Rejection of Keystone XL not yet secured.

Drowned Out

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

whygohome wrote:

MayDay Malone wrote:

100,000 jobs. Energy independence.Naw... No upside here.
Im glad Obama cancelled it- something else to hammer him on in the general election...

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.

additionally, please provide credible evidence that a single pipeline is going to produce complete and total energy independance...

My understanding is that the pipeline will not improve oil independence AT ALL. The oil is destined for export.

RFTC wrote:

cornell study says 5k jobs, state dept says approx 6k, one other outside group said tops 10k, counting support personnel, ie. hospitality, transportation, supply chain. i think american petroleum institute and/or gop came up w/a # btwn 20-100k. :roll: 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.

I’m in Alberta, so I’m in the same boat…I’m not directly working in the O&G sector, but I am in construction….so the boom/bust cycles of the tarsands directly effect new construction around here…..it’s kind of a fine line to walk without being hypocritical…but personally, I don’t care if I piss people off with my opinions – spurring debate is never a bad thing.

Drowned Out

pandora wrote:

I vote pipeline and get some people to work ... a lot of people

plus if it will help even a little to ease the dependency on foreign oil
thats a good thing.

$5+ a gallon by summer...yikes!

You’re putting way too much stock in the propaganda being pushed by the corp media, and from the corp owned govt. There will be a lot of very TEMPORARY jobs created by this. It’s estimated that approx 50 permanent jobs will be created. Is that really worth it.
Again, it’s destined for export.
And…this pipeline will lead to price INCREASES in the midwest – it’s right in Transcanada’s application to build.


http://dirtyoilsands.org/midwestgas/iowa

KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE IS PROJECTED TO INCREASE MIDWEST OIL PRICES

Iowa won't see any benefits from this pipeline. Instead, if completed, the new pipeline will cause gas prices to go up 10 to 20 cents per gallon of gasoline and put two million Americans’ drinking water at risk of contamination from toxic tar sands oil.
The analysis used in the application submitted to The Canadian National Energy Board, conducted by Purvin & Gertz Inc. on behalf of TransCanada, says:
Existing markets for Canadian heavy crude, principally PADD II, are currently oversupplied, resulting in price discounting for Canadian heavy crude oil.
Access to the USGC via the Keystone XL Pipeline is expected to strengthen Canadian crude oil pricing in PADD II by removing this oversupply… The resultant increase in the price of heavy crude is estimated to provide an increase in annual revenue to the Canadian producing industry in 2013 of US $2 billion to US $3.9 billion.
The ‘price discounting’ that TransCanada speaks of refers to the effect the oversupply of Canadian crude oil has on gas prices in the Midwestern United States.
PADD II refers to the Midwest, PADD I refers to the Gulf Coast.
Famed oil market economist Dr. Verleger describes how the increase in the cost of oil associated with Keystone XL’s construction will have adverse economic effects for Midwestern FAMILIES in addition to higher prices at the pump.
1. ‘U.S. farmers, who spent $12.4 billion on fuel in 2009, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, could see expenses rise to $15 billion or higher in 2012 or 2013 if the pipeline goes through. Of course, American consumers will pay the price of this highway robbery. Food prices will rise because they reflect farm operating costs. In addition, millions of Americans will spend 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel fuel as tribute to our "friendly" neighbors to the north.’
2. Higher oil prices in the Midwest will have substantial economic impacts upon every aspect of American life. Higher fuel prices will lead to increased expenditures in the education sector, the agricultural sector, and the public transportation sector, just to name a few. While TransCanada, our ‘friendly neighbor’ claims to have America’s national interest in mind, the economic evidence says otherwise. Stand up for America’s national interest, and the economic welfare of all Americans.

Bennyorr4 wrote:

oil can only be extracted from the tar sands when the price per barrel is over $75 ... something that wars and instability in the middle east does ... without those wars - tar sands oil would not be profitable

So I guess we should all thank the US for keeping a roof over my head . Thanks again for keeping the middle east unstable. Now you complain about a pipeline? WOW! Priorities eh? Do you realize how many pipelines are under our feet? Maybe we should create jobs by tearing all of them up. Obviously they are so bad for the environment, not like spilling oil into the ocean, that is ok right. Cuz if this pipeline isn't approved then more oil will be shipped by boat. (to China) Thats way better than over the land that it came from in the first place. (sarcastic)

As an Albertan involved in, and supporting the O&G industry, you should be asking why this oil is not being refined in Canada, not defending selling it for fucking penny royalties to other countries to be refined. Our natural resources are being plundered by foreign interests for next to nothing. We’re actually LOSING jobs by piping this stuff south, as it could be refined here if we built the infrastructure to do so. But we won’t....Why? Refineries.... NIMBY, right?
Also, you seem to think that this pipeline will prevent water based shipping….how do you think they will export the refined product out of the gulf? Between the added shipments from those refineries, and our own Northern Gateway pipeline BS, we will see a massive INCREASE in shipping via water.

SweetChildofMine

Do you know how many jobs we would create with a conversion to alternative energies that does not include fracking of some sort? Millions. retro fitting cars, retro fitting homes, new grids....blah blah blah... the list goes on and on.

brianlux

SweetChildofMine wrote:

Do you know how many jobs we would create with a conversion to alternative energies that does not include fracking of some sort? Millions. retro fitting cars, retro fitting homes, new grids....blah blah blah... the list goes on and on.

Even the most avid capitalists could understand this, wouldn't 'cha think? :crazy:

polaris_x

SweetChildofMine wrote:

Do you know how many jobs we would create with a conversion to alternative energies that does not include fracking of some sort? Millions. retro fitting cars, retro fitting homes, new grids....blah blah blah... the list goes on and on.

the problem is that the corporations that have been exploiting us for years would not continue to make massive profits on the people's backs ... so, they will put on PR BS that the general public eat up because they can't think for themselves anymore ...

i pushed a environmental sustainability program through my work and got it approved amongst our executives (none of which are remotely close to being lefty liberals) because it made good business sense ... that's the frustrating thing - going green makes sense ... but we don't because of the misinformation put forth by those who would not be allowed to continue to exploit us ...

whygohome

polaris_x wrote:

SweetChildofMine wrote:

Do you know how many jobs we would create with a conversion to alternative energies that does not include fracking of some sort? Millions. retro fitting cars, retro fitting homes, new grids....blah blah blah... the list goes on and on.

the problem is that the corporations that have been exploiting us for years would not continue to make massive profits on the people's backs ... so, they will put on PR BS that the general public eat up because they can't think for themselves anymore ...

i pushed a environmental sustainability program through my work and got it approved amongst our executives (none of which are remotely close to being lefty liberals) because it made good business sense ... that's the frustrating thing - going green makes sense ... but we don't because of the misinformation put forth by those who would not be allowed to continue to exploit us ...

+1,000,000,000

The embrace of a clean energy industry is pure capitalism. Unfortunately, a majority of those opposed see it as liberal, hippie propaganda..........we are such a smart society!!!

SweetChildofMine

whygohome wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

SweetChildofMine wrote:

Do you know how many jobs we would create with a conversion to alternative energies that does not include fracking of some sort? Millions. retro fitting cars, retro fitting homes, new grids....blah blah blah... the list goes on and on.

the problem is that the corporations that have been exploiting us for years would not continue to make massive profits on the people's backs ... so, they will put on PR BS that the general public eat up because they can't think for themselves anymore ...

i pushed a environmental sustainability program through my work and got it approved amongst our executives (none of which are remotely close to being lefty liberals) because it made good business sense ... that's the frustrating thing - going green makes sense ... but we don't because of the misinformation put forth by those who would not be allowed to continue to exploit us ...

+1,000,000,000

The embrace of a clean energy industry is pure capitalism. Unfortunately, a majority of those opposed see it as liberal, hippie propaganda..........we are such a smart society!!!

Thats the thing. Now I feel like I have to appeal to greed to get anything accomplished. Here we have green energy in the "suits" commercial someone just sent me. Which is fine if this is what it takes then, Id have to agree, then. When I watch it, I feel a bit sold out and dirty.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... tqxEgoaABI

brianlux

SweetChildofMine wrote:

That's the thing. Now I feel like I have to appeal to greed to get anything accomplished.

That is so true and so sad. It's a fact of life, I'm afraid, but I suppose we do have to use what means are available. Too bad doing what is logical and what makes the most sense doesn't seem to count as much as money, money, money.

SweetChildofMine

http://getenergysmartnow.com/2012/01/30 ... um=twitter



Big oil, big business, propaganda and lies... decide for yourself how deep unethical practices go. Murdoch in the title should be enough.

SweetChildofMine

http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/01/3 ... &mobile=nc

Media distortion of safety issues with Chevy Volt.


Waiting lines for sustainable cars and nothing but red-tape, grief and destruction of possibilities.

Newch91

Not sure if I should post it here, but I figured this would be a good thread to post it, since we're talking about renewable energy.

Wind power growing in California.

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/l ... rack=icymi

Newch91

Is this fine to post in here, too? Not quite about the Keystone, but has to do with fracking.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/0 ... ng-hearing

SweetChildofMine

Maybe the thread author \ would like to change the title to something like the ongoing saga of the world trying to switch to renewable energy so we can post all together all the stories.

SweetChildofMine

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/299517

Eat or Heat.

Why would we want to move to renewable energies?

Jason P

Here is a question to ponder on ... Canada seems determined to increase production of this oil no matter what. There are two options ... a pipeline to Texas where it will be refined under US environmental rules and regulation ... or a pipeline to British Columbia where it will be transported by oil tankers across the Pacific ocean to Asia where rules and regulations are sometimes governed by bribes.

As an environmentalist, which is the lesser of two evils?

(and no choosing "neither" cause that's cheating )

whygohome

Jason P wrote:

Here is a question to ponder on ... Canada seems determined to increase production of this oil no matter what. There are two options ... a pipeline to Texas where it will be refined under US environmental rules and regulation ... or a pipeline to British Columbia where it will be transported by oil tankers across the Pacific ocean to Asia where rules and regulations are sometimes governed by bribes.

As an environmentalist, which is the lesser of two evils?

(and no choosing "neither" cause that's cheating )

This is the way that i look at it. Sad decision to make for me.

polaris_x

Jason P wrote:

Here is a question to ponder on ... Canada seems determined to increase production of this oil no matter what. There are two options ... a pipeline to Texas where it will be refined under US environmental rules and regulation ... or a pipeline to British Columbia where it will be transported by oil tankers across the Pacific ocean to Asia where rules and regulations are sometimes governed by bribes.

As an environmentalist, which is the lesser of two evils?

(and no choosing "neither" cause that's cheating )

that's like asking is it better to get hit by a truck or have a grand piano land on you ... neither of those options have to occur so i therefore deem this question illegitimate ...

Drowned Out

Jason P wrote:

Here is a question to ponder on ... Canada seems determined to increase production of this oil no matter what. There are two options ... a pipeline to Texas where it will be refined under US environmental rules and regulation ... or a pipeline to British Columbia where it will be transported by oil tankers across the Pacific ocean to Asia where rules and regulations are sometimes governed by bribes.

As an environmentalist, which is the lesser of two evils?

(and no choosing "neither" cause that's cheating )

Refined under US environmental rules and regulations....then exported by tanker out of the Gulf (without a penny of tax paid in the US, from my understanding). There is no lesser evil. It's the same evil. Personally, I'd rather the pipeline run mostly thru your country than thru BC's temperate rain forest, to shallow reef-infested ports Buuuut....I would wager almost anything that both of these pipelines will be built. Keystone was shelved for the election, and the Northern Gateway will be pushed thru by our Oiligarchy Con majority. They are going to have some serious issues with natives in BC tho, and I support them 110%.

whygohome

I have a copy of Cornell's report on the Keystone project. It is a PDF file, so I can send it as an attachment in a PM......we can send attachments, right?

Drowned Out

btw....I don't know if we should be holding the US up as a place with effective rules and regulations... You guys have had a couple of minor problems down there in recent memory, no?