The company supplies the plan, they are the ones that selected the route through the aquifer. The local land owners (Republicans) were the ones that organized the opposition, to being railroaded by a foreign corporation into an environmentally unsound solution over an American resource more valuable than oil. The delays are not costing consumers a nickle. There is a glut of oil now at Cushing and the reversal of existing lines and construction the Southern extension are going full bore. As usual, the FAUX interpretation has little to with reality and everything to do with political posturing.
Oil has fallen significantly in the past two days. The build in supply was tremendously beyond expectations on the latest inventory report. i predict oil below $100 by election and a landslide by president erkel
France mulls strategic oil release with U.S. and U.K. March 29, 2012 01:52 AM By Yann Le Guernigou, Muriel Boselli Reuters dailystar PARIS: France is in talks with the United States and Britain on a possible release of strategic oil stocks to push fuel prices lower, French ministers said Wednesday, four weeks before the country’s presidential election...... http://newsessentials.wordpress.com/2012/03/28/france-mulls-strategic-oil-release-with-u-s-and-u-k/
The Koch-Stone XL Pipeline Posted: 05/11/2012 3:19 pm Two pieces of crucial evidence emerged in the tar sands fight yesterday. One, happily, got all kinds of notice -- Jim Hansen's op-ed in the New York Times was the "most emailed" item of the day, which is appropriate since he explained new calculations showing that those Canadian deposits contain "twice the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by global oil use in our entire history." If we burn them on top of all the coal and oil and gas we're already using, "concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere eventually would reach levels higher than in the Pliocene era," the government's leading climate scientist explained, which you think would be enough to end the debate -- even in our weird political culture, there aren't many leaders clamoring to return us to the Pliocene. But the debate continues -- in fact, House leaders are busily trying to fasten automatic approval of the Keystone Pipeline, the biggest straw into the pipelines yet, onto a must-pass transportation bill. So the other crucial analysis that emerged yesterday is probably just as important. It demonstrates the real power behind the drive for tar sands oil: the Koch Brothers. They'd long insisted that they didn't have a stake in the Keystone Pipeline, and in the most narrow lawyerly sense that may be true. But the expose from from journalist David Sassoon pierced the secrecy of the Koch brother's private holdings to show that "at the top of the list are the Koch family's long and deep investments in Canada's heavy oil industry, which have been central to the company's initial growth and subsequent diversification since 1959." Their companies are among the largest importers of tar sands crude to the U.S., and the largest holders of mineral leases across Alberta -- they're up to their necks in the tarry stuff. And to protect that investment, they've done what they always do: buy influence. According to an article last year in the Los Angeles Times, Koch Industries and its employees were the largest oil and gas industry donors to the new members of the House subcommittee on energy and power, including new chair Fred Upton of Michigan, contributing $279,500 to 22 of 31 Republicans, and $32,000 to five Democrats. Little wonder, then, that Upton -- long considered an environmental moderate in the GOP -- soon became the leader of the fight to build the Keystone Pipeline, even now pushing to shut down environmental reviews and provide a permit. The irony of the Koch Brothers involvement should be lost on no one. The only argument for building the pipeline (which will export its oil off the continent and do nothing at all about gas prices) is that it will provide several thousand good-paying construction jobs. That's nothing to sneeze at. But in so doing it will prop up the people doing most to undermine the union movement in this country. Construction workers that depend on, say, the Davis-Bacon Act and its support for prevailing wages on public projects have their most powerful enemy in the Kochs, who have helped create the anti-union campaigns in Wisconsin, Indiana, and so many other places. Despite the power of the Kochs, this battle is still very much alive. First Nations people rallied in Toronto yesterday -- environmentalists and trade unionists have joined with indigenous people across Canada in an inspired fight against other proposed pipelines that would carry tar sands crude to China. So far they're winning -- the projects have drawn more public comment and opposition than any infrastructure plans in Canadian history. It's entirely possible that we'll be able to keep most of the tar sands oil in the ground. It's also entirely possible that oil money will carry this fight as it has so many others -- at the moment in Washington, only a handful of senators, led by Barbara Boxer, stand in the path of congressional approval. But at least, as of yesterday, we know exactly the stakes and exactly the players. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-mckibben/the-kochstone-xl-pipeline_b_1510115.html?igoogle=1 Follow Bill McKibben on Twitter: www.twitter.com/billmckibben
If you want to see Paul Dano do the best work of his life, sure. But for the topic, the PBS Video version of Daniel Yergin's "The Prize" might be a little more worthwhile. Although as a natural gas guy I'd probably recommend reading Castaneda's Gas Pipelines and the Emergence of America's Regulatory State, about the history of Panhandle Eastern and gas regulation up until 1990.
Commerce Clause to Save the Pipeline <script type="text/javascript" src="http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=1424614028001&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript> http://reason.com/archives/2012/05/08/obama-boxed-in-on-keystone-pipeline-cons/1 One troubling aspect of the building the Keystone pipeline is the use of eminent domain to force landowners to allow it to pass through their property. Eminent domain is defined as the legal right of a government or its agents to expropriate private property for public use, with payment of just compensation. The New York Times is reporting today a story about how Texas landowner Julia Trigg Crawford is fighting TransCanada’s use of eminent domain to build a section of the southern leg of the Keystone pipeline through her property. Unfortunately for landowners pipelines are generally considered to be common carriers [PDF], usually defined as companies that agree to publicly transport people or goods at a fixed fee. The U.S. government and most states have delegated the power of eminent domain to common carriers. <iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6SDf5_Thqsk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Conservative principles be damned: Texas court agrees, Canadian firm can seize US land from US citizens.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/oDcWh-z9kIc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
well, Obama, if you don't approve the Keystone XL pipeline, that oil will come to the US by a much more dangerous path: rail. Did you watch the news this past weekend in Quebec? http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...c-train-derailment-deaths-explosions/2496811/ LAC-MEGANTIC, Quebec (AP) - As firefighters doused still burning oil tanker cars, more bodies were recovered Sunday in this devastated town in eastern Quebec, raising the death toll to five after a runaway train derailed, igniting explosions and fires that destroyed the downtown district. With dozens of people reported missing, authorities expected to find more bodies once they reach the hardest-hit area. Quebec provincial police Lt. Michel Brunet said Sunday that at least 40 people are reported missing, but cautioned that the number could fluctuate up or down. Brunet confirmed two more deaths early Sunday afternoon after confirming two people were found dead overnight. One death was confirmed Saturday.
There is not necessarily a shortage of oil, certainly not in the US. The only difference releasing Tar Sand oil oil is on the price. Build the XL, more oil reaches the world market and the price per barrel goes down by maybe $1. Cheaper oil will mean people will use more, and there is less incentive to switch over to renewable energy making it harder to reach economies of scale. Why wouldn't it be better policy to save the Tar Sands in reserve for 50 years to see if in fact the world will run low on it. It is the the most environmentally costly oil resource. I realize this is in Canada and the Canadian companies would like to get rich, but I don't see how it is in the US's long term best interest to help them.
It is tar sand, largely dug up from the surface. Basically digging up a ****ty landscape as it is. Not much damage there. That being said, the pipeline should not be built.
hahahaha Did JOBS ever cross your mind? ...and your point about saving the tar sands -- are you kidding me? If producers thought it would be more economically profitable to save them, they would! There's money to be made now, son...
The only permanent jobs influence XL would have would be a couple of hundred pipeline maintenance men and some tanker loaders. The actual amount of oil it produces is a tiny fraction of what Saudi Arabia can turn on and off as a whim so it's effect on oil prices will be minimal. Better jobs, more long term jobs could be had in developing renewable an alternative energies. The only big money in the XL will be made by Canadians. And, I didn't say it would be more profitable to save Tar Sands in reserves, I said it would be prudent, though it certainly may be more profitable if oil runs low in 50 years to yield $200 an barrell instead of $85 now. It's just the guys that want the trophy wives and yachts from it want theirs now.
hahahahaha you have a lot to learn about the energy industry, champ Renewables? Did you miss the whole shale revolution that's happened in the past few years? Or are you still trying to pick winners like Solyndra alongside Obama?
