Politico is reporting that Republicans will get what they wanted: the administration is set to formally anounce the rejection of the pipeline permit.
Ask your common sense why they are piping it all the way to the Gulf Coast to be refined? Why not refine it much closer to the Canadian border? Do we not have any refineries other than on the Texas Gulf Coast?
Then ask your common sense how much supertanker traffic there is on Canada's west coast compared to the U.S. Gulf coast? Does Canada's west coast have offshore mooring points that allow supertankers -- ships that are much too large to enter a normal port -- to load/offload cargo?
You might also ask what lies between the oil sands region and Canada's west coast. They call'em the Rocky Mountains for a reason; they're rocky, and they're mountains.
Last edited by AdamT; 01-18-12 at 12:27 PM.
Talk about cronyism, BHO rejects the pipeline and who will benefit?
If the pipeline is rejected, there are some companies that will profit, according to Andrew Lipow of Lipow Oil Associates in Houston…Railroads, including Burlington Northern, a unit of Berkshire Hathaway…are expected to benefit because they will be hauling more of the oil not flowing through the pipeline.
Way to go Warren!
Aggregate consumption fell in 2001, and then continued to fall between 2005 and 2009.
Aggregate consumption in 2010 is lower than it was in 1999 (19519000 barrels per day in 1999 vs 19180000 barrels per day in 2010), even though there are now 36 million more Americans, which is why per capita consumption is important.
It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
"Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911