Page 78 of 83 FirstFirst ... 28687677787980 ... LastLast
Results 771 to 780 of 821

Thread: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

  1. #771
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    Your first link is 7 months old and can therefore can prove nothing about the 1 month old Keystone XL pipeline decision/deferral.

    Your second link is an editorial that is essentially a rehash of your original link, neither of which contains any facts about selling any 'Keystone XL' oil to China, as you claimed: The right wing penchant for failure in these debates is baffling.
    Oh, okay. So Canada will not sell oil to China then. It's all a big lie in order to deceive the American public and get them 'scared'.

  2. #772
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,772

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    We should be drilling our own oil.

    Canada is not anything like an unstable Middle East, nor is it ruled by a whacky dictator like Venezuela.

    This project is good for American jobs, for American oil security, and it would lower gas prices.
    I haven't kept track of this conversation since my last posting on page 9 (post #89). So, I apologize if the following linked articles have already been posted. I will just say that while I agree with the initial assessment above - that America should be drilling for our own domestic oil in areas that lessen the environmental impact of public land and residential communities - we should also be very wary of this KeystoneXL pipeline.

    The NY Examiner article by actor and environmental activist, Robert Redford, brings a few things to light I'm sure most people who support the pipeline hadn't considered or know nothing about, i.e., "why is is so important to bring this pipeline to the Gulf Coast" and "who stands to benefit the most for its exports". I would urge the supporters of this project to read the article and then re-examine your position on the matter.

    Although Mr. Redford links Mr. Nocera's NYTimes article to his Examiner op-ed piece, I have posted a link here for your reading pleasure.

    Keystone Pipeline Facts*|*NYTimes eXaminer

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/op...e-xl.html?_r=1

    Additional information and/or commentary concerning this "foreign" oil pipeline project are provided below.

    State of the Union: Nebraska landowner response accuses Republicans of playing political football with the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline | Susan Casey-Lefkowitz's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC

    Keystone pipeline has flawed economics | OregonLive.com
    (Note: NRDC.org article links to the above article under the heading, "new analysis from Texas" which is misleading. The article is actually a Syndicated Columns op-ed piece written by "William Edwards, who runs Katy, Texas-based Edwards Energy Consultants". (See bottom of article for details.) Just wanted to be fair about who wrote it and where the "analysist" comes from.)

    Environment, Economy at Heart of Keystone XL Pipeline Debate | PBS NewsHour | Oct. 10, 2011 | PBS

    North American Oil & Gas Pipelines |Pipeline Construction in North America

    A Pipeline Divides Along Old Lines: Jobs Versus the Environment | Ocala.com

    Latest Pair of Oil Accidents Fuel Opposition to Keystone Pipeline Extension | Reuters

    Quote Originally Posted by sharon View Post
    Go to google and put in Keystone XL, export pipeline..

    There is NO shortage of information that this Canadian bitument will be refined and sold in foreign markets.
    Which takes us back to the Robert Redford NY Examiner op-ed piece. Know exactly what brining this pipeline into America really means for America, folks. The issue of "job creation" is but a small part of the equation (figuratively and literally).
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 02-14-12 at 12:48 PM.

  3. #773
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by sharon View Post
    Just trying to sort facts from political accusations and BS.
    Wonderful! And you're doing just a terrific job.

  4. #774
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    08-09-13 @ 08:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,600

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Wonderful! And you're doing just a terrific job.
    In fact, when it comes to jobs and the Keystone XL pipeline, the State Department estimated it would create only 20 permanent jobs and about 5-6,000 temporary construction jobs… not the hundred thousand jobs proponents of the tar sands pipeline have been citing.

    I am just not keen on buying a pig in a poke... Better we know what were getting.

    Motiva Refinery is fully staffed an operational NOW.

  5. #775
    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 sharon View Post
    In fact, when it comes to jobs and the Keystone XL pipeline, the State Department estimated it would create only 20 permanent jobs and about 5-6,000 temporary construction jobs… not the hundred thousand jobs proponents of the tar sands pipeline have been citing.

    I am just not keen on buying a pig in a poke... Better we know what were getting.

    Motiva Refinery is fully staffed an operational NOW.
    Come on Sharon, don't you know that no sacrifice is too great if it means creating just a handful of jobs in the oil industry? OTOH, no sacrifice can justify creating tens or hundreds of thousands of jobs in the area of renewable energy.

  6. #776
    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 Grant, replying to Karl View Post
    Oh, okay. So Canada will not sell oil to China then. [...]
    After failing -- twice -- in your previous claim, you now trot out a strawman. Odd, from an intellectual standpoint.

    Par for the course, from a propaganda standpoint.

  7. #777
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by sharon View Post
    In fact, when it comes to jobs and the Keystone XL pipeline, the State Department estimated it would create only 20 permanent jobs and about 5-6,000 temporary construction jobs… not the hundred thousand jobs proponents of the tar sands pipeline have been citing.

    I am just not keen on buying a pig in a poke... Better we know what were getting.

    Motiva Refinery is fully staffed an operational NOW.
    I guess we all believe who we choose to believe.

    The waters will become less muddy in the near future.

  8. #778
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    After failing -- twice -- in your previous claim, you now trot out a strawman. Odd, from an intellectual standpoint.

    Par for the course, from a propaganda standpoint.
    What straw man? I'm conceding the debate you to.

  9. #779
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    08-09-13 @ 08:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,600

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    I guess we all believe who we choose to believe.

    The waters will become less muddy in the near future.
    I should probably tell you that I love the oil business...

  10. #780
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    I haven't kept track of this conversation since my last posting on page 9 (post #89). So, I apologize if the following linked articles have already been posted. I will just say that while I agree with the initial assessment above - that America should be drilling for our own domestic oil in areas that lessen the environmental impact of public land and residential communities - we should also be very wary of this KeystoneXL pipeline.

    The NY Examiner article by actor and environmental activist, Robert Redford, brings a few things to light I'm sure most people who support the pipeline hadn't considered or know nothing about, i.e., "why is is so important to bring this pipeline to the Gulf Coast" and "who stands to benefit the most for its exports". I would urge the supporters of this project to read the article and then re-examine your position on the matter.

    Although Mr. Redford links Mr. Nocera's NYTimes article to his Examiner op-ed piece, I have posted a link here for your reading pleasure.

    Keystone Pipeline Facts*|*NYTimes eXaminer

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/op...e-xl.html?_r=1

    Additional information and/or commentary concerning this "foreign" oil pipeline project are provided below.

    State of the Union: Nebraska landowner response accuses Republicans of playing political football with the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline | Susan Casey-Lefkowitz's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC

    Keystone pipeline has flawed economics | OregonLive.com
    (Note: NRDC.org article links to the above article under the heading, "new analysis from Texas" which is misleading. The article is actually a Syndicated Columns op-ed piece written by "William Edwards, who runs Katy, Texas-based Edwards Energy Consultants". (See bottom of article for details.) Just wanted to be fair about who wrote it and where the "analysist" comes from.)

    Environment, Economy at Heart of Keystone XL Pipeline Debate | PBS NewsHour | Oct. 10, 2011 | PBS

    North American Oil & Gas Pipelines |Pipeline Construction in North America

    A Pipeline Divides Along Old Lines: Jobs Versus the Environment | Ocala.com

    Latest Pair of Oil Accidents Fuel Opposition to Keystone Pipeline Extension | Reuters



    Which takes us back to the Robert Redford NY Examiner op-ed piece. Know exactly what brining this pipeline into America really means for America, folks. The issue of "job creation" is but a small part of the equation (figuratively and literally).
    If enough Americans agree with Mr. Redford that the pipeline shouldn't be built then, obviously, the pipeline shouldn't be built.

    I'm Canadian and know there is a market for oil, just as there is for other natural resources, and it will be sold overseas or sold domestically. It doesn't matter to me. I feel this pipeline rejection is being short-sighted but that's just one man's opinion.

Page 78 of 83 FirstFirst ... 28687677787980 ... 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
  •