en/about/blogs/direc ... eystone-xl
Here's the email that Bill McKibben just sent to US 350.org supporters who have been working on Keystone XL:
Just in case you thought there was anything subtle about the Keystone battle, you need to hear what the president of the American Petroleum Institute -- the oil industry's #1 front group -- said yesterday: if the President doesn’t approve the project there will “huge political consequences.”
That’s as direct a threat as you’re ever going to hear in DC, and it shows just how mad you made the oil industry last year by exposing Keystone for the climate-killing danger it is. And the oil industry can obviously make good on their threats -- they’ve got all the money on earth, and thanks to Citizens United they can use it without restriction in our elections. They’re not used to ever losing.
So far the Obama administration is standing firm in the face of Big Oil's bullying -- the White House made it completely clear last month that if the oil industry and its harem in Congress forced a speeded-up review, it would lead to an outright rejection of the permit for the pipeline. We expect they’ll keep their word.
http://www.350.org/en/about/blogs/direc ... eystone-xl
Here's the email that Bill McKibben just sent to US 350.org supporters who have been working on Keystone XL:
Just in case you thought there was anything subtle about the Keystone battle, you need to hear what the president of the American Petroleum Institute -- the oil industry's #1 front group -- said yesterday: if the President doesn’t approve the project there will “huge political consequences.”
That’s as direct a threat as you’re ever going to hear in DC, and it shows just how mad you made the oil industry last year by exposing Keystone for the climate-killing danger it is. And the oil industry can obviously make good on their threats -- they’ve got all the money on earth, and thanks to Citizens United they can use it without restriction in our elections. They’re not used to ever losing.
So far the Obama administration is standing firm in the face of Big Oil's bullying -- the White House made it completely clear last month that if the oil industry and its harem in Congress forced a speeded-up review, it would lead to an outright rejection of the permit for the pipeline. We expect they’ll keep their word.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
"Try to not spook the horse."
-Neil Young
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Proof that Big Oil is more powerful than leaders in government. We'll see what happens... I don't know about you Brian, but I see Obama being forced to cower because the sad truth is that no president has more power than the sickening fossil fuel industry...either that or no one has the balls to do anything about them. I certainly hope I wrong. What do you think he'll do?
Both suggestions seem likely, Jeanwah but if I had to guess, I'd say it's the former. My feeling is the President would like to oppose the Keystone XL and I do believe if enough people voice opposition to it* that it might get stopped... which is what initially appeared to be the case. Hoping for the best!
*By the way, this can easily be done through the link provided above!
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I gotta go back a read more on this.
If I was without a job right now, I would be getting some welding training as quickly as possible. Pipefitters and welders are going to make serious bank when this gets pushed through.
I'm not for or against it, but that is my realistic take.
Another fallacy being promoted is the idea that the Keystone XL pipeline will supply more oil to the US (a bad idea anyway compared with developing clean energy). Here are two links that discuss that:
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswif ... s_pip.html
This reads, in part:
One of the most important facts that is missing in the national debate surrounding the proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is this – Keystone XL will not bring any more oil into the United State for decades to come. Canada doesn’t have nearly enough oil to fill existing pipelines going to the United States. However, existing Canadian oil pipelines all go to the Midwest, where the only buyer for their crude is the United States. Keystone XL would divert Canadian oil from refineries in the Midwest to the Gulf Coast where it can be refined and exported. Many of these refineries are in Foriegn Trade Zones where oil may be exported to international buyers without paying U.S. taxes. And that is exactly what Valero, one of the largest potential buyers of Keystone XL's oil, has told its investors it will do. The idea that Keystone XL will improve U.S. oil supply is a documented scam being played on the American people by Big Oil and its friends in Washington DC.
and this video (thank you T.):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9C-AJ6ZNVw
And this link regarding CO2 in our atmosphere:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... t-methane/
which concludes:
Could methane be a point of no return?
Actually, releasing CO2 is a point of no return if anything is. The only way back to a natural climate in anything like our lifetimes would be to anthropogenically extract CO2 from the atmosphere. The CO2 that has been absorbed into the oceans would degas back to the atmosphere to some extent, so we’d have to clean that up too. And if hydrates or peats contributed some extra carbon into the mix, that would also have to be part of the bargain, like paying interest on a loan.
Conclusion
It’s the CO2, friend.
The only ones to benefit (and even then, only on the short-term) from the Keystone XL pipeline are big oil companies. Continued reliance on fossil fuels is bad for us, bad for the planet.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
The project will go through. My take is to make an opportunity out of it if you are able-bodied and jobless.
Why not support jobs in the renewable/clean energy industry instead? The opportunities there are huge, more varied, longer lasting and the result of that kind of work is good for us and our planet rather than self-destructive.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Tell us more. What's new in renewable energy? How can we get involved?
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=10411%3Cbr
Notice one wise responder states, "I would just add that the bottom line of ALL these speculative looks at the various potential “nasty surprises” that may be in store, is to simply reinforce the urgency of rapidly phasing out ALL anthropogenic GHG emissions as quickly as possible. There is, after all, little else that we can do about the problem anyway."
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Great point! :thumbup:
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Please explain where these "renewable energy" jobs are.
Heard Solyndra wasn't really hiring anymore...
I'm surprised that solar power has taken so long to advance. We have a giant burning orb in the sky and we have failed to take advantage of it.
Im still waitin for the cold fusion idea to come thru- like in that movie The Saint.
Until then, I will take wonderful, plentiful oil, 100,000 jobs, and the pipeline!!
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-set-reject-keystone-oil-pipeline-sources-165859308.html
It didn't happen yet.
Energy independence.
Naw... No upside here.
Im glad Obama cancelled it- something else to hammer him on in the general election...
I see it's now been updated.
He had to do this because environmentalists vote for him and if he loses them, well...
This unfortunately is all about votes, but thankfully it is definitely in the right direction for the planet. Politics suck anyway, at least something gains something out of this, if not only temporarily.
Please find me a reputable source that states that the pipeline will produce 100,000 jobs.
If you can't find a reputable source, then please keep quiet.
The state department denied a permit for the 1,600-mile (2,700km) Keystone XL pipeline, saying it had insufficient time to review the plans.
The project has been delayed amid objections by environmental groups and the US state of Nebraska.
At the end of 2011, Republicans forced a final decision on the plan within 60 days during a legislative standoff.
US President Barack Obama said he was disappointed that the deadline set by Republicans in Congress had caused the state department to reject the project before a full study could be undertaken.
"This announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the state department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project and protect the American people."
But Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper spoke to Mr Obama and expressed his "profound disappointment" with the decision, a spokesman said.
The crude oil pipeline would run from western Canada to oil refineries on the Texas coast.
Jobs at stake
The state department added that Wednesday's recommendation not to proceed with the current proposal would not preclude TransCanada, the developer, from submitting a new route for the pipeline.
Officials said that any new plan that was broadly similar to the rejected proposal could be processed more quickly, but it would take between 12 to 18 months to complete a full review.
Keystone XL has been approved by Canada and is supported by US Republicans who say it would create much-needed jobs and improve prospects for US energy independence.
The Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner, criticised the Obama administration for failing to give the green light to a project that would have created "hundreds of thousands of jobs".
"The president's policies are making the economy worse, not better," he said, adding that the pipeline would be good for the country. Mr Boehner pledged that the fight was not over.
Republican Congressman Fred Upton said he has requested that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testify before a House committee.
The oil industry has estimated the project would create 20,000 jobs, although the state department and some independent studies suggest a lower figure of 6,000 jobs.
Carbon emissions
Environmental groups and the US state of Nebraska expressed concerns that the pipeline could contaminate a major aquifer on its route.
There are also concerns about carbon emissions from oil sands production in Alberta, a western Canadian province.
The legislature of Nebraska passed a measure requiring state approval of any route before TransCanada could start construction.
The pipeline would also pass through the US states of Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma.
The White House had tried to postpone a final decision on the project until after the 2012 presidential election.
But during a congressional impasse on a payroll tax holiday in December, Republicans forced the Obama administration to agree to make a decision on the pipeline within two months.
The US state department, however, said this would not be enough time to carry out the legally required environmental studies needed to approve the project.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
From an environmental standpoint, it's great that the Nebraska aquifer is spared, but in reality the pollution implications are just as real as if the project was approved. It will just take a little bit longer.
(Kind of joking but really, despite all the in-fighting, AMT really does provide an interesting source of information! We should pat ourselves on the back for that.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
tough for me to bash it as my company would definitely profit from the project being approved. i would be lynched in Houston around certain business's if they sensed an opposition to keystone.
MGM Grand - Jul 6, 2006
Cox Arena - Jul 7, 2006
New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival - May 1, 2010
Alpine Valley Music Theater - Sep 3-4 2011
Made In America, Philly - Sep 2, 2012
EV, Houston - Nov 12-13, 2012
Dallas-November 2013
OKC-November 2013
ACL 2-October 2014
Fenway Night 1, August 2016
Wrigley, Night 1 August 2018
Fort Worth, Night 1 September 2023
Fort Worth, Night 2 September 2023
Austin, Night 1 September 2023
Austin, Night 2 September 2023
How will it cost jobs when those jobs don't currently exist?
"President Obama is about to destroy tens of thousands of American jobs," a spokesman for Republican house speaker John Boehner said.
How can you destroy something that doesn't exist? :think:
Besides, Byrnzie, the potential for clean energy jobs is much greater. The oil industry is a dinosaur-- well, dinosaur food anyway. Oil production has peaked, consumption is steadily rising, methods for extracting crude are becoming more and more problematic and hazardous to the environment and burning all of that oil for the last 100 years has (not is, has) changed the climate.
Jobs? Lets get working on changing over to renewable energy before its too late-- and if you study climate change you'll agree, too late is not too far away.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
"Green jobs" or "clean energy jobs" are just liberal, hippie, treehugger propaganda. We all know this.**
**If a republican, say Jeff Sessions, or John Cornyn (http://thinkprogress.org/report/clean-energy-cons/) had brought green energy to the forefront of the national discussion, instead of that evil Al Gore, then I am sure the public discussion would be far different.
Let's not forget: we do not live in an educated, informed, aware society. We live in a society where the public falls prey to misinformation and clever media trickery. In the end, it is too much to ask of the people to educate themselves; to do the research necessary to acquire knowledge, instead of imprisoning themselves within the walls of their own un/misinformed, uneducated opinions. We live in a society where people not only see in black and white, but also only see--and only vote--in Rs and Ds. Oh how history will judge the oil and war generation!