House Passes GOP Bill To Bypass President To Speed Approval Of Keystone XL Oil Pipeline

I'm not talking about outsourcing, I'm talking about using a pipeline vs trucking

 

TransCanada begins eminent domain proceedings to seize farmland from Nebraska farmers who refuse to sell

This is interesting insofar as eminent domain (the government seizing your property and there's nothing you can do about it) is always cited by libertarian/tea party types as the most grossly unconsitutional form of federal government overreach.

I remember in law school all the Federalist society types had conniption fits any time anything hinted at a takings/eminent domain issue

Of course, when it comes to defeating evil atheist muslim dictator weakling Obama, most core conservative principles are dropped quicker than Romneycare. Sure, the government can take part of your land and give it to a canadian oil company - nothing wrong with Big government there.

 

Everything the people above are quoting about the positive effects of XL are the result of a massive PR assault bought and paid for Transcanada, including the Congressmen that are pushing it. It's all lobbying and advertising. It will have little effect at all for the USA, few long term jobs, no tax income. All we get is the risks and all the planet gets is more CO2.

**** those Canadian Corporations, buyoff your own politicians.

 

But CO2 is what plants crave.....

 

I don't think this has any major impact on CO2. It's a wash. But I see no overall benefits for the USA while the USA is taking all the risks. Not sure why Republican is so in favor of this.

 

Are they forcefully taking land or forcefully requiring easement?

 

Up to 200,000 barrels are reserved for US use. That would largely be Williston basin oil which would be used as a diluent.

 

Like i said, overall no benefits.

 

Up until a certain parts-per-million where CO2 becomes toxic to plants...

 

Yeah but do we really expect CO2 to become a higher concentration than 2,000 PPM or 0.2% of the atmosphere? For it to start being toxic to plants we'd need over 5 times as much CO2 in the atmosphere as there is now.

 

What logic lead you to this conclusion?

 

Talking points on both sides of any issue are massive PR assaults, probably conceived by the same firms and funded by both commercially and ideologically vested stakeholders on both sides. Very few private sector projects have massive benefits or, when incrementally adding to previous similar ones, particularly massive detriment.

 

It takes about as much energy from gas to produce a barrel of tar sand oil as you get from a barrel of tar sand oil. That's almost as inefficient as synthetic fuels from corn. If you're not Transcanada, it makes little sense to promote the dirtiest oil on the planet vs. cheaper less polluting sources. ( if you are Transcanada that's how you make your billions so it's worth it to you to spend tens of millions on lobbyist and PR.)

The advocates for saner energy policy don't have a financial stake, we just would like to have a benign planet to live on.

 

More "treason"?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/29/politics/senate-keystone-final-vote/index.html

 

More like a waste of time.

 

Probably, but it would only take 5 more senators voting for it to override the veto.....which you probably would see as treason.

 

Well Obama kept his word and vetoed the bill, we'll find out in a week if the congress has the votes to override it. Should be a close vote.

 

meanwhile, more and more trains carrying oil are derailing... let's use some common sense and use safer pipeline technology rather than these trains.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/23/ap-exclusive-fuel-haulin_n_6730476.html

 

l2O&G

Pipelines will not stop the use of trains as a carrier.

 

Let's just not import dirty polluting tar sand oil, and, don't export domestic oil.
That makes more sense, for Americans and the Planet.