Yup. It's not really a rejection of the pipeline at all - merely the arbitrary deadline that Congressional Republicans put in the payroll bill. Before that, TransCanada said it was already working on an alternative route and the administration said it would officially decide in early 2013 (presumably, after said alternative route has been finalized). This is just Obama's way around the "deadline". The pipeline will still happen, in all likelihood.
I think the original pipeline route was to run to the west coast of Canada, but the water ways there are so narrow that only one tanker can leave port at a time. National Geographic did a report on the area not too long ago. Essentially the narrow water ways would congest the area and increase the chance of an accident. With the added concerns about environmental damage from an accident, Canadian companies looked to the U.S. to build an extension of the Keystone Pipeline - known as the XL Pipeline. However, I think most people are upset because there is currently construction underway to expand access to the Cushing hub in Oklahoma. I have read that building pipelines from Cushing to the Gulf Coast would allow West Texas Intermediate (WTI) prices to increase to levels on par with Brent and Dhubai, which are about $10 higher than WTI at this moment. The whole idea was to build pipelines from Canada to Cushing, OK so that these new pipelines running to the Gulf Coast would take the oil to other markets. Right now the only real market for WTI is the US. The added access would hopefully increase the price.
It's some of the most environmentally costly oil on the planet. A significant portion of it that would reach the Gulf would actually be used for export. When corporate spokesmen say 'jobs', they almost always mean 'profit'.
The oil sands will be developed. I'd rather a pipeline vs tankers. Pipeline's safer. (and the tankers would be in my backyard ). Pretty basic deadline dodge by Obama. It was almost too easy. They delayed their Christmas break for this????
This is the most likely outcome and as Deckard noted the Tar Sands will be exploited with or without the XL pipeline. When I was at the trade conference in the PRC last year there was a delegation from Edmonton pushing the tar sands. On a side note talking privately to the deputy mayor of Edmonton he told me that they look at the tar sands as a mixed blessing at best and are doing as much as they can to diversify their economy so they don't have to depend on the tar sands. He hoped that at some point that tar sands mining would stop.
Another facking example of how Obama cannot make a decision. He's had 3 damn years to examine this thing, and he provides his typical non-committal response, as was expected. Then of course he tried to blame the Republicans for forcing him to make a decision. DO YOU WANT JOBS, OBAMA? I guess not. Just some cheap political points to some hippies in Berkeley who would have voted for you anyways.
Gas prices are slowly creeping up, many folks are still without jobs, mark this day on your calendar: NOV 6th 2012, TIME TO TAKE OUT ALL THE TRASH!
Just for you lil't How Republicans Killed Own Pet Oil Pipeline Project At the peak of December’s payroll tax cut showdown on Capitol Hill, two top Republican aides discussed with me the pros and cons of making the Keystone XL pipeline a centerpiece of the debate. They relished the idea of forcing President Obama to take a public stand on the pipeline early in an election year, instead of after the election as he had wanted. And they were eager to force him to choose between supporters in the labor movement, some of whom are pushing for the pipeline, and others in the environmental movement who vehemently oppose it. So they decided to go for it. At the same time they knew he’d likely have to reject the project, and for them that created a dilemma. “It’s a question of whether we’d rather have the pipeline or the issue,” said one of the GOP aides. Black or white. In the end they chose the issue. On Wednesday, as expected, Obama shutdown the project, dooming it unless the Canadian company angling for the project goes through the costly process of reapplying and winning approval next year. The irony is that the Obama administration has suggested pretty clearly that they would have backed the project several months down the line. They sought the delay for political reasons, but assuming Obama wasn’t dissuaded in the ensuing months, it was just that — a delay. By forcing the issue, Republicans have made the eventual construction of the pipeline less likely. But they have their issue.
What's ironic is that one of the biggest reasons why the pipeline was delayed was the Republican governor and legislature of Nebraska saying they needed an alternate route so it would go across an aquifer.
TPM is (as usual) spinning away. The project is not less likely. There was no rejection of the merits of a pipeline. The decision has simply been delayed until after Nov 2012 -- as was the original intention of the Admin. The companies involved are already resubmitting their bids. Expect approval with lots of self congratulations from all involved about their hard stance and due diligence resulting in a better outcome for all. It's just political theatre. Fodder for the commentators and blogs. Pageview magnets.
So this creates 2,000 jobs and that's suppose to be a game changer? I think they should build the pipeline if they can mitigate the environmental risk. We don't need an agricultural nightmare 20 years down the road. As for this helping us become energy independent. I thought oil was a marketplace. If the oil doesn't go to us directly it's not like there's less oil to go around.
Considering that Canada is a separate country even if tar sands oil goes directly to the US doesn't mean the US is more energy independent.
First three would have been government funded in the face of large deficits, the last would not have been; so not entirely analogous.
You are right - the first 3 would have created 100's of thousands of jobs. The last one only about 2,000 for a few years.
refining capacity usage in this country is at historical lows. the last report i looked at it was at 86%. i support this project but keep that in mind. you could look at it two ways, we are not refining enough or the price of gasoline is extremely overpriced because refineries aren't buying.
