Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

sharon · Jan 26, 2012

Gill said:
You simply repeated what I had already basically said. Due to the threat of lawsuits and regulations, it is easier to expand existing refineries. New ones can't be economically built due to the high cost of lawsuits and years of regulation compliance.

This oil will be diverted to lucrative export markets with a tax advantage to foreign owned Canadian companies.

Canadian refineries and US Mid West refineries will be scrambling to find crude oil to refine...

It may be a job killer.

Keystone XL is using current unemployment in the US to jam this pipeline thru by grossly inflating job creation numbers.

Here: Read the Cornell Study.

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

Gill · Jan 26, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
The 3+ million private sector jobs created over the last 2 years nullifies that.

You should read BLS data instead of Democrat party talking points. By the

Riiiight ... because the Republicans who caused it in the first place could havefixed it quicker ... they just let it get worse and worse for 3 years running for their own amusement.

You are obviously confused.

sharon · Jan 26, 2012

Gill said:
You should read BLS data instead of Democrat party talking points. By the

You are obviously confused.

They won't be expanding refineries in Canada and the Mid West US.. they will not be able to get crude oil.

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

Sheik Yerbuti · Jan 26, 2012

Gill said:
You should read BLS data instead of Democrat party talking points. By the

You are obviously confused.

My numbers come from BLS. You don't know what you're talking about.

And the confusion is all yours. The economy grew worse every year under Republican leadership during the depression until Democrats took over in 1933; afterwhich, it imroved every year except one. According to your imagination, the party which caused it to occur and the party which caused it to get worse ... according to you, could have fixed it quicker. When the fact is, there is no evidence they could have fixed it at all.

MoSurveyor · Jan 26, 2012

Sheik Yerbuti said:
My numbers come from BLS. You don't know what you're talking about.

To be honest the numbers I saw were a 2.8 million increase (137968k to 140790k) from Dec 2009 to Dec 2011.

Still, I'm on your side here!

sharon · Jan 26, 2012

sharon said:
This oil will be diverted to lucrative export markets with a tax advantage to foreign owned Canadian companies.

Canadian refineries and US Mid West refineries will be scrambling to find crude oil to refine...

It may be a job killer.

Keystone XL is using current unemployment in the US to jam this pipeline thru by grossly inflating job creation numbers.

Here: Read the Cornell Study.

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

Because Keystone XL project would divert a huge volume of tar sands oil away from Midwest refineries to be sold at higher prices to Gulf Coast and export markets, it would increase prices consumers pay for gasoline and diesel fuel, adding up to $5 billion to the annual U.S. fuel bill. (U.S. News & World Report, Dec.16)

Sheik Yerbuti · Jan 26, 2012

MoSurveyor said:
To be honest the numbers I saw were a 2.8 million increase (137968k to 140790k) from Dec 2009 to Dec 2011.

Still, I'm on your side here!

I was talking about private sector data...

12/09: 106835
12/11: 109928

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

sharon · Jan 26, 2012

This is NOT a new oil supply.. It just diverts 700,000 bpd to the Gulf Free Trade Zone and away from Mid West Refineries.

Canadian domestic production is maxxed out for the time being at 2.2 million bpd... and half of that is used domesticlly..

Canada imports more than half of the crude oil it needs. .... purchasing around 55 per cent of our oil from countries such as Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. ....also turning increasingly toward new sources including Russian and African producers.

Lord Tammerlain · Jan 26, 2012

Gill said:
You simply repeated what I had already basically said. Due to the threat of lawsuits and regulations, it is easier to expand existing refineries. New ones can't be economically built due to the high cost of lawsuits and years of regulation compliance.

The regulatory cost and the threat of lawsuits in Alberta would be minimal. This is the province as I stated is allowing strip mining to get the oil in the first place. Building a refinery would be easy in comparison. They are not being built because the costs (labour, equipement etc) do not justify it, when an exisisting one can be expanded at a cheaper cost. Builing an extra unit onto a refinery site with all the supporting infrustructure already in place is far cheaper then building a new refinery without the supporting infrustructure

sharon · Jan 26, 2012

Lord Tammerlain said:
The regulatory cost and the threat of lawsuits in Alberta would be minimal. This is the province as I stated is allowing strip mining to get the oil in the first place. Building a refinery would be easy in comparison. They are not being built because the costs (labour, equipement etc) do not justify it, when an exisisting one can be expanded at a cheaper cost. Builing an extra unit onto a refinery site with all the supporting infrustructure already in place is far cheaper then building a new refinery without the supporting infrustructure

Why would they bother to build new refineries in Canada?

They can ship south (NAFTA) to refineries in Texas that are in a Free Trade Zone.. The new Chinese owners are working every angle.

sangha · Jan 26, 2012

Gill said:
Those numbers during Obama's 36 months in office have only occurred 9 times. I do consider that paltry and inconsequential when compared to the monthly job losses during the rest of his term.

In wingnut world, 9 times 120,000 is paltry, but one-time boost of 20,000 is HUGE!!!! :cuckoo:

sharon · Jan 26, 2012

sangha said:
In wingnut world, 9 times 120,000 is paltry, but one-time boost of 20,000 is HUGE!!!! :cuckoo:

Except its BS..

The construction of the pipeline will require 3200 to 4200 temporary jobs.. The refineries in Texas are already staffed and it won't take more than 300 to 400 people to monitor the pipeline.

sangha · Jan 26, 2012

sharon said:
Except its BS..

The construction of the pipeline will require 3200 to 4200 temporary jobs.. The refineries in Texas are already staffed and it won't take more than 300 to 400 people to monitor the pipeline.

Yes, I know. I was just using Gills own argument to show how dishonest his post was.

sharon · Jan 26, 2012

sangha said:
Yes, I know. I was just using Gills own argument to show how dishonest his post was.

Oh... LOLOL

Meanwhile, domestic energy production is rising and — astonishingly — import dependence is rapidly falling.

In 2010, oil imports accounted for 49 percent of U.S. consumption, down from 60 percent in 2005. By 2035, imports could decline to 36 percent, projects the EIA.

Gill · Jan 26, 2012

sharon said:
They won't be expanding refineries in Canada and the Mid West US.. they will not be able to get crude oil.

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

Ahhh, a report funded by environmental groups.

Very convincing.......:roll:

sharon · Jan 26, 2012

Gill said:
Ahhh, a report funded by environmental groups.

Very convincing.......:roll:

Severl US refineries on the East Coast and a large one in the Virgin Islands are closing or have closed already and the tanker industry is predicting a very slow year.

Consider that Canada produces about 2.5 million barrel of oil per year and imports another million from Saudi arabi, Africa an /venezuea.. then exports 2/3 of their total crude to the US.

sangha · Jan 26, 2012

Gill said:
Ahhh, a report funded by environmental groups.

Very convincing.......:roll:

More convincing than your claim that more than a million jobs are "paltry" but 20,000 jobs is HUGE!!! :lamo

Gill · Jan 26, 2012

sharon said:
Severl US refineries on the East Coast and a large one in the Virgin Islands are closing or have closed already and the tanker industry is predicting a very slow year.

Consider that Canada produces about 2.5 million barrel of oil per year and imports another million from Saudi arabi, Africa an /venezuea.. then exports 2/3 of their total crude to the US.

I'm shocked............ Your numbers are not even close. Canada produces almost 3.3 million barrels per DAY.

Other than that incorrect comment, you quoted my post and totally ignored it in your reply.

Gill · Jan 26, 2012

sangha said:
More convincing than your claim that more than a million jobs are "paltry" but 20,000 jobs is HUGE!!! :lamo

Feel free to quote my post claiming 20,000 jobs are 'HUGE'.

sangha · Jan 26, 2012

Gill said:
Feel free to quote my post claiming 20,000 jobs are 'HUGE'.

Not very good with satire, are you?

But it's revealing that you admit to thinking that more than a million jobs is "paltry"

Gill · Jan 26, 2012

sangha said:
Not very good with satire, are you?

But it's revealing that you admit to thinking that more than a million jobs is "paltry"

Couldn't find anything to back your claim I see, so you brought out the ole 'it was a joke' routine.

sangha · Jan 26, 2012

Gill said:
Couldn't find anything to back your claim I see, so you brought out the ole 'it was a joke' routine.

Not "a joke" - it was "satire"

Like I said, you're not very good with satire

Gill · Jan 26, 2012

sangha said:
Not "a joke" - it was "satire"

Like I said, you're not very good with satire

Actually I am, but you are not very good at it.

sharon · Jan 26, 2012

Gill said:
I'm shocked............ Your numbers are not even close. Canada produces almost 3.3 million barrels per DAY.

Other than that incorrect comment, you quoted my post and totally ignored it in your reply.

Canada produced about 2.8 million bpd in 2010 and ranks sixth in the world for total crude oil production.

Read more: Canadian crude oil production expected to rise 23 per cent by 2016

The burgeoning Canadian oil supply will lead to an increase of imports to the U.S.,” the report stated. “Canada currently exports around 2.2 million barrels per day to the U.S., with 64 per cent going to the (U.S. Midwest) market.”

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/techno...on+rise+2016/6049574/story.html#ixzz1kbUGCgSp

Gill · Jan 26, 2012

sharon said:
Canada produced about 2.8 million bpd in 2010 and ranks sixth in the world for total crude oil production.

Read more: Canadian crude oil production expected to rise 23 per cent by 2016

The burgeoning Canadian oil supply will lead to an increase of imports to the U.S.,” the report stated. “Canada currently exports around 2.2 million barrels per day to the U.S., with 64 per cent going to the (U.S. Midwest) market.”

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/techno...on+rise+2016/6049574/story.html#ixzz1kbUGCgSp

Ahh, ahhh, ahhh..........you can't change your facts in midstream.

You originally said Canada PRODUCES 2.5 million barrels per YEAR.

Now you are switching to EXPORTING 2.2 million barrels per DAY, which is correct.

Your production figure does not appear that it includes tar sand bitumen, which contributes almost 800,000 barrels a day. Canadian oil production in 2011 was over 2.9 million barrels per day, NOT including the bitumen.