http://www.cbc.ca/...keystone-xl-pipeline.html

Good... now it is far more likely that Northern Gateway will happen and even more money will be made by selling the oil to China, Japan, India, and South Korea at higher rates.

But regarding Obama's big talks regarding energy security and getting off saudi oil: ahhh hahaha!

Enbridge needs to submit a revised proposal, expanding the capacity of the northern gateway pipeline.

We are going to need to ship a lot more than 500k barrels a day to asia when this is all said and done...

Seems to work out better for us(canada) in the end!

Have I mentioned that I did not vote for President Wish It Think It.

As a TC employee, I hope you're wrong. But thanks to the misinformation-spreading activists (i.e. outright liars), Keystone XL has somehow become the poster child for all that is evil in the world. *sigh* It's amazing how so many morons can fit on one bandwagon without even ONE of them figuring out that they're being fed complete and utter nonsense.

I'm still hoping that common sense will prevail and Keystone XL will get the green light.

it seems kind of.. foolish that they wouldn't want this oil..

you can continue to "invest" your billions in failing green technologies, don't worry, but in the mean time you do actually need energy, don't you?

i'd rather leave it in the sand than sell it to china

I'm at work, but I just heard that someone called my workmate and said he'd rejected it. Can anyone confirm?

Looks like it's true... announcement expected from the White House in 4 mins.

That's what all the local political reporters are saying in DC. Some privately and some more publicly now.

megyn kelly promised to tell me in three minutes

I got a long lecture on this subject from an Occupy DC person at McPherson Square the other day. He kept claiming it would ruin some water table. I pointed out if he preferred, it could be shipped several thousand miles across a big ocean. He continued to ramble on about TC being evil. I finally had enough and left.

Why in the world we in the US (read Obama) would reject a deal that gives us a product we need at an affordable rate with arguably our best trading partner and that produces thousands of net new jobs is beyond me.

First of all... there are already THOUSANDS of km of pipeline running through the Ogilalla Aquifer (I can get the exact stats if you wish), some dating back to 1956. This would have been state-of-the-art, extremely low risk pipeline which even the experts agreed would result in virtually ZERO detriment to the aquifer even IF it leaked, due to its design. But the nay-sayers conveniently leave out the facts when talking about Keystone, because celebrities have made it their current 'cause celebre' - and apparently your average American is content to just believe whatever comes out of [that moron] Darryl Hannah's mouth instead of getting the facts for themselves.

I'm sorry patty, but although I do support oilsands expansion and pipeline expansion to transport said oilsands expansion, I still don't agree with some of those stats that TC projects.

For example the "thousands of km of pipeline" they like to quote is very misleading. A vast majority of the pipe accounted for in that calculation is regular city utility pipes (aka the pipes that bring natural gas into your home furnace for heating).

Although those technically are "pipelines" it is an apples to oranges comparison between those pipes and a major commercial pipeline...

Obama just wants to destroy the US!

I don't get it. Why don't you stop blaming the US and build your damn refineries to process the tar sands?


Canada already has pipelines that go to refineries in the midwest. Ya'll want the keystone xl so they can go to the gulf coast refineries, skirt taxes, and ship it off overseas.

What am I missing here?

a) What you seem to be missing is that many Canadians don't especially care whether or not the US buys our oil. At this point polling indicates that we would rather sell it to asia anyway.

b) How does it skirt taxes? The refineries are on US soil (last I checked they aren't located in a foreign trade zone) thus the revenues for the value added activity very much go to the US refineries. The oil companies sell the oil to the refineries who then refine it and then sell all the end products for a profit. Those profits would be taxed by US governments (such as Texas, local and Federal governments).

c) Refineries produce hundreds of products as output from petroleum. This includes everything from fuels like diesel, gasoline, jet fuel, bunker fuel, kerosine etc etc. As well as things like ashfalt, various plastics, lubricants, and even products like insecticides. Many of the products such as ashfault tend to be driven by regional markets due to the high transportation/distribution costs (similar to how products like cement tend to be mostly regional economy driven).

Canada doesn't have enough of a market (or market access) to make producing all of these products in vast quantities viable. Thus why we don't have many refineries here.

Question: Is this oil going to be sold in the United States? Or is it being refined for the international market?

I suspect people are being disingenuous. Saying that Canada is selling "us" oil is not the case. They are selling it to gigantic soulless international corporations that will put the usual markup on it, and then sell it on the global market.

I'm getting this vibe that Canadians think they are doing Americans a favor. I just don't see it.

Did 'Obama' reject it or was it another sabotage run by the current GOP incarnation to keep a good project from being attributed to Obama?

Seems like they do that a lot. I don't have a clue about anything regarding the pipeline but these congress people have done good at making Obama the boogeyman.

As a part of the payroll tax deal (which the republicans took an asswhooping on, lmao), the GOP petulantly demanded that Obama decide one way or another on Keystone XL by a deadline. Their fault, because Obama probably would have approved it, if the GOP had allowed this to play out.

As it stands, there are issues with individual states about where the exact location of the pipeline. Instead of allowing a final compromise on issues such at these, the GOP tried to force Obama's hand, and he said no.

Rejection is official now.

H4xOr:

a) Polls may show that, but oil exes would rather not. Dump more oil in Asia and selling price goes down. That's why they want to refine it on the coast and ship it to latin america.

b) It skirts taxes because they would use refineries on gulf coast in free trade zones. No duties.

If it means anything to you I want to buy your oil...

Cheaper oil to latin america?

WIN

Were you old enough to vote when Obama got elected?

I am currently working on a remediation project for the worst subsurface pipeline spill I have ever dealt with (which numbers in the hundreds). It has affected a whopping 2.2 acres of subsurface aquifer. 2.2 acres is nothing, nada to an aquifer the size of the Ogallala. This is from a 60+ year old PL that is made of thin WWII steel. The new lines are as thick as tank armor and every weld gets X-rayed. The notion that a PL could possibly do more damage to the Ogallala aquifer than all of Nebraska's industrial agriculture is beyond laughable.

Dozens of high capacity pipelines are being built out of the shale gas plays every day without a squeak from the treehuggers. Keystone became a political football, decisions regarding its development have nothing to do with science or engineering and everything to do with November 6, 2012.

Point 1) As I understand it, the environmental concern regarding spills from the pipeline (which TC has a checkered history with to begin with) are secondary to the carbon emissions from burning tar sands oil.

Point 2) The Administration originally intended to delay the decision until after the 2012 election. It was the sole "concession" of consequence demanded by Republicans in the payroll tax debacle that the decision be expedited; before the State Department's (whom has final say {short of POTUS} in international trade agreements) recommendation was made. If indeed this whole happenstance were centered around the 2012 Presidential Election, who made it so? And Why?

Lots of good points: yes, it become a push for political points that caused the defeat.

Of course both sides are screaming Doom or gloom: It so save just like Fukishima, the Pumps and Gates around New Orleans, Valdez, BP's Gulf... ect. The Aquafiers will never get damaged, untill ooops that dam Tornado wasn't in our forecast and we saved some maintenance money so some valves failed so the spill is alittle bigger then it should have been, but its not our fault we outsourced that part of the project and it was approved my the Army Corp so its real the Government's fault. We've heard it before count on it happpening again.

Now there is so much Oil in Canada, and North Dakota, Seems like it might be just as practical and yes They cost billions (oh so does this pipeline) To just Build a Big Refinery in the North Midwest instead... Wow what a concept expand our refinery Capacity .. But wait that might cause prices to fall, we just spent 30 years closing refineries to ensure there was actually no excess capacity and now is at bare capability to meet the demand during good economic times especially when we shut them all down for mainetence in JUNE so to create the shortage before the summer season

Taxas or Texas : The oil will get sold on the world market anyways, but that doesn't help the refineries in the gulf.
As for tax base those refined products getting sold will pay taxes to the country that has the lowest tax base for them. As we are talking Multi-nationals with foreign holdings, I spend $100 to make products and sell them to my Foreign subsidiary, for the $100 and pay no taxes as I have no profit. that foreign Sub in low tax Nation now sells them products for there $400 value and pays the tax to that Low/No corp tax country, And as the holder I will only pay taxes here on the portion of the post tax profits that I bring back to the US. Oh but I can wait till they pass another Tax-free Repatriation of Currency measure that they did only about 6 years ago, and are again talking about. (Bringing all them billions home in 2005 really expanded the economy, and created mass prosperty... didn't it...lol)

He changed his mind.

http://thepeoplescube.com/...pipeline-route-t8301.html

Rufus: LoL... that had better not run through ANWAR.

Obama did reject this on his authority alone. It is shameful. My only two guesses is either he hates America and wants us to fail or he is doing this to gain support from the extreme left wing of his party for election. I have no idea.


What i do know is that American economic growth is barely if at all and cheaper gas and oil would go a long way for most of Americans to have more money in their pockets to spend. It is shameful to delay anything to do with this. He should do all he can to speed the process up.

One other possibility- big oil is giving him tonz of money for reelection to delay this so they can make HUGE profits on over priced gas as long as possible. When will we get a President who will put AMERICA FIRST? Bush did not. Obama clearly has not.

Deerhunter: At face value it looks like it would bring more oil to the US; however, that's just deception. There are already pipelines running from Canada to the US which are not at max capacity. The XL project would route even more oil away from the midwest (increase of fuel prices) refineries, and send oil to the gulf refineries so it can be shipped overseas to latin american countries.

Keystone XL does not equal cheaper gas and oil.

President Obama is the magic president. He wishes things were the way he wants them to be and believes that things are the way he thinks they should be, so they are the way he thinks they should be. President Obama lives in his own little world where wishes matter and reality can take a hike. Sadly, the rest of us must live in the real world where reality matters and wishes can take a hike. Until wishes turn into action to change reality...they are meaningless.

The Keystone Pipeline would create jobs, stimulate business and has united two opposing forces (unions and businesses). President Wish It Think It is too concerned with his non-existant reelection chances to do right by the nation. The Keystone developers have listened to concerns raised by the states concerning environmental impact and made adjustments as necessary to accommodate the people that are far more concerned about the environmental impact in individual areas than the Federal Government is. If Wish It Think It had determined to utilize federal and state resources to conduct a final, accelerated environmental impact study, then I would have supported him. President Wish It Think It, however, wishes the states would go away and thinks that only the federal government can know anything, so he has ignored the reality of the situation and substituted what he wishes things were. He wishes he could put off a decision until after he's defeated in the 2012 election.

I may be optimistic, but I dearly hope that President Wish It Think It will be a one term president.

I think you are in serious need of an Econ 101 course on supply and demand.

Patty and others: If this pipeline will be so ubersafe and never fail why were there 12 leaks in similar pipeline in just the past year?

Nothing stops Obama from reversing his decision. The GOP's move was right--you make him pick now before an election so people can see him for what he's worth. Plus, the longer you wait, inevitably the more it costs.

Why would they ship to Latin American countries when the Paraguana Refinery is the world's second largest in Venezuela?

Second, how do you figure they would route more oil away from the midwest if you're increasing supply and your refineries have set capacities? Perhaps it isn't a massive influx, but it will be more. Shipping it abroad means significant cost in transport and insurance. You sell where you can make the money first.

Exactly what don't you understand? Right now Canada's oil is not in huge demand in Asia nor in the midwest...because of the lack of demand for the oil, it keeps the price down. Canada right now has 2 partners, Midwest and Asia---they are seeking to add latin america to that list with the keystone XL. They would divert the oil from the midwest refineries to the gulf refineries and ship it to latin american countries.

WHere am i wrong?

TC stated their intentions to do so in their own documents.

sigma, the foreign trade zones that the refineries are located in don't exempt from all taxes, just certain ones, as such there will still be government revenue.

Also, oil sands bitumen is a very heavy oil. The reason why they want to pipe it to Texas is because the coastal refineries have been recently upgraded in order to handle heavy bitumen. The refineries in the midwest have not recieved similar upgrades and thus do not have the proper capability to handle the bitumen. That is why they want to pipe it to texas, otherwise it would absolutely make more sense to pipe it to the midwest...

And bobby: refer to archiac's post for your answer on that one. The pipelines you are talking about which have leaked were build a long time ago and no not come anywhere near the standards of modern built pipelines.

H4: I'm no expert at all on this, but no I don't believe that is the answer. I realize I"m quoting USA today but this seems to state at least some of the spills were from only year old pipeline:
http://content.usatoday.com/...one-pipeline-hits-bumps/1

sigma: if what you say is true that does make some sense, but I'd been under the impression they weren't shipping to midwest b/c there wasn't enough capabilities there and they were sending it to gulf coast refineries. So I guess, sorry, I do get your economics...if not your assumptions (and perhpas I'm wrong there too)

I have heard actual experts who used to work in the oil industry with worries over this plan. One worry stated by a former structural engineer with a similar pipeline was that the place he was with before essentially ignored problems with the quality of craftsmanship etc because it was in the middle of nowhere and no one would care. Multiple other issues were brought up too. Not everything activits say is utter nonsense.

obama is just a fail president

Stop spelling his name wrong- it is Obummer.

I'm sure if there was excess capacity then they would rather ship and turn a profit than reduce the amount pumped out. With that said, I think you're confusing oil and natural gas. The asian markets would love your natural gas (http://www.ensec.org/...rity1111&Itemid=386), but that's not the same thing.

Not like the republicans ever game anything a shot to work. If Obama said he wanted to save 1million people for free they'd say no

oh bush was plenty of fail also.

clinton was the last non-fail president we had, sucks it's been 12 years since we had anything competent in the white house

meh. Comparing people from very different economic and social times is hard imo. If Obama didn't inherit a country in such a fluff state at the time then perhaps people would think differently :P

if politics wasn't so polarized and the only way to gain politcal advantage wasn't to destroy any policy presented by the opposition regardless of its merit, then maybe we'd have a non fail government.

You've been listening to that moron Darryl Hannah, haven't you? :p

There have been leaks. 11 of the 12 were small leaks at pumping stations which were cleaned up within hours (I believe the amounts were all under 2L, but it would take me a while to find the exact stats) with zero environmental impact. The twelfth and largest leak was, as I recall, a microfine spray leak that affected a field downwind. The amount leaked was less than the amount in your car, and it was also cleaned immediately with no environmental impact. (And it wasn't 'similar' pipeline - it was older and/or legacy pipeline.)

This is the safest pipeline technology ever developed. It far exceeds any current safety regulations. It has a barrier, so that in the unlikely event of a leak or spill, the bitumen would be contained. And that's an important fact that most people ignore - this pipeline would be transporting BITUMEN, which is thick, heavy, and slow moving. It takes bitumen months to move inches. After a full year of laying on the ground, bitumen would have moved only a few feet.

And to H4's point about TC releasing 'misleading' information about the type of pipelines currently running through the Ogallala - I went back to our archives yesterday. I'll do this in miles, because the stats were easier to remember: There are currently 21,000 miles of pipeline running through the Ogallala. Over 3,000 miles of that pipeline is transporting hazardous LIQUIDS, and some of it dates back to 1956.

In case that doesn't make my points for me, I'll say it again. This is the safest pipeline technology ever developed and far exceeds current safety standards. And it is transporting bitumen, which, in the unlikely event it were to escape from the safest pipe ever developed, would migrate at the pace of a dead frozen snail in Moose Jaw in January.

In any case, TC saw this coming and had already agreed on an alternative route with the powers that be. This pipeline will be built - the only question is where.

I was unaware that anyone could inherit a Presidency. I'm pretty he's elected. And in this situation, he actually ran on the economic calamity to win his election. So this inherited rhetoric is a bunch of bs because everyone knows the economy was sinking as he ran and he campaigned on it. But he also made unrealistic promises to win an election and should be held accountable given the facts as people see them.

I just scoff at the notion that someone could inherit a problem that they used to campaign on. You run to change things. Not to b-tch about them. If he wants to keep complaining then I'm sure CNN could free up some space.

you look red in the face...