State Department To Reject The Keystone Pipeline

[Melensdad]

Get ready for $5 gas

Looks like Obama and his administration are going to cave into the Saudi oil interests, environmentalists, etc.

State Department To Reject The Keystone Pipeline

The Obama administration is expected to reject the controversial Keystone Pipeline this afternoon, according to Fox News.
The State Department is expected to vote against the pipeline this afternoon. Transcanada will however be allowed to reapply with an alternate route going through Nebraska.

The administration will be unlikely to approve the pipeline under the timeline for the payroll tax cut extension law which requires a decision by February 21

The project has been extremely controversial for two main reasons. Those in favor of the pipeline point to the 8.5% unemployment rate, and point out that the pipeline could create much-needed high-paying jobs. Moreover, it would provide cash-strapped governments with tax revenues. On the other hand after the BP Deepwater spill of 2010 and ExxonMobil's July 2011 pipeline spill, environmentalists are pressuring the Obama administration to nip the project in the bud.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-to-deny-keystone-pipeline-2012-1#ixzz1jpWMUcVk​

 

[FrancSevin]

OMG this is a TOTAL surprrise.

Time for the Republicans to stop giving another inch.

 

[joec]

And like this would lower the price of gas. Now that is a stretch.

 

[thcri]

And like this would lower the price of gas. Now that is a stretch.

Yep your right Joec, it would not lower it. But it sure may prevent it from going higher.

 

[Melensdad]

And like this would lower the price of gas. Now that is a stretch.

Would it lower it? Maybe not. Would it stabilize it? Yes! Would it help keep our prices lower than world prices? Yes! Would it lower our dependence upon "middle east" oil? Yes!

But Joe, if we use your logic then we might as well say that we don't need oil from any new source because no new source can help us. So we should stop drilling too.

 

[muleman]

Harper and the Canucks will build a second line to the pacific coast and sell it to Asia. We are so F*cked in this country.

 

[Cowboy]

Yep your right Joec, it would not lower it. But it sure may prevent it from going higher.

But it would add 20.000 + jobs, also I posted the other day where they have changed the route due to the concerns the greenies had. Now there should be no excuse for it to not go forward.

 

[joec]

Would it lower it? Maybe not. Would it stabilize it? Yes! Would it help keep our prices lower than world prices? Yes! Would it lower our dependence upon "middle east" oil? Yes!

But Joe, if we use your logic then we might as well say that we don't need oil from any new source because no new source can help us. So we should stop drilling too.

What I'm saying is the price of oil/gas/fuel etc isn't really based on supply vs demand and hasn't been for years. Oh and have you noticed the ads from the major oil companies on TV of late, all talking about clean alternate means of supply our energy needs usually with a picture of a windmill in the background? It isn't about supply at this time as there seems to be plenty as most have cut their production due to lower demand. But you won't accept it just because I stated it so look it up.

 

[Melensdad]

Joe, I don't need to accept anything from any side. I simple look for the truth.

Truth like the fact that the interior department won't let us drill for natural gas. Truth like we picked ethanol to support with tax dollars despite the fact that we have the resources to totally convert gas to natural gas vehicles and make us virtually energy independent.

 

[joec]

Joe, I don't need to accept anything from any side. I simple look for the truth.

Truth like the fact that the interior department won't let us drill for natural gas. Truth like we picked ethanol to support with tax dollars despite the fact that we have the resources to totally convert gas to natural gas vehicles and make us virtually energy independent.

Ah you do realize that the US has one of the largest supplies of natural gas on the planet. I also seem to remember a guy called T. Boone Pickens pushing for it by converting all vehicles over to NG for the last 20 years or so. He made one mistake is he mentioned it was cleaner than gasoline to burn. Oh those pesky environmentalist again or is it the oil lobbyist had more power than him to get it done.

 

[Melensdad]

NG is cleaner.

And yes, I clear understand we are sitting on decades worth of NG but we can't drill for it because the EPA gets all pissy about that.

 

[joec]

NG is cleaner.

And yes, I clear understand we are sitting on decades worth of NG but we can't drill for it because the EPA gets all pissy about that.

So it is the EPA fault again? Please Congress has the power to over ride anything any government agency does, hell they wrote the rules to begin with. They don't stop it due to the power of the oil lobbyist is all as that is their meal ticket.

As for this pipeline from Canada it seems there are some ligament concerns about it as they have had problems with it on the existing sections. Now how true that is I don't know but any doubt about it as far as safety then they made the right decision.

 

[Kane]

But it would add 20.000 + jobs, also I posted the other day where they have changed the route due to the concerns the greenies had. Now there should be no excuse for it to not go forward.

The truth for sure, Cowboy. No excuse.

But the strategic vote count doesn't work for Obama. Because the drill-baby-drill crowd won't vote for Obama anyway, the union vote is a lock regardless, and there are more greenie votes than there are from people with common sense.

So do the math. Obama has to reject the pipeline.

 

[thcri]

The truth for sure, Cowboy. No excuse.

But the strategic vote count doesn't work for Obama. Because the drill-baby-drill crowd won't vote for Obama anyway, the union vote is a lock regardless, and there are more greenie votes than there are from people with common sense.

So do the math. Obama has to reject the pipeline.

You would think the Union being they would represent the majority of the construction jobs would push for it.

 

[Kane]

comi

You would think the Union being they would represent the majority of the construction jobs would push for it.

Very true. But it would take much more than a "delay" to the pipeline to sway a union voter from Obama. Remember the $5,000 "signing" bonus he just gave to all of the GM workers? A measly five grand a vote ain't bad when it's coming from the taxpayers.

 

[Cowboy]

The truth for sure, Cowboy. No excuse.

But the strategic vote count doesn't work for Obama. Because the drill-baby-drill crowd won't vote for Obama anyway, the union vote is a lock regardless, and there are more greenie votes than there are from people with common sense.

So do the math. Obama has to reject the pipeline.

What makes no sense to me is they are still saying that they will reconsider if the route is changed. I guess they dont read the news let alone their mail as this was posted in November and they suposedly put the ball bck in Obamas court thinking it would move through quickly. At least thats the way I understand it. Full article at the link. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/nov/15/nation/la-na-keystone-pipeline-20111115


Keystone pipeline builder proposes changing Nebraska route

It would avoid the delicate Sandhills region above a shallow aquifer. Many cheer, but some environmentalists say the fight isn't over.


November 15, 2011|By Kim Murphy, Los Angeles Times
Reporting from Seattle — The builders of the controversial Keystone XL tar sands pipeline agreed Monday to reroute it around Nebraska's ecologically fragile Sandhills in the hope the move would shorten any delay in the project, which has posed political complications for the Obama administration.
TransCanada Corp.'s agreement to skirt the porous, watery region atop the nation's most important agricultural aquifer was celebrated by Nebraska ranchers and conservationists who have battled the pipeline.

 

[FrancSevin]

You would think the Union being they would represent the majority of the construction jobs would push for it.

Obummer is at odds with the Union on this. And some have publicly expressedthat outrage. That said however, it is unlikely the unions will hold it against him in the voting booth.

As I ubnderstand it, the EPA or the Interior dept alread approve the current route. So this objection is political, perhaps based on the Governor of Nebraska's eservations. Fat chance any new route will pass the interior Depts environmental impact studyas easily.

So the football will go inthe air from time to time, theteamswill call time out and the chineese will get the oil Exon Mobile produced from Canadian Tar sands.

China will place more funds into US T bills and Hugo Chevez will smile and buy some more Russan planes.

 

[300 H and H]

It's only the hydo carbon hating enviromentalists left in the way. The new re-routing has very much pleased the local land owners. They are now very much in favor of this project. It is only the hard core greenies that still wish to kill this project.

Regards, Kirk

 

[Cowboy]

It's only the hydo carbon hating enviromentalists left in the way. The new re-routing has very much pleased the local land owners. They are now very much in favor of this project. It is only the hard core greenies that still wish to kill this project.

Regards, Kirk

Lets not forget the "crook in chief" that wants their votes.