Keystone XL pipeline - why the fuss?

[pm]

I don't understand what's the big deal about the Keystone XL pipeline expansion. We already have a Keystone pipeline from the tar sands in Canada over Nebraska and that crosses over the aquifer that is being quoted as the risk.

Can someone explain to me - without invoking partisan politics - why it's ok that the Keystone pipeline exists and is operational but an expansion of it is bad? I mean if people were honestly worried about the aquifer then how/why did the original pipeline get built?

And if someone invokes job-killing-democrats or oil-funded-republicans in their answer, I'll lose all faith in P&N and I'll go post the question at Reddit.

 

[bfdd]

people are stupid. to put it simply we should go through with this. it'll bring in more Canadian oil, already our largest importer and a country I believe most Americans would rather do business with as well. It doesn't mean we shouldn't keep working on other energy projects, but being able to bring in more cheap Canadian oil would be a blessing.

 

[Throckmorton]

Who benefits? Does anybody actually believe we'll see lower oil prices in America? Oil price is determined by the speculators...

 

[Darwin333]

Who benefits? Does anybody actually believe we'll see lower oil prices in America? Oil price is determined by the speculators...

We either have to import less oil from people that dislike us or we get to export more refined petrochemicals, so umm, us and our buddies to the north?

Edit: And the jobs created to build the pipeline itself.

 

[Howard]

Who benefits? Does anybody actually believe we'll see lower oil prices in America? Oil price is determined by the speculators...

Are you saying that there is no benefit in increasing the supply?

 

[Throckmorton]

Are you saying that there is no benefit in increasing the supply?

How much would the world oil supply change?

 

[bfdd]

How much would the world oil supply change?

as a grand total of imports or of simply Canadian imports? Throckmorton you realize that Canada is the largest importer of oil right? We also seem to get along quite a bit better with them than we do some of the other countries we buy oil from. Bringing in more oil will bring in more high paying jobs. Jobs to create and maintain the pipeline, and jobs which will be created due to refining more product. Even if we get off of oil as a fuel source, we're still going to need tons of the stuff.

 

[Throckmorton]

as a grand total of imports or of simply Canadian imports? Throckmorton you realize that Canada is the largest importer of oil right? We also seem to get along quite a bit better with them than we do some of the other countries we buy oil from. Bringing in more oil will bring in more high paying jobs. Jobs to create and maintain the pipeline, and jobs which will be created due to refining more product. Even if we get off of oil as a fuel source, we're still going to need tons of the stuff.

Oil prices are controlled by global oil speculation, not by how big our pipeline from Canada is. Remember when oil hit $130/barrel? That wasn't because of supply changes.

 

[Throckmorton]

http://thegazette.com/2011/10/26/keystone-xl-pipeline-will-not-reduce-gasoline-prices/

Unfortunately, there is no reason to think that the pipeline will increase the U.S. gasoline supply or reduce prices. When oil leaves the refinery, it enters the world market, and as Oil Change International reported last August, the refineries in Port Arthur, Texas, where the oil would be sent, are focused on exporting oil to Europe and Latin America.

To make matters worse, Port Arthur is in a Foreign Trade Zone, so U.S. citizens would not even get the benefit of export taxes, since they don’t have to pay any.

Pipeline proponents in their frequent Gazette ads suggest the Keystone XL would provide thousands of jobs. But a Cornell University report suggests this is seriously inflated. Using figures submitted by TransCanada Corp., the company applying to build the pipeline, they estimate it will create no more than 2,500 to 4,650 temporary construction jobs.

 

[monovillage]

The arguments against building the Keystone XL pipeline are weak sauce based almost entirely on symbolic rather then practical considerations. There are no arguments against the pipeline that aren't political.

 

[bfdd]

Oil prices are controlled by global oil speculation, not by how big our pipeline from Canada is. Remember when oil hit $130/barrel? That wasn't because of supply changes.

not just speculation. please. producers hold quite the hand themselves. or do you not remember the last round of oil spikes which put some financial speculators in the hole for hundreds of millions? i made post after post talking about how producers are holding back and inflating prices and trying to pawn it off on speculators again. There are still speculators fucking with the market, but it is no where near what it was a few years ago.

 

[Darwin333]

Oil prices are controlled by global oil speculation, not by how big our pipeline from Canada is. Remember when oil hit $130/barrel? That wasn't because of supply changes.

What part of "refining that oil creates jobs" do you not understand? What part of "its better to buy from our good buddies than our enemies" do you not understand? I would be more than happy to help explain it to you if you would simply tell us which parts you are confused about.

 

[Darwin333]

http://thegazette.com/2011/10/26/keystone-xl-pipeline-will-not-reduce-gasoline-prices/

You still haven't posted a reason not to build it.

 

[pm]

I'm still not seeing the answer to the question which confuses me - which is what are the objections to the pipeline that didn't apply when they built the current existing and operating pipeline that crosses Nebraska, goes over the aquifer and then ends in Oklahoma. The Keystone pipeline already exists and it's operating... this was just an expansion that makes a more direct line, widens the pipe from 30" to 36" (from memory) and extends it to Texas.

They all seem like logical things to do - straighter, wider and ending at the main refineries in Texas and all the complaints against it seem - to me - anyway, like they would have applied to the original pipeline which already exists.

So I'm trying to figure out if there's a deeper reason against this expansion that I'm not seeing reported in the media. Because the explanations that are out there - leaks into aquifers, tar sands oil being inefficient, etc - seem to apply to the pipeline that we already have.

 

[Throckmorton]

What part of "refining that oil creates jobs" do you not understand? What part of "its better to buy from our good buddies than our enemies" do you not understand? I would be more than happy to help explain it to you if you would simply tell us which parts you are confused about.

In what fantasy world do you live in where the oil from Canada won't get shipped overseas leaving us to buy oil from exactly the same places we buy it now?

You can tell who has zero familiarity with the oil industry by the bullshit they post on these forums.

 

[Throckmorton]

You still haven't posted a reason not to build it.

Because I don't trust those people to build anything or the government to provide oversight. I'm not going to lose any sleep over whether the pipeline gets built or not... But I don't understand why some people are so adamant about it. It won't benefit you at all.


I get it, because it's OIL, suddenly you rightwingers are all for siezing land with eminent domain to help out your super rich buddies.

 

[pm]

Because I don't trust those people to build anything or the government to provide oversight. I'm not going to lose any sleep over whether the pipeline gets built or not... But I don't understand why some people are so adamant about it. It doesn't affect your life at all.

I'm not adamant about anything... I'm just confused. I can understand the rationale to expand/straighten the pipeline, but I don't understand the opposition to it. The things that are being said apply to the pipe we already have but I don't see anyone talking about the expansion in light of the pipeline that we already - the fact that it exists already seems to mostly get glossed over.

I get it, because it's OIL, suddenly you rightwingers are all for siezing land with eminent domain to help out your super rich buddies.

Is eminent domain a concern? I hadn't see that reported. THAT makes some sense. Do the land owners think they aren't being compensated?

Maybe I need to wait for the next issue of the Economist to explain this to me because what I'm reading just doesn't seem to make sense to me.

 

[Throckmorton]

I'm not adamant about anything... I'm just confused. I can understand the rationale to expand/straighten the pipeline, but I don't understand the opposition to it. The things that are being said apply to the pipe we already have but I don't see anyone talking about the expansion in light of the pipeline that we already - the fact that it exists already seems to mostly get glossed over.

It's not an expansion, it's an extension to the Gulf Coast so oil can be exported more cheaply, on new land siezed using eminent domain. This isn't just widening an existing pipe...

 

[Throckmorton]

IMO, using eminent domain for private projects is always wrong. Guess the freemarket libertarian Paulbots flipflopped on eminent domain.

 

[monovillage]

It may never happen, the White House State Dept. just delayed it, we'll have to wait and see if the delay kills it and Canada just decides to ship it instead.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...-is-delayed-by-u-s-to-study-alternatives.html

 

[Throckmorton]

TransCanada has been strongarming landowners... Giving them 30 days to reply or else the'll invoke eminent domain. Nevermind that they don't even have approval. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/09/us-usa-pipeline-nebraska-idUSTRE7A80MA20111109

 

[senseamp]

Koch brothers want to use eminent domain to build their pipeline. Them's fine conservative values right there

 

[bfdd]

In what fantasy world do you live in where the oil from Canada won't get shipped overseas leaving us to buy oil from exactly the same places we buy it now?

You can tell who has zero familiarity with the oil industry by the bullshit they post on these forums.

Because we have pretty good refining capabilities and facilities here, with a rather large experienced and skilled labor force. these are well paying jobs, i used to work in the industry. we should be encouraging these kinds of things to create work for people, GOOD WELL PAYING WORK.

 

[monovillage]

Koch brothers want to use eminent domain to build their pipeline. Them's fine conservative values right there

You have a winner pm

 

[bfdd]

lol, who is ok with eminent domain? I am not, I don't think they should be able to do that as well. i don't think the government has the right to take private property for public or private projects. so fuck your "just private projects" shit throck. the thing is, that's HARDLY what is being bitched about and it's all environmental bullshit. the history of it is rife with environmentalist bitching and State department saying it undermines our "clean energy goals". that has been the biggest push against the expansion and the expansion should occur. We should be bringing all of the raw crude to the USA for refining. We do it cleaner and better than most.