By David E on 01-18-12
http://www.npr.org/2011/12/29/144155269/gas-pains-u-s-diesel-gas-exports-surpass-imports
http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/05/news/economy/gasoline_export/index.htm
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/dec/30/business/la-fi-fuel-exports-20111231
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/12/05/us-on-pace-to-become-net-fuel-exporter/
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/03/MN8I1M7LAV.DTL&ao=2
Just wondering why this isn’t bigger news. Exports are big business too I guess?
By RussCrowder on 01-19-12
Wouldn’t it be nice for the U.S. to be a major exporter of energy. It might make a small dent in our massive yearly trade deficit and in an emergency, those exports could be shut off and used for our own
domestic needs. Of course with the Socialists/Marxists that are running this country determined to
bring it to it’s knees, the idea of energy independence, at least for now, is just a pipe dream.
By cs1 on 01-19-12
Yes, it would be nice. Having said that, how does imported crude from Canada, sent to Louisiana for refining, and then shipped abroad make us less dependent on foreign oil? Secondly, there’s the
Nebraska issue. Do they or don’t they have a say in where the proposed pipeline traverses their
state? Are they not entitled to protect there water table, as is the concern of their govenor and the
reason for delaying the project so that it’s route can be changed. And as for your other comments,
are you speaking of the Soviet Union or Communist China, cause last time I checked we live in a
republic/democracy and when I went to vote last time I wasn’t denied.
By Craig moore on 01-19-12
cs1, the pipeline was also to carry up to 150000 bbls. per day of American oil to Americanrefineries:
http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story.asp?storyid={ee89c60e-e00b-4352-aa51-cc3871f1a428}&src=main
Nebraska officials want this project to go forward. Also, there is a letter from Democratic
lawmakers asking for it to go forward:
http://www.transcanada.com/docs/Key_Projects/democratic_support_keystone.pdf
===quote===
We write today to express our support that a Presidential Permit for the Keystone
XL Pipeline Project is in America’s national interest. This is based on the fact that the
Keystone XL Pipeline will inject $20 billion of private sector investment into the
American economy, create 20,000 direct jobs, spur the creation of 118,000 spin-off jobs,
payout $5 billion in taxes to local counties over the project’s lifetime, bolster America’s
energy security and strengthen our national security. The project, which has bipartisan
support in Congress, has also earned the support of local government officials in the
states along the pipeline’s route, labor unions, landowners, veterans’ groups, Hispanic
groups, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, energy policy experts, national security experts,
editorial boards and Americans desperate to see economic growth take hold once again in
our country.
The Keystone XL Pipeline project is the subject of an exhaustive three-year,
multi-agency review process, which the Department of State has led. This thorough and
fair review has included an examination of the pipeline’s impact on America’s economy,
environment, energy supply, national security, safety and routing. Among the agencies
that the Department of State has coordinated and consulted with are the Departments of
Defense, Justice, Interior, Commerce, Transportation, Energy, Homeland Security, and
Environmental Protection. The Department of State has also held more than 25 meetings
with interested groups - both supporting and opposing the project. It has also obtained
input from interested citizens across the country during the Environmental Impact
Statement comment periods and the public meetings held throughout the country over the
last few weeks
The Department of State’s Final Environmental Impact Statement reaffirmed the
findings of the two previous environmental impact statements, namely, that the Keystone
XL Pipeline will have no significant impact on the environment. It should be noted that
as a result of the comprehensive review process, the Keystone XL Pipeline will be
subject to heighten safety measures. Since the pipeline is the subject of a Project Labor
Agreement with four international unions, it will be constructed and maintained by the
best-trained workforce in the world. We are confident that the Department of State’s
review process and the project operator’s commitment to employing well-trained union
workers will yield the most appropriately routed, safest and environmentally sound
pipeline in our nation…
===end quote===
By Eileen Wright on 01-19-12
Arguments are fruitless because no one is interested in compromise. But, 20,000 jobs and all ofthe collateral business supporting this project would be a big benefit to our economy.
If environmentalists are sincere about protecting the planet it seems they would favor the US
developing resources with our state of the art technology over the uncontrolled processes that
exist in underdeveloped countries where regulations are handled with a bit of mordida.
By Craig moore on 01-20-12
Looks like the project is not dead after all: http://www.financialpost.com/news/TransCanada+shorten+Keystone/6024137/story.html
Also, Canada announced that it will market it’s oil to Asia after Obama’s “No!”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-19/canada-pledges-to-sell-oil-to-asia-after-obama-rejects-keystone-pipeline.html
So what was really accomplished by Obama’s game playing?
By Eileen Wright on 01-20-12
Obama could possibly have hurt himself with the ‘greens’ if he approved the pipeline. He knowsthey are a committed category. Dumping on the unions was easier. He knows he can count on their
vote, regardless.
By Native on 01-20-12
Obama didn’t say “no”, he said “maybe”. He was getting too much pushback from the Republicans in Nebraska. Silly President who wants to learn all the facts before making a
decision. Too bad we don’t still have dubbya pulling the trigger because he’s got “a good feelin”
about it.
By Craig moore on 01-20-12
Native, if you spin any faster on this matter your butt will catch fire!
As to Nebraska R’s there is the governor:
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/01/nebraska-governor-the-president-made-a-mistake-111473.html
===quote===
Nebraska’s Republican Gov. Dave Heineman, whose state is a key part of the Keystone XL oil
pipeline debate, expressed his disappointment with the final decision the Obama administration
made yesterday to kill the project.
“I want to say I’m very disappointed,” Heineman told POLITICO. “I think the president made a
mistake.”
“Really what he was saying in denying the permit was ‘no’ to American jobs and ‘yes’ to a
greater dependence on Middle Eastern oil,” he said. “We want to put America back to work.”
The White House has used Heineman as political cover in the fight, pointing to the fact that the
original route approved by the State Department was opposed by Heineman for ecological reasons.
He said that his Legislature and his administration were working to get the final approvals in
place and that the State Department should have approved conditionally while Nebraska worked out
the final route. The company seeking to build the pipeline, TransCanada, was perfectly willing
to begin construction at either end and finish in Nebraska, according to Heineman.
===end quote===
Then there is Congressman Terry:
http://leeterry.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2016:terry-statement-on-keystone-xl-permit-denial&catid=3:press-releases
===quote===
Terry Statement on Keystone XL Permit Denial
Congressman Lee Terry
2ND District, Nebraska
For Immediate Release
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Lee Terry (R-NE) today responded to the Obama Administration’s
decision to deny a Presidential Permit to the Keystone XL Pipeline – prohibiting the
construction of the pipeline. This decision requires TransCanada to begin the application
process for the needed permit once again.
“I’m deeply, deeply disappointed that our President decided to put his politics above the
nation’s job creation and energy independence – the two things the Keystone Pipeline brings to
the United States.
“I’ve worked with Chairman Upton to invite Secretary of State Clinton to testify before the
House Energy and Commerce Committee – to explain the Keystone review that her Department submitted.
“This isn’t over. We’re working towards restarting this project,” Terry said at a press
conference in the Capitol this afternoon.
===end quote===
By mooseberryinn on 01-20-12
Ya just gotta love it. The great King obama wrecking ball strikes again. But - still his enthralled faithful followers will make excuses for him. We really must get rid of this regime before they damage America
beyond hope of recovery. Anybody but obama! Any of the current GOP candidates would be far better.
By Eileen Wright on 01-20-12
Once again, Obama has shown that he is unqualified for the job. He is incapable of putting thecountry first.
By Eileen Wright on 01-20-12
“When I am President I am immediately going to direct the full resource of the Americangovernment and the full energy of the private sector to single overarching goal – in ten years
time we are going to eliminate the need for oil from the entire middle east and Venezuela” –
Barack Obama September 2008
Note: The Keystone project has EPA approval.
Note: Canada is a neighbor and an ally. Saudi Arabia and Venezuela are campaign supporters of
Barack Obama
By reggie on 01-21-12
Obama has stated that this was not going to be rushed through and approved without due process, and since the pipeline route wasn’t approved through Nebraska’s state department
the preliminary steps were not complete.This decision is not based on the merits/demerits of
the pipeline, it is because congressional Republicans chose to make this a political football by
refusing to allow the appropriate time for legally required enviromental review. The decision by
elected Repubs to end run the review process doomed this application, not the President.
It has been reported the speeker Boehner has $ millions invested in keystone XL, and
everyone knows the Repub position on regulations, especially environmental regulations.
These reasons, coupled with a political GOTCHA! make this a triple winner in an election year.
The pipeline will get another bite of the apple after the legally required enviromental review,
and a decision based on accurate knowledge and sound sciencs, not contrived side issues will
be reached.
By Craig moore on 01-21-12
Reggie, I refer you again to the letter from the Democratic lawmakers to Obama advocating forthe pipeline: http://www.transcanada.com/docs/Key_Projects/democratic_support_keystone.pdf
===quote===
We write today to express our support that a Presidential Permit for the Keystone
XL Pipeline Project is in America’s national interest. This is based on the fact that the
Keystone XL Pipeline will inject $20 billion of private sector investment into the
American economy, create 20,000 direct jobs, spur the creation of 118,000 spin-off jobs,
payout $5 billion in taxes to local counties over the project’s lifetime, bolster America’s
energy security and strengthen our national security. The project, which has bipartisan
support in Congress, has also earned the support of local government officials in the
states along the pipeline’s route, labor unions, landowners, veterans’ groups, Hispanic
groups, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, energy policy experts, national security experts,
editorial boards and Americans desperate to see economic growth take hold once again in
our country.
The Keystone XL Pipeline project is the subject of an exhaustive three-year,
multi-agency review process, which the Department of State has led. This thorough and
fair review has included an examination of the pipeline’s impact on America’s economy,
environment, energy supply, national security, safety and routing. Among the agencies
that the Department of State has coordinated and consulted with are the Departments of
Defense, Justice, Interior, Commerce, Transportation, Energy, Homeland Security, and
Environmental Protection. The Department of State has also held more than 25 meetings
with interested groups - both supporting and opposing the project. It has also obtained
input from interested citizens across the country during the Environmental Impact
Statement comment periods and the public meetings held throughout the country over the
last few weeks
The Department of State’s Final Environmental Impact Statement reaffirmed the
findings of the two previous environmental impact statements, namely, that the Keystone
XL Pipeline will have no significant impact on the environment. It should be noted that
as a result of the comprehensive review process, the Keystone XL Pipeline will be
subject to heighten safety measures. Since the pipeline is the subject of a Project Labor
Agreement with four international unions, it will be constructed and maintained by the
best-trained workforce in the world. We are confident that the Department of State’s
review process and the project operator’s commitment to employing well-trained union
workers will yield the most appropriately routed, safest and environmentally sound
pipeline in our nation…
===end quote===
By Eileen Wright on 01-21-12
NYT August 2011—
“The $7 billion Keystone XL oil pipeline cleared a key hurdle today, as the State Department
finalized an environmental review that found limited hazards from the controversial
Canada-to-U.S. project.
The environmental impact statement (EIS) on the pipeline—which would nearly double U.S.
imports of Canadian oil sands crude if constructed—is but “one piece of the information that
will be considered” alongside foreign policy, economic and other concerns, before State makes a
final decision by year’s end, Assistant Secretary of State for International Scientific Affairs
Kerri-Ann Jones told reporters today. “
After acknowledging that the EPA approved the project and stated that their study found little
hazard, note the considerations Obama is stalling with.
1. Foreign policy: do we prefer to do business with a friend and ally, or pump billions into the
pockets of Cesar Chavez and mullahs in the middle east?
2. Will the project improve our economy, put people to work and bring in more tax revenues?
3. “other”—I wonder what other could be. Obviously it means nothing more than polling to see
which voter blocks will be less offended and which would likely withhold support. It seems that
Hollywood and the green lobby are more important than the economy and possibly 20,000 citizens
hoping for well paying jobs.
It’s time to admit that Mr. Obama does not have America’s best interests at heart.
( Rumors about Boehner do not hold up against the fact that Obama’s pal Warren Buffet has
controlling interests in Burlington Rail Road which services the Bakken Reserve in the Dakotas
and may see competition from the Keystone Pipeline)
By reggie on 01-21-12
See: Cornell GLI’s new report, Pipe Dreams? Jobs Gained, Jobs Lost by the Construction of Keystone XL for debunking the inflated jobs estimate in the letter from supporters you linked,
Craig.
See http://thinkprogress.org/green/2012/01/18/406095/obama-to-reject-keystone-xl-today/ to
read the State department rejection letter from last Wednesday with accurate job numbers (not
from a study commissioned by transcanada) and other pertinent info for rejection of application.
By Craig moore on 01-21-12
Here is a breakout of the real jobs numbers: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/transcanada-releases-detailed-keystone-xl-job-creation-data-2012-01-10-71570
===quote===
The $7 billion oil pipeline is the largest infrastructure project on the books in the U.S. right
now. It would create 20,000 jobs: 13,000 in construction, 7,000 in manufacturing.
— Construction of the 1,600 mile pipeline is broken down into 17 U.S.
pipeline spreads or segments, with 500 workers per spread - that’s 8,500
jobs
— Keystone XL also needs 30 pump stations worth tens of millions of
dollars. Each station requires 100 workers - that’s 3,000 jobs. Add
another 600 jobs that would be needed for the six construction camps and
tank construction at Cushing, Oklahoma
— A project of such magnitude needs construction, management and
inspection oversight - that would create 1,000 jobs, bringing the
overall Keystone XL total to 13,000 direct, on-site jobs.
===end quote===
Those are just the direct jobs not counting the 1000’s of manufacturing jobs to produce the
construciton matterials, tools, and machinery to build the pipeline. Then there are the many
1000’s of indirect jobs to provide the community support structure to provide housing, food,
etc. for the construction and manufacturing workers from the Canadian border to the Gulf of
Mexico. Don’t have any faith in the Cornell study.
By Eileen Wright on 01-21-12
The pipeline project will also create untold collateral jobs and businesses that will evolve tosupport the workers and project sites. Beginning with the local survey teams and ending with the
environmental restoration efforts, there are all sorts of logistical opportunities.
By Gabby Johnson on 01-21-12
Now that the pipeline is delayed, the U.S. can demand American content in the equipment and pipepurchases as part of a final agreement. I wish we would require all the drilling rigs in the
Gulf of Mexico working American leases be American-built, but the multi-nationals always get a
better deal from South Korean shipyards.
By Eileen Wright on 01-21-12
Gabby -
That’s an idea that should be perfectly workable. The unions pulled off the same sort of thing
with prevailing wage law. So why not have domestic production and supply laws? I like it.
By reggie on 01-22-12
Don’t understand why anyone would take the estimate of jobs created or risk faced that were produced by the main, for profit, player pushing the project instead of the ones produced by the
State Department, acting as a neutral representative of the public who’s job of protection is
described in statute. Regardless, during my fourty + year career in construction I was fortunate
to work on two pipelines, and am familiar with the requirements for employees and materials.
Employee numbers are (on all construction projects) directly related to time frame for
construction. As such these estimates can vary greatly, even among uninvolved sources.
I am a supporter of keystone XL pipeline if it can be constructed in a safe manner that passes
our legal requirements, including enviroment protection. There is every reason to believe this
can and will be done, however we just don’t know yet if the undecided route, nor the rest of the
potential problems are adequately addressed. From experiance we know this investigation
takes X amount of time, and have allowed our represenative agency the required amount by
law. My opposition to this politically motivated demand for premature approval is based on
experiance with corner cutting construction companies, as well as profit based demands from
the coustomer that bend the rules. The potential for enviromental tragedy must be anticipated
and reduced as much as legally required, or no one should support a risk of this magnitude for
such a small reward. The large majority of this oil is destined for export to offshore coustomers.
By RussCrowder on 01-22-12
Boy, this blog really has the Komrad Barack Hussain “deniers” out in force. The reality is that if you are determined to bring this nation to it’s knees, the last thing you want is cheap and available
energy…..THIS WHOLE ISSUE IS NO MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT !
By BiggerMig on 01-22-12
Obama’s the man!
By Craig moore on 01-22-12
reggie, your position appears to be the tactic of “loving something to death” with delay,delay, delay…. In testimony before Congress Brent Booker, Director, Construction Department
Laborers’ International Union of North America said:
===quote===
On behalf of the half a million members of the Laborers International Union of North America
(LIUNA) I want to thank you and the members of the Committee for holding this hearing.
LIUNA strongly supports the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline which will move oil
from deposits in Canada to existing refineries into the Texas, Oklahoma and the Midwest. Our
union has been involved with this project for 3 years and we believe that the benefits of this
pipeline are too many to allow it to be derailed by environmental extremists.
The Keystone XL will create good paying jobs here in the United States and Canada. It will
increase the Nation’s energy security by providing a reliable source of crude oil from a
friendly
and stable trading partner. And it will provide State and local governments with new revenue
that can help them provide much needed services to the public.
For many members of the Laborers, this project is not just a pipeline; it is in fact, a
life-line…
===end quote===
By mooseberryinn on 01-22-12
The obama Regime strikes again. And still his mesmerized followers sing his praises! Hey there brother pass the kool aid.
By reggie on 01-22-12
Craig, there are many quotes from directly involved sources and supporters plus deductions from those who stand to profit from this pipeline, I just trust knowledgeable outside sources that
have no direct financial interest more.
Moose and Russ, congressional Republicans made this a political issue, it didn’t have to be
one. And really isn’t one on the most important issues of merit, safety, and supply, we all want
our water to remain clean, and a stable supply of crude that doesn’t enrich our adversaries,
right? No one is asking for extra, prolonged enviromental studies, just those already required
legally. We will still need the jobs after we are sure the existing requirements have been met by
this company, and the few thousand temporary plus few hundred perminent jobs involved are
not enough to warrent risking the potential disaster that would be made more risky by
premature approval.
Most of this oil is not intended for the U.S. so what else is there to our advantage? Or is it that
right wing activists prefeer a ploitical wepon more than clean water in an election year?
By Passin through on 01-23-12
Where is it a surprise that Mr. Harper has said he would sell the oil to Asia if the pipe does not go through here, this was the plan right from the start, was it not said that 3/4 of the oil was going
overseas and the last 1/4 would be split between Canada and the US. So where is this a threat to
get us to change our views, we were not getting a huge share of it even though it will be shipped
through most of our country, refined in our country, adding to the junk put into the air of our country.
By the way where do they get rid of the sand/whatever after it is refined; in our country or can we
ship it back to Canada?
I do get most my information about this off a Canadian station ;on a live broadcast the reporter
said “Mr. Harper wants to do more business with Asia.” What better way to gain entrance into the
countries over there then shipping them oil. Also from same news source it was said that the
report had inflated the jobs numbers, they stated many of the reports had been played with.
Maybe against my better judgment I will assume I can believe their news service as much as I can
ours.
Point blank the OIL Company wants what they want no matter if people want to be sure the
FACTS do work out the way they say. And we all know how companies would never fudge
numbers or facts to get what they want would they.There’s an old saying when cutting board’s
measure twice cut once so what’s wrong with a second check to be sure the facts are backed up.
And BTW I would want another check no matter who the President was.
By Craig moore on 01-24-12
I see where the Teamster’s, James Hoffa, had the following to say about the pipeline:
===quote===
“The Keystone Pipeline project will offer working men and women a real chance to earn a good
wage and support their families in this difficult economic climate. Our country was built by
the hard-working men and women of the middle class - when they prosper so does America.
Investment projects like Keystone Pipeline will go a long way toward helping our country down
the road to economic recovery.”
By Eileen Wright on 01-25-12
“The executive branch also needs to change. Too often, it’s inefficient, outdated and remote.That’s why I’ve asked this Congress to grant me the authority to consolidate the federal
bureaucracy so that our Government is leaner, quicker, and more responsive to the needs of the
American people.”- Barack Obama, SOTU 2012
...oh my!
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.