• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Could US lose access to Keystone oil? Canada moves to Plan B

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
With the Canada-to-Texas Keystone XL pipeline stuck in limbo on the U.S. side, Canada’s Energy Board recently gave a thumbs up to a $6.5 billion pipeline designed to carry 525,000 barrels of oil per day from the oil sands of Alberta to ships on the British Columbia coast. The final destination is most likely Asia. The development has the U.S. oil industry attacking the Obama administration over its drawn-out process.
“It’s taken longer to approve the Keystone XL pipeline than it did to win World War II, longer than it took us to put a man in space, and almost as long as it took to build the Trans-Continental railroad 155 years ago,” said Jack Gerard, president of the American Petroleum Institute.

Could US lose access to Keystone oil? Canada moves to Plan B | Fox News

Jobs, wealth, energy. Things we lose with that idiot in the White House.
 
Do you have a non-partisan opinion as to why Obama is stalling on this? A reason, not a rant please. Even if you disagree with the reason - what is the actual reason (in Obama's view)? Do you know? Does anybody?
No, there is not a "non-partisan" answer. Spare the non-partisan bull**** okay? Obama's made it clear that he doesn't support "fossil fuels" and he won't back Keystone for idiotic "green" reasons. Throws billions at failures like Solyndra but Keystone isn't backed by a major donor and would piss off some of his more vocal base.

There is NO Rationale "non-partisan" motivation to his behavior.
 
I am sure we can lose the keystone pipeline. No doubt if it isn't approved in the near future Canada will have no other choice. IMO Not approving it is the president's way of saying thank you to the greens who supported him.

Basically, that and moving forward approving keystone isn't beneficial for the DNC in any strategic way.
 
I am sure we can lose the keystone pipeline. No doubt if it isn't approved in the near future Canada will have no other choice. IMO Not approving it is the president's way of saying thank you to the greens who supported him.

:shock: ... :thumbdown: Whatever happened to the concept of being the President of all the people, instead of a very small, very vocal minority? How much revenue, and how many jobs will never see the light of day? Sad...
 
How terrible! Exported oil that reduces the price of oil on the world market - just terrible!


The oil is destined to be exported, that why they want it near the Gulf of Mexico.
 
The oil is destined to be exported, that why they want it near the Gulf of Mexico.

Who gives a ****? It hits the gulf coast, it can be refined, we have plenty of those, it creates jobs, which we need.
 
How terrible! Exported oil that reduces the price of oil on the world market - just terrible!
If it reduces the price on the world market wouldn't do the same thing if it was exported from BC?
 
Who gives a ****? It hits the gulf coast, it can be refined, we have plenty of those, it creates jobs, which we need.
It would create jobs to construct the pipeline, but very few permanent jobs would be created.
 
As per the States' Righters, shouldn't each of the RED-wing states like Nebraska vote on having the Keystone come through their state?
Not that they would be worried about the Platte River complex and the Ogallalla Aquifer.

Canada hasn't exactly been the poster boy for the environment, and now they want to cross Maine from Quebec to Portland, ME.
They could give a **** about our water .
 
Sure if it cost the same. My guess is it cost more to export it into the world market from BC and of course it means no maintenance, no repair, monitoring, or shipping jobs for the US. So we all end up paying a little more and fewer people work - the true Liberal way!


If it reduces the price on the world market wouldn't do the same thing if it was exported from BC?
 
Keystone would also be a bargaining chip throughout this year with legislative matters .
I am sure we can lose the keystone pipeline. No doubt if it isn't approved in the near future Canada will have no other choice. IMO Not approving it is the president's way of saying thank you to the greens who supported him.
 
Basically, that and moving forward approving keystone isn't beneficial for the DNC in any strategic way.

Actually the highly toxic chemical witch's brew that moves the tar through the pipeline doesn't help this country in any strategic way. 'Clean crude' is being diverted to canadian refineries so our refineries can be converted to handle the hot mess. :doh

Given the big spike in domestic oil production the need for conversion to handle tar in gasoline production is absurd. let China deal with that crap. (if that sludge was worth half a bucket of warm spit the world would be bidding for it.... on the world stage there is only crickets.) Let Canada 'threaten' to sell the poison elsewhere, let them pipe it 100% across THEIR country and handle it on their coastline.

Win/win for us... so simple even a CON can do it.... ok, maybe not... :peace
 
Do you have a non-partisan opinion as to why Obama is stalling on this? A reason, not a rant please. Even if you disagree with the reason - what is the actual reason (in Obama's view)? Do you know? Does anybody?

To destroy America. That's why.
 
It would create jobs to construct the pipeline, but very few permanent jobs would be created.

How many permanent jobs would those toad projects that Marse Barack promised?
 
:shock: ... :thumbdown: Whatever happened to the concept of being the President of all the people, instead of a very small, very vocal minority? How much revenue, and how many jobs will never see the light of day? Sad...

There is still time pol, but it is running out.
 
Building the pipeline does not garentee access to the oil.

and it won't create jobs for everyone, only those with knowledge of working oil rigs and piplines.

it is only a fig leaf.

If those with this knowledge are currently unemployed, would it not be better to have policies that would re-employ them?
 
:shock: ... :thumbdown: Whatever happened to the concept of being the President of all the people, instead of a very small, very vocal minority? How much revenue, and how many jobs will never see the light of day? Sad...
How many?
 
Back
Top Bottom