He’s still deciding if more people employed is good for Democrats. This project should’ve been approved years ago. Thousands of jobs and cheaper oil with profits not going to the Middle East.Let the lefties start the lies NOW…………Fact: The Keystone XL Pipeline project will support the creation of 9,000 construction jobs in the United States – work for pipefitters, welders, electricians, heavy equipment operators and many more.
The Department of State noted in the DEIS that Keystone XL will contribute to America’s long-term energy security,support tens of thousands of jobs, and provide billions in private sector investment, earnings and taxes.
The DEIS report states:
Construction of the proposed project would contribute approximately $3.4 billion to U.S. GDP if implemented.
A total of 42,100 jobs throughout the United States would be supported by construction of the proposed project.
Total employment earnings supported by the proposed project would be approximately $2.053 billion.- See more at: http://keystone-xl.com/facts/myths-facts/#sthash.ZffBwZkY.dpuf
Run the pipeline through West Virginia.They’ve got no rules about environmental safety to get in the way.
If Rush supports it, by golly, let me read no further! Pass the rubber stamp!
Forget cheaper gas prices, the pipeline will carry Canadian oil to the Gulf so it can be sold on the international market where it can demand higher prices. Cushing’s glut will vanish. We get the environmental risk they get the profit and out gas prices will probably go up because more oil can be exported.
http://theuptake.org/2013/07/25/three-years-later-michigan-tar-sands-oil-disaster-spells-urgent-warning/^http://www.4-traders.com/EXXON-MOBIL-CORPORATION-4822/news/Exxon-Mobil-Corporation—Our-Crude-Response-to-Oil-Spills-17761276/^The above are 2 examples of recent pipeline failures. There were many other articles, but I sought sources that would not be turned aside due to ‘slant’.^http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/jan/20/data-oil-spills-from-trains-surged-in-2013/^http://www.post-gazette.com/local/region/2014/01/19/Upper-Big-Branch-disaster-spurred-mine-safety-progress/stories/201401190164^http://www.workers.org/articles/2014/01/20/water-still-unsafe-elk-river-chemical-spill/^The following three examples show that businesses are too willing to not self regulate. There are many other examples I could link.^Regulations are written to be overcomplicated and even burdensome to people who might want to break into an existing industry. Our legislators, themselves stockholders with an interest in how the market flows, work with lobbyists to protect existing companies with bills designed with loopholes for the companies whose lobbyists, in many cases, helped write.^“First do no harm.” is the proverb by which doctors are supposedly supposed to make their decisions. The keystone pipeline is treated as the ONLY job creating project the USA has. It is not only NOT the only one, but it should take a low priority to some others. California is facing a severe drought and desalination plants on the pacific coast, run through pipelines built towards agricultural areas, will save Americans billions in food costs over time. Unlike an oil pipeline, a water pipeline is a long term project from which farmers, communities, and recreational areas benefit. As for the brine,http://www.examiner.com/article/la-sinkhole-danger-officials-to-reveal-methane-gas-concernsA company mining brine in La. has destroyed a section of Bayou and forced residents to flee as dangerous amounts of methane is released and a sinkhole grows in size. ^One in five bridges need repair, and of those, one in four will fail if a single factor fails.
The power grid is at risk. Modernizing and upgrading the grid is a project way overdue. ^http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-26/utilities-feeling-rooftop-solar-heat-start-fighting-back.html^In the above link, you’ll see that solar panels are efficient, though not constant, so the power grid is often overwhelmed by power being pumped back into the grid. In Hawaii, the power company is charging users of solar a fee because of the cost of balancing the power produced in a grid that is inefficient and outdated.^This post is overlong, as are most of mine, but until we can guarantee protections to our neighbors, our environment, and business, the Keystone is a luxury we do not need, especially when faced with so many other things that need fixing.The keystone is a project wanted by a few. The concerns and suggestions I’ve made above are NEEDED by MANY. There are jobs, long term jobs, to be created from doing these things. Oil is finite. Water, people’s need for electricity, and safe bridges are permanent.Respectfully,C.
Is that what you call it? Looks more like he’s daydreaming about another all-taxpayer-expense-paid vacation to Hawaii.
I notice you conveniently ignore the GOVERNMENT statements I posted.You know, these………..The Department of State noted in the DEIS that Keystone XL will contribute to America’s long-term energy security,support tens of thousands of jobs, and provide billions in private sector investment, earnings and taxes.The DEIS report states:Construction of the proposed project would contribute approximately $3.4 billion to U.S. GDP if implemented.
“Keystone XL Would Not Reduce Foreign Oil Dependency”Well DUH! Canada is not part of the US, so any oil entering the US via Keystone is being IMPORTED from a FOREIGN country. By the same token, Keystone XL is proposed to export crude… from Canada to the US. Canada’s proposal for serving the Chinese oil market is to build a pipeline to the Pacific not the Gulf (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enbridge_Northern_Gateway_Pipelines).
As for the exact number of jobs created by Keystone, WHO CARES. The taxpayer wouldn’t be paying for those shovel-ready jobs, whether they are temporary or permanent.
It’s simple: we already EXPORT more actual PRODUCT than in the past. Keystone will INCREASE exports of product (not crude). WE will have to deal with the waste product from this filthy “crude” piped in from Canada. Please to note, the biggest objection to the pipeline has come from PRIVATE land owners, like in TEXAS objecting to using eminent domain to seize their land for the Right of Way.
Another note: conservatives like Lisa who have no knowledge whatsoever of what actually goes on with oil production, or pipelines, are the biggest fans, as long as those activities aren’t anywhere near THEM! (Yes,I spent years working on those rights of way for pipelines, and power lines, and Keystone is mostly approved already, and the remnant segments have serious problems to be addressed. The end result btw isn’t relevant to the actual R/W EIS.)
MYTH: Keystone XL is an export pipeline to China.FACT: Not a drop of crude oil will be exported.I’m not so quick to trust the PR people from TransCanada. Currently, most of the Canadian oil is going to Midwestern refineries. The main reason they want to extend the pipeline to the gulf, is so they can export to whatever market will fetch the highest price. Maybe China, maybe Europe, maybe it stays here. The market will determine that, unless you want to have a law requiring oil coming through Keystone to remain in the US. I suspect if that law gets passed, the project will die a quick death.
TransCanada takes 100% responsibility for cleanup.But, who determines what ‘cleanup’ means? Usually the people paying, feel the job is done before anyone else.
There will be even more jobs once this thing starts to leak.
Sorry about the links, Mr. Snare. I felt I wasted a certain amount of time waiting for them to come up so I could read them. I’m not against keystone in theory, but when one considers the many failures of industries to protect the public good, I feel a better foundation needs be laid for regulating and insuring its safety prior to authorizing it.I’m also against a new project that is not necessarily “needed” when there are so many projects that are.I do agree with you that hopelessness can be overcome. It MUST be overcome if our nation is to have the “Can Do” attitude that made it great.Thank you for you kind reply.Sincerely, C.
3 options 1] continue to ship via buffet rail road [higher cost and more pollution] 2] build pipeline [keep USA refinaries open] 3] build pipeline to canada coast and ship crude to china
So when your boy Barry allows it to be built (Even he’s not as dumb as you, so he will) will you call him a horrible president?Because according to you, this pipeline is an environmental disaster that is just going to make the greedy oil companies richer, so he’d have to be horrible to allow it, right?We’ll bookmark this…..
None of these would have been built, we’d be heating our thatched huts with logs and coal, and burning whale oil for light.Either I’ve failed to notice a 10 foot diameter oil pipe out back, or that map counts the gas pipe that goes to my house as a ‘pipeline’.
Churchie: your map is outdated, for one, it doesn’t include the 42 inch diameter natural gas pipeline seven miles south of my house that takes gas from Wyoming to California.
As to Keystone again, if the end product isn’t intended for export, why does the line bypass over 13 refineries in the midwest that could produce product for the U.S. instead of going all the way to the Gulf? (Okay, to be fair, Texas’ lack of regulations doesn’t restrict what happens to all that waste product from tar sands as strictly as those other states.)
dear wrench i gather you support bho buddy rr and greater polution as the option you prefer // USA refineries % of utilization rate has dropped from 92.6% 2012 to 86.9% 2013// import from questionable source countries [ russia ven., columbia,chad,arab,] =42% [USA] // note pipeline to pacific on fast track http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Canada_oil_pipeline_to_Pacific_clears_major_hurdle_999.html
yes bho is paying buffet back for his support // it is the chicago way// enbridge is building the westward pipe line not keystone // keystone want to go into competion
Well, that pretty much covers all the pros and the cons. Now let’s build the dang pipeline. Enough studies of studies of studies that all point to the need for the pipeline. Question: Are we going to continue to be dependant upon petroleum and petroleum products to feed clothe and shelter a world population of around 7 billion, or are we not, and thus allow, oh I’ll guess, about a third of them to die of starvation and privation? If you’re in agreement with the obvious conclusion that we will continue to be dependant upon petroleum for numerous human needs, does it make sense to shut in the third largest known deposit on the planet? Of course not. So lets develop a North American resource responsibly for the main benefit of North Americans and not be dependant on more costly, more uncertain, and more environmentally risky alternatives.
Just a note to Lisa: the walls of those pipes aren’t nearly that thick, which is a part of the “safety” issue.