• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Buckwheat Rejects Keystone Pipeline

Mike

Well-known member
Was there ever any doubt?

WASHINGTON — President Obama announced Friday that his administration has rejected the Keystone XL Pipeline project after more than six years of review.

"The State Department has decided that the Keystone XL pipeline would not serve the national interest of the United States," Obama said, appearing at the White House with Secretary of State John Kerry and Vice President Biden. "I agree with that decision."

But even as he rejected it, Obama downplayed the importance of the decision, saying the project had an "over-inflated role in our political discourse," saying that the project would have been neither a "silver bullet for the economy" nor "the express lane to environmental disaster."

Obama combined his statement on the Keystone rejection with a comment on Friday's positive jobs report, saying the latter proves that the economy is expanding and that the pipeline would make little difference.

"While our politics have been consumed with a debate about whether this pipeline would create jobs and lower gas prices, we've gone ahead and created jobs and lowered gas prices," he said.

Obama said he spoke Friday morning to Justin Trudeau, the newly elected Canadian Prime Minister who had supported the project. He also confirmed publicly for the first time that he will attend the international climate conference in Paris in three weeks. He's long argued that it was important for the world's largest economy to bring substantive reductions in carbon pollution to the conference in order to urge other countries to do that same.

The final determination on Keystone comes 2,604 days after TransCanada first applied for State Department approval to build the 1,179-mile cross-border pipeline from Alberta or Nebraska. Earlier this week, the State Department rejected the company's request to delay a final determination.

Under an executive order signed by President George W. Bush, the application triggered reviews by the departments of Defense, Justice, Interior, Commerce, Transportation, Energy, Homeland Security, and the Environmental Protection Agency. If any of those agencies disagree, the final determination is made by the president.

As those reviews dragged on, Congress passed a bill in February that would have short-circuited that review and approved the pipeline. Obama vetoed that bill, saying it undercut the established procedure and didn't allow for a thorough determination of whether the pipeline is in the national interest.

TransCanada did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., the ranking Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said thanked Obama "for protecting the health of the American people and the health of the planet by rejecting the ill-advised Keystone tar sands pipeline, which would have brought the filthiest oil known to humankind into our country in large amounts."
 

Traveler

Well-known member
Union claims Buckwheat threw them under the bus. Hillary would do the same.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/259395-union-obama-threw-workers-under-the-bus
 

Steve

Well-known member
And the Winners are,....

Third runner up Tthe saudi's who get to keep their blood soaked hands on the spigot;

Second runner up
The Russians, who gets more oil selling opportunities

first runner up The rich obama buddy who owns the railroad

while tied for winner, The iranians. will now have a broader market for their thick oil..
and have more voice in how opec sets it's spigot and in pricing. AND more money to buy weapons and build it's bomb

and the winner is Venezuela who now can sell it's heavy oil , Chavez would be so proud of his little buddy obama.

not that environmentalist think they are winners,.. but that groups is just a bunch losers

the loses list seems obvious

the unions,.

Canadians,

and the US and all it's historical allies who often depend on US supporting them..
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Steve said:
And the Winners are,....

Third runner up Tthe saudi's who get to keep their blood soaked hands on the spigot;

Second runner up
The Russians, who gets more oil selling opportunities

first runner up The rich obama buddy who owns the railroad

while tied for winner, The iranians. will now have a broader market for their thick oil..
and have more voice in how opec sets it's spigot and in pricing. AND more money to buy weapons and build it's bomb

and the winner is Venezuela who now can sell it's heavy oil , Chavez would be so proud of his little buddy obama.

not that environmentalist think they are winners,.. but that groups is just a bunch losers

the loses list seems obvious

the unions,.

Canadians,

and the US and all it's historical allies who often depend on US supporting them..

SIGH. Our grandkids don't have much to look forward to.
I have a faint idea how many millions were invested in America on behalf of the Keystone Pipeline. They paid their land
leases all up a couple of years ago. The State Dept. under Hillary approved this at one time.....remember that? If you
read the remarks on facebook, so many were misinformed about the pipeline, where it was going and what was going to happen
once it got the Gulf. The more misinformed they are, the louder they seem to be.
 

Silver

Well-known member
Well, for all the wrong reasons Obama made the right choice. That pipeline would have piped Canadian jobs right out of Canada. Of course to complete the happy ending to this story there needs to be refinery capacity built in Canada to process this oil, and then market the products to the highest bidders on the world market whoever they may be.
 

burnt

Well-known member
Silver said:
Well, for all the wrong reasons Obama made the right choice. That pipeline would have piped Canadian jobs right out of Canada. Of course to complete the happy ending to this story there needs to be refinery capacity built in Canada to process this oil, and then market the products to the highest bidders on the world market whoever they may be.


I agree.

But then the question imposes itself - what are the chances of a refinery being built in Canada/ And where would it be built without the NIMBYism, seeing as to how a pipeline will be necessary anyway?

I am strongly inclined to believe that the sorely misguided and nihilistic left with its "environmentalism" religion will be able to put a stop on most, if not all, development that would sustain our country.

In other words, it's all downhill from here.

I hope that I'm wrong.
 

Brad S

Well-known member
FH, big muddy nailed it. Sorry for the ambiguity. Barry = no respect, beast = avoid profanity.


As I understand the pipeline, there is something of a symbiotic relationship between Bakken byproducts and Canadian shale oil. In the Bakken there is a lot of extremely volatile product like drip gas and mixing it with shale oil makes the drip gas manageable and improves the shale oil. I think this is the relationship, but I'm not sure. I also think the shale oil is best suited for plastics production, and refining it for car gas is possible but not optimal. I equate it to us trimmings and Aussie lean - trade helps everyone.

Enbridge is the Canadian company wanting the pipeline. I wish our government was as responsible as enbridge. Seems like there are some good oil companies out of Canada.

lil joe might have a better explanation of how shale oil and Bakken byproducts work together.
 

Latest posts

Top