Trump greenlights Keystone XL pipeline, but obstacles loom

[jcsmith]

16 hours ago, keep it real said:

it's been said that warren buffet owns the railway that currently transports the oil, and he gave Obama some 25M to block the damn pipeline.

It's also been said that Obama wire tapped Trump Tower... People say a lot these days.

[stander]

17 hours ago, keep it real said:

it's been said that warren buffet owns the railway that currently transports the oil, and he gave Obama some 25M to block the damn pipeline.

 

The Keystone XL is a pipeline which would enable 700,000 barrels of crude oil to be pumped per day from Canada to Texas. What does this have to do with Buffet? With the permit denied, the only option left to transport the oil is via railroad. One of the key railroads which will be running this oil is the Burlington Northern Santa Fe, a railroad which Buffett acquired in 2009. As Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for BNSF, put it, if Keystone XL “doesn’t happen, we’re here to haul.”

http://www.westernjournalism.com/warren-buffett-profits-hugely-from-obama-keystone-decision/

[Grubster]

2 hours ago, iReason said:

2 hours ago, Grubster said:

Well I can tell you that sending all the production to foreign countries that could care less about the environment or workers standard of living is not the answer and is precisely what we the west have been doing.

 

Well, actually no, you can't.

 

The Keystone Pipeline; i.e:

 

"The fact is that most if not all of the Canadian crude is designated to be processed in U.S. refineries, not exported directly. But a large portion of the diesel fuel, gasoline and other products of those refineries is indeed expected to be sold overseas."

 

"NRDC told us its calculations assume that all of the Canadian crude coming through the pipeline would go only to coastal refineries in Texas and Louisiana (sub-districts for which the government provides aggregate production figures), and that all of the Gulf Coast district’s exports of refined products come only from those refineries."

 

I said sending the production to foreign countries not the products. I am for keeping production at home as much as possible for the jobs, and also that we do it much more environmentally friendly and pay our workers a fair wage etc. Of course we will sell the products wherever the demand is. Canada's other option would be to send it over the mountains to the coast and then ship it to China's refineries, or build their own refineries that they are much to green to except. Sending your raw resources overseas to be transformed into finished products at much more environmentally hazardous plants and factories than in your own country does not seem like an very viable environmentalist thing to do. Not to mention the Hazards of shipping.  

[gabruce]

As this article from Forbes points out, moving oil has risks. Pipelines are the least risky (4.5 times safer than trains). So the choice would normally seem to be: don't use oil or oil products (no plastic, gasoline, heating oil etc) - which while a defensible position is entirely impractical at the moment, or choose the least risky method (or at least consider risk with costs and favour lower risk over higher cost). 

The logic behind no pipelines seems to be do everything possible to limit the use of petroleum products, which usually means higher prices, and which usually impacts lower-income people more.

[Ramen087]

4 hours ago, gabruce said:

As this article from Forbes points out, moving oil has risks. Pipelines are the least risky (4.5 times safer than trains). So the choice would normally seem to be: don't use oil or oil products (no plastic, gasoline, heating oil etc) - which while a defensible position is entirely impractical at the moment, or choose the least risky method (or at least consider risk with costs and favour lower risk over higher cost). 

The logic behind no pipelines seems to be do everything possible to limit the use of petroleum products, which usually means higher prices, and which usually impacts lower-income people more.

Possible to post a link to the Forbes Magazine article???

[gabruce]

3 hours ago, Ramen087 said:

Possible to post a link to the Forbes Magazine article???

Apologies. I mental lapse. I copied, however didn't paste. 555. Old age I guess. Here is the link.for the Forbes article  http://fortune.com/2016/08/28/pipelines-vs-trains-oil-transport/

[Scott]

A post with a racial slur has been removed along with replies.  

[pegman]

11 hours ago, Grubster said:

I said sending the production to foreign countries not the products. I am for keeping production at home as much as possible for the jobs, and also that we do it much more environmentally friendly and pay our workers a fair wage etc. Of course we will sell the products wherever the demand is. Canada's other option would be to send it over the mountains to the coast and then ship it to China's refineries, or build their own refineries that they are much to green to except. Sending your raw resources overseas to be transformed into finished products at much more environmentally hazardous plants and factories than in your own country does not seem like an very viable environmentalist thing to do. Not to mention the Hazards of shipping.  

Canada has many, many  refineries. The Alberta social democratic government wants more refinery capacity which lays waste to the lies about envio slurs. The Fraser Inst. is a joke. They had a study in the 1990's that stated there was no connection between smoking and lung cancer. Give them a grant and they will write whatever you want. The big winners when it comes to pipelines of tar sands to the Gulf Coast refineries are the Kochs who have big stakes at both ends.  No doubt their $$$ went to this study. The thing is the size of leaks from trains are much smaller than that of pipelines. Canada needs to refine our own product then export it from the west coast. We need to wean ourselves from trading with the American loonies. The future is with Canada -China trade. They are much more rational. 

[Andaman Al]

On 3/25/2017 at 6:56 PM, keep it real said:

it's been said that warren buffet owns the railway that currently transports the oil, and he gave Obama some 25M to block the damn pipeline.

That is another serious criminal allegation against Obama. So who exactly has said that? - just you maybe?  Links please.

Edited March 27, 2017 by Andaman Al

[Grubster]

5 hours ago, pegman said:

Canada has many, many  refineries. The Alberta social democratic government wants more refinery capacity which lays waste to the lies about envio slurs. The Fraser Inst. is a joke. They had a study in the 1990's that stated there was no connection between smoking and lung cancer. Give them a grant and they will write whatever you want. The big winners when it comes to pipelines of tar sands to the Gulf Coast refineries are the Kochs who have big stakes at both ends.  No doubt their $$$ went to this study. The thing is the size of leaks from trains are much smaller than that of pipelines. Canada needs to refine our own product then export it from the west coast. We need to wean ourselves from trading with the American loonies. The future is with Canada -China trade. They are much more rational. 

Sorry I was not aware that Canada had refineries, I would think they could easily have done this on their own soil if so. Be careful what you wish for trading with China as you will see your average wage plummet as you get addicted to the low wage, pollution producing, companies in China that will take over your economy. Once you give your work away, its going to be very hard to get it back. Good luck.

[Langsuan Man]

21 hours ago, steven100 said:

Good job ....    create jobs ... jobs ...  jobs  ..

 

Thats what the Australian PM needs to do but the clown is failing miserably ...

I assume that you are lauding the US popular vote loser; who has once again pivoted on the requirement that only US produced steel be used for the pipeline.  Now he says that since they already bought the Chinese steel they can use it

 

Thus I guess that Making America Great Again doesn't include made in America 

[steven100]

3 minutes ago, Langsuan Man said:

I assume that you are lauding the US popular vote loser; who has once again pivoted on the requirement that only US produced steel be used for the pipeline.  Now he says that since they already bought the Chinese steel they can use it

 

Thus I guess that Making America Great Again doesn't include made in America 

well I guess if it was already bought from the Chinese and there's no way to rescind that purchase then it has to be.

But at least you have the positive side that jobs ... jobs andmore jobs will be created.

At least the US president is for making jobs and he's doing it ...

The Australian PM on the other hand is not making jobs ...  and is a failure.

A complete failure .. 

[Langsuan Man]

1 minute ago, steven100 said:

At least the US president is for making jobs and he's doing it .

Donald Trump said Keystone XL pipeline would create 28,000 jobs. US State Department says 50

source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-keystone-oil-pipeline-create-28000-jobs-us-state-department-50-climate-change-protest-a7647281.html

[localczar]

20 hours ago, stander said:

The Keystone XL is a pipeline which would enable 700,000 barrels of crude oil to be pumped per day from Canada to Texas. What does this have to do with Buffet? With the permit denied, the only option left to transport the oil is via railroad. One of the key railroads which will be running this oil is the Burlington Northern Santa Fe, a railroad which Buffett acquired in 2009. As Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for BNSF, put it, if Keystone XL “doesn’t happen, we’re here to haul.”

http://www.westernjournalism.com/warren-buffett-profits-hugely-from-obama-keystone-decision/

Buffet + Obama= no keystone pipeline, thanks to massive political contributions. Very simple.

[steven100]

9 minutes ago, Langsuan Man said:

Donald Trump said Keystone XL pipeline would create 28,000 jobs. US State Department says 50

source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-keystone-oil-pipeline-create-28000-jobs-us-state-department-50-climate-change-protest-a7647281.html

appears that the US State Department are liars on the jobs numbers ....  50 ..lol

I would say probably somewhere between 15,000 - 20,000  if you add in all the contractors /  suppliers / sub contractors.

[Srikcir]

1 minute ago, steven100 said:

appears that the US State Department are liars on the jobs numbers ....  50 ..lol

I would say probably somewhere between 15,000 - 20,000  if you add in all the contractors /  suppliers / sub contractors.

No...50 would be the number of permanent jobs after building the pipeline.

[steven100]

1 minute ago, Srikcir said:

No...50 would be the number of permanent jobs after building the pipeline.

Ok ,  ic   ....  well thats not many permanent jobs is it.

but unfortunately thats the result .... but it will feed thousands of families during construction.

[Srikcir]

15 minutes ago, steven100 said:

but it will feed thousands of families during construction.

And further enrich Trump with his indirect ownership in the pipeline.

Great to be POTUS.

[gabruce]

11 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

And further enrich Trump with his indirect ownership in the pipeline.

Great to be POTUS.

Okay. That's interesting information. Which company, what's the connection, and how much does Trump own?

[Langsuan Man]

18 minutes ago, steven100 said:

but it will feed thousands of families during construction.

But your missing the point, the huckster promised good jobs, great jobs, spectacular jobs but you wouldn't know that because you didn't bother to read the article quoted 

 

Quote

As Donald Trump signed an executive order to advance construction on the Keystone XL Pipeline on January 24, he said the measure would create a "lot of jobs, 28,000 jobs, great construction jobs.”

source: http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-says-keystone-xl-will-create-7-times-more-construction-jobs-than-it-will-2017-1

[Ramen087]

13 hours ago, gabruce said:

Apologies. I mental lapse. I copied, however didn't paste. 555. Old age I guess. Here is the link.for the Forbes article  http://fortune.com/2016/08/28/pipelines-vs-trains-oil-transport/

Thanks for posting the link.

I'll take a look.