Do these pipelines really reduce energy costs? And is it cheaper for who... Canada, or the U.S.? And are there safer and better ways to achieve cheaper energy prices. Especially in light of the potential and actual dangers: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-04-08/keystone-pipeline-leak-worse-than-thought
yes. if it wasn't a cheaper way to transport oil then why would anyone build it.? both No. pipelines are the safest way to transport crude oil. You should try looking up and answering your own questions.
I read that it would yield about 1B in annual saving. That # wouldn't make a dent in oil price, even if all of the saving is passed on, which we know will not be the case.
You should try to be a more careful reader... I asked if there were safer and better ways achieve cheaper energy prices (not transporting oil). And odd I was pose that question in a discussion forum. I am not an energy expert (I am in the high technology industry), so folks here in Houston might be good sources for this sort of information, and a discussion among people with more knowledge of the topic would be more educational than simply seeing partisan positions.
Even if i did agree with that (I don't), is the fact that its the most environmentally friendly method to transport crude oil not good enough for you? The pipeline would ship half a million gallons of gas a day. Of course it would yield more than 1B in savings ( I am assuming you mean 1B a year).
What the keystone means for Houston: more docks, more tanks, more refinery, more trucks, more pipelines. less dependency on OPEC oil, uptick in volumes can hopefully reduce price but not margins. Outside of these so called environmental issues, I don't know why Obama rejected this. Seems like a win win situation for us and the Canadians and take out the opportunity cost that was there for the taking from China.
I am supportive of activities that reduce energy reliance on foreign oil and benefit the US and especially local economy as long as (1) its done in concert with an overall energy programs (2) it truly benefit US and local economy (and not just corporate greed) and (3) sufficient environmental safeguards are in place (perhaps speaking to the "so-called environmental issues"?). Win-win-win?
Yes 1b per year. Is it when you take into consideration of spill from a pipeline vs a truck or rail? Spill from truck and rail are contained to a fix volume per spill. Not so for pipeline. In addition, the route of rail and roads are already established while new pipeline routes are having a new impact on those living along it. And who ends up paying for spills, if there is even a cost that can recover damages? And who lands are being subjected to this risk? If the land issue is resolved and there is a guarantee (maybe reserve fund from saving) for damage recovery, I don't have an issue with this pipeline. As of now, I see $ benefit to a few while subjecting many more folks to new risk (small chance but can be extremely damaging when spill happen).
I think we all knew this was coming and it's a good thing. Transporting that oil via any other method is MUCH more dangerous than via pipeline so the people protesting never really had a point to begin with.......which is a common theme among protesters today. Lots of protests, almost no valid causes.
How's that? By doing things other people don't like (thought they don't actually have valid reasons for not liking) "makes" them terrorists? I don't think you give people enough credit. I know that a lot of people have thrown public temper tantrums due to not getting their way in this election, but I think as a whole, people are better than that.
Lots of jobs coming to my state Montana with this coming. Great article here about the impact this will have on smaller towns along the way. http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/seek...small-towns-pray-keystone-xl-pipeline-n139976
tl;dr It's going to be built. Liberals are gonna cry. People's lives are measurably improved. Conservatism wins again.
I'm not conservative, but twenty dekatherms is twenty dekatherms. All kinds of liberals work on pipelines and in the energy industry.
i've got mixed feelings but if you stop progress for the past then you are forever stunted by the past. and if you do stop progress for historical spiritual reasons, where does it stop. are you going to go back and address all spiritual claims by natives? the past is the past, got to move forward even if it hurts. in the name of peace and progress!
http://theantimedia.org/iowa-pipeline-bursts-dapl/ Iowa Pipeline Bursts Only Days After Trump Approved DAPL Construction Rocket River
At a Boeing plant in today, Trump claimed he approved construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. Not quite...
