• 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!

Senate nears 60 on Keystone

Wow, a story from Democratic Underground and Daily Kos.... there's a couple of unimpeachable sources.

glad you agree.

Or did you have data to counter the stories?
 
glad you agree.

Or did you have data to counter the stories?
How many jobs will it take to construct the pipeline? Resurfacing a bridge deck or adding an extra lane to a highway creates zero full time jobs, yet that was at the heart of the stimulus package touted by democrats for saving the planet from depression. Now, here we have a shovel ready infrastructure job and liberals oppose it. It gets harder and harder to take you guys seriously on any subject.
 
How many jobs will it take to construct the pipeline? Resurfacing a bridge deck or adding an extra lane to a highway creates zero full time jobs, yet that was at the heart of the stimulus package touted by democrats for saving the planet from depression. Now, here we have a shovel ready infrastructure job and liberals oppose it. It gets harder and harder to take you guys seriously on any subject.

Wait...you're serious...you don't see the long term benefit of upgrading 70 year old infrastructure?
 
I have no problem with Canada refining it's own oil or Alaska refining it's oil or using some other means of transporting goods to the mainland US.

So you would prefer highly flammable volumes be transferred as opposed to crude?

And since that's a big no no for pipelines above ground, would you prefer train cars or trucks?

I have no trouble doing the refining here, it would give us control of a significant part of the market, but is that what you want?
 
Well you did boil infrastructure projects down to "full time" jobs created in which you said "none".
That was in response to a poster who claimed XL would create only 50 permanent jobs. That is 50 more than the trillion dollar stimulus created.
 
My advice is shut the whole tars sands project down. Its' too expensive in too many ways. Now that the Chinese have signed on to reducing Greenhouse gas emissions, you won't be able to unload it on them. Tar sands **** will need 3 times the carbon credits as regular crude. It will become too dirty to use...cut your losses and put that land back into something tolerable that won't give us all cancer.. I'm surprised we can't smell it here in Florida. The entire project is an environmental nightmare whose time is long past.

Thank you for that unsolicited advice on how Canada should operate. It appears you believe that some action will actually happen on Obama's treaty or if ti did that will somehow affect existing long term supply agreements. At the least, that won't happen for 25 years.

The negatives of the tar sands have been so grossly exaggerated by the ecology mob that it's laughable. You need to know that Keystone XL4 has been twice reviewed and been green lighted by the EPA.

Take your environmental argument to them, in the meantime I'm watching the increasing business we are doing with Asia on resources and how that is driving the exploration and drilling industries and whistle all the way to the bank
 
So you would prefer highly flammable volumes be transferred as opposed to crude?

And since that's a big no no for pipelines above ground, would you prefer train cars or trucks?

I have no trouble doing the refining here, it would give us control of a significant part of the market, but is that what you want?
My issue is with eminent domain laws.Not the environment. If landowners not selling their property to a oil company means that oil company has to seek alternative means of transporting their oil then so be it.
 
Prove it.

Some will be exported, some will be distributed in the U.S.


  1. [h=3]What You Need To Know About The Keystone XL Oil ... - NPR[/h]www.npr.org › NewsScienceEnergyNPR


    2 days ago - Because it crosses the U.S. border with Canada, Keystone XL ... Crude from oil sands is some of the most expensive oil to produce in the world.You visited this page.




  2. [h=3]Keystone Pipeline Pros, Cons and Steps to a Final Decision ...[/h]www.nytimes.com/.../us/.../what-does-the-proposed-k...The New York Times


    19 hours ago - A. The Keystone oil pipeline system is designed to carry up to ... A. The United States and Canada are crisscrossed by thousands of miles ... In 2011, the most recent year for which comprehensive international data is available, .... email updates and special offers for New York Times products and services.


 
My issue is with eminent domain laws.Not the environment. If landowners not selling their property to a oil company means that oil company has to seek alternative means of transporting their oil then so be it.

I get that, but you have not answered the question. On any route one person can shut it down, so what alternative do you prefer?

You're not going to be weaned from the oil tit any time soon, US consumption ratios are rising
 
I get that, but you have not answered the question. On any route one person can shut it down, so what alternative do you prefer?

You're not going to be weaned from the oil tit any time soon, US consumption ratios are rising

I do not care how it is transported. I am not for seizing someone's property just so a private company,especially a private company in another country can use that property as their own private highway.
 
Hurrah! Congress finally gets something positive done.

nevet152.gif
nevet152.gif
the GOP members of Congress were given 3 simple orders by the API

1) Win a majority in Congress
2) Enact the Keystone XL bill
3) Force Obama to sign it under the threat of impeachment

And they blew it!!!!

Keystone XL pipeline bill dies in Senate | Reuters

In spite of his team getting paid $100 in millions by the oil cos., mcconnell failed to puff his silicone-injected cheeks and blow them when requested (i. e. only fulfilling order #1), and hence, will now set the world record for shortest term as Senate Majority Leader.
 
Hard to see what all the fuss is about.

Pipeline Map - Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers

Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) › ... › OilCanadian Association of Petroleum Producers


Map of Canadian and U.S. pipelines and refineries. CAPP Crude Oil Pipeline & Refinery Map · CAPP Oil and Gas Pipeline Map Download the pipeline map

[h=2]CAPP Crude Oil Pipeline & Refinery Map[/h]

rush limbaugh never made his followers (i. e. the GOP voting public) aware of this map. In fact, they're not supposed to see it.
 
That was in response to a poster who claimed XL would create only 50 permanent jobs. That is 50 more than the trillion dollar stimulus created.

Did the Stimulus Create Jobs?

But it’s just false to say that the stimulus created "no jobs" or "failed to save and create jobs" or "has done nothing to reduce unemployment" – or similar claims that the stimulus did not produce any jobs.
As we have written before, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a report in August that said the stimulus bill has "[l]owered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points" and "ncreased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million."
Simply put, more people would be unemployed if not for the stimulus bill. The exact number of jobs created and saved is difficult to estimate, but nonpartisan economists say there’s no doubt that the number is positive.
 
Invade Canada with overwhelming force and nationalize the tar sands. Problem solved. Likely without a shot fired.
 
Back
Top Bottom