Page 10 of 83 FirstFirst ... 891011122060 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 821

Thread: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

  1. #91
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    LOL The only ones hurt are the Reps. who have egg on their face AGAIN. It was their ridiculous deadline that nixed this application. Transcanada was invited to reapply and accepted. I still don't like the whole idea. Tar sands are the dirtiest and most expensive oil on the planet to produce, we have lots of real crude we can just pump out all over the world. Those tar sands should be saved for when we are REALLY running out of real crude.

    Jan. 19 (Bloomberg) -- TransCanada Corp.’s $7 billion Keystone XL oil pipeline still will move ahead with an alternate route after President Barack Obama’s decision to deny a permit, investors, public officials and analysts say.
    Obama blamed congressional Republicans yesterday for imposing a deadline on his decision, which he said left no time to approve the project. His administration invited TransCanada to reapply, an overture the Calgary-based company promptly said it would accept.
    Denying the permit pushes a final decision on the pipeline into 2013, safely past this year’s presidential election.

    Keystone XL Pipeline Seen Moving Ahead on Alternative Route - Businessweek
    Their ridiculous deadline?

    The application was put in back in 2008. The environmental study was already done. Transcanada should not have to reapply.

    All of that is Obama's doing.

    Obama will not be able to deflect blame on this one. People are not that stupid.

  2. #92
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    Their ridiculous deadline?

    The application was put in back in 2008. The environmental study was already done. Transcanada should not have to reapply.

    All of that is Obama's doing.

    Obama will not be able to deflect blame on this one. People are not that stupid.
    The route has been changed several times since '08, requiring additional study for the new routes. The rehubs aborted their own argument when they used a deadline that they were told in advance was impossibly short. Dumbasses. Why do you suppose they didn't use a more realistic span, like six or eight months? That's right -- because they were afraid it would be approved close to the election, taking away a campaign issue.

  3. #93
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham, in post #8 View Post
    Thank goodness! What would we do with 20,000 jobs this year and an estimated 100,000 jobs by 2015? [...]
    Well, as we can see above, it didn't take long for the propaganda to show up. Now, for the rest of the story....

    Transcanada itself cast doubt on its employment forecast when a vice president for the company told CNN last fall that the 20,000 jobs Keystone would create were temporary and that the project would likely yield only "hundreds" of permanent positions.


    Another reason for the discrepancy appears to stem from what that 20,000 figure really means. As Transcanada has conceded, its estimate counted up "job years" spent on the project, not jobs. In other words, the company was counting a single construction worker who worked for two years on Keystone as two jobs, lending fuel to critics who said advocates of the pipeline were overstating its benefits.

    The Cornell researchers concluded:

    The construction of KXL will create far fewer jobs in the U.S. than its proponents have claimed and may actually destroy more jobs than it generates....

    The claim that KXL will create 20,000 direct construction and manufacturing jobs in the U.S. is unsubstantiated. There is strong evidence to suggest that a large portion of the primary material input for KXL -- steel pipe -- will not even be produced in the U.S.

    Keystone pipeline: How many jobs really at stake? - CBS News
    So, even if the 20,000 'job-years' figure were true (which seems unlikely), it still would not true --it would be more like 6,600 jobs for three years... and then back to the unemployment line, except for a few hundred.

    As to 100,000 jobs by 2015, that is simply bizarre... if the pipeline were completed in 3 years (my figure, for illustration purposes), there would be -- as the TransCanada VP stated above -- a few hundred permanent jobs left. An alleged boomtown gone bust. With lots of empty Kool Aid packets laying around, blowing in the wind, it seems...

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    This issue will harm Obama in the election. We could have had 10,000 to 50,000 more jobs [....]
    Oops, there goes one of those empty Kool Aid packets now! <flutter>

    Oh, what a tangled web the right wing weaves, when they first begin to deceive....

  4. #94
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by jambalaya View Post
    Is that permanent jobs? What about construction jobs which have a more immediate impact and requires a lot more workers?
    No, sorry.

    13,000 'job-years' on the construction, if TransCanada is not puffing up the figures....

  5. #95
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I've seen no evidence that they're considering a western route through Canada. I've seen a few western routes mentioned, but they all pass through the US.
    Canada seeks alternative route for Keystone XL pipeline

    On Tuesday, an independent federal panel in Canada will begin its review of a proposed western pipeline that would carry the oil from Alberta to the coast of British Columbia. From British Columbia, the oil would be shipped on tankers to oil-hungry China.
    Yeah, this is so much a more preferable scenario...
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  6. #96
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    The route has been changed several times since '08, requiring additional study for the new routes.
    That's called a good ole fashioned run-around by this administration. Delay tactics. Evasion. Avoidance.

    Nobody is buying it.

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    The rehubs aborted their own argument when they used a deadline that they were told in advance was impossibly short. Dumbasses. Why do you suppose they didn't use a more realistic span, like six or eight months? That's right -- because they were afraid it would be approved close to the election, taking away a campaign issue.
    In 2008 the State Dept agreed that there would be an environmental study done, and they outsourced that study to a company that TransCanada got to pick.

    Then they come back this year and say, "hey wait a minute, that's a conflict of interests..." and so now the study needs to be done all over again.

    You want to talk about "dumbasses," take a look at the State Department. THAT's why the timetable was so screwed up.

    Either that or the impact statement was fine, and in that case it also suggests Obama's avoidance tactics for not accepting it.

    I think it's pretty clear that these are delay tactics, and that Obama never had any intention of making a decision before election day.

    What I'm saying is that the American people are not that stupid.
    Last edited by Peter Grimm; 01-19-12 at 08:15 PM.

  7. #97
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Obama will drop another couple notches on this one. Just all the more reason to throw him so far out of office that we never see him again.

    Most inept President ever.

  8. #98
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,343

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    For me, here is the deal:

    1) I am not against the pipeline. I am actually in favor of it. However, in planning the route the pipeline is to take, you must follow the rules, and make an impact study. It has been this way for decades. What Republicans did was to make an impact study impossible, then to accuse Obama of being anti-energy. It was their plan all along, and it was transparent.
    Not so fast there Dan...

    “The Keystone Pipeline has been through three years and it’s passed every approval process as required by the law. Even the president’s own State Department has indicated that this thing ought to move forward,” Boehner said. “The Canadians are in conversations with the Chinese, and if we don’t build this pipeline to bring that Canadian oil and pick up the North Dakota oil and deliver it to our refineries in the Gulf Coast, that oil is gonna get shipped out to the Pacific Ocean and will be sold to the Chinese.”

    “This is not good for our country,” he continued. “The president wants to put this off until it’s convenient for him to make a decision. That means after the next election. The fact is the American people are asking the question right now: Where are the jobs? The president’s got an opportunity to create 100,000 new jobs almost immediately. The president should say yes.”

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...economy-worse/
    This thing has been through more studies than any other pipeline in America...Why another year? Election maybe?


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  9. #99
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    [...] This thing has been through more studies than any other pipeline in America...Why another year? Election maybe?
    Probably

  10. #100
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    Oops, there goes one of those empty Kool Aid packets now! <flutter>

    Oh, what a tangled web the right wing weaves, when they first begin to deceive....
    The truth hurts, doesn't it?

Page 10 of 83 FirstFirst ... 891011122060 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •