Why We Should ALL Want the Keystone Pipeline



Comments (15)

  1. tymtrvlr says:

    Why do all these facts come out now? All we ever heard was that the pipeline would NOT supply America. Why all the lies and cover-up?

    [Reply]

    B Reply:

    Because liberals have to rely upon lies and cover-up in order to advance their agenda.

    [Reply]

    Shelley Goldberg Reply:

    Thanks for your question. It’s not that the facts all of a sudden came out, but rather that, over time, the economics have changed. U.S. refiners are currently refining and exporting heavy Canadian crude. Yet, exporting it is now less economically viable given transport costs and market conditions. Why? Because Gulf Coast refiners’ traditional sources of heavy crudes, particularly Mexico and Venezuela, are declining rapidly. We are also continuing to strive for energy independence. OPEC has refused to cut production, namely because Saudi Arabia wishes to maintain its market share. This is helping to keep global crude prices low and is hurting higher-cost U.S. drillers. Thus, the Keystone XL-transported oil will remain with us.

    [Reply]

    gauge Reply:

    It’s not that its going to go away. we know that. what it is that how hard people like the richest 1% push so hard to do something without thinking of anyone else. think about the air we breath, the land, the water, and it’s that disrespect for us and life that we fight to stop it because it is nice to see beautiful things being taken care of with such in-your-face hatred for the rest of the people. we all know everyone uses it in everything we do. but don’t try to make us look stupid or selfish for wanting nature around us to look at the beautiful nature the lord gave us to enjoy just as well as the oil to use. but the lord did not want us to kill everything in its path to get to it. please think of all the world not just the few who think its there for the taking no matter what. all we ask is to do it the safest way possible and let all things live please.

    [Reply]

  2. Fred Yde says:

    I seriously doubt if we ever totally abandon Saudi crude or north Atlantic crude as both are significantly “sweeter” base resources than our shale or Canadian sands. Sweeter oil brings a far greater refined product, and I think that is a fact that is often overlooked in the discussion of imported oil. The US is positioned to sustain its current status as a net exporter, and we should. But the geopolitical as well as the logistic and qualitative reasons to retain our trading partners isn’t going away soon.

    [Reply]

  3. Tom says:

    Until the public links the $$$ that Warren Buffett stands to lose if this pipeline is built with the $$$ that Buffett provides to the Obama political machine, they will remain baffled by O’s refusal to sign off on the Keystone XL. Buffett’s rail cars will remain filled with oil for at least another two years.

    [Reply]

  4. Zap says:

    Fact: Obama is not blocking the Keystone for environmental reasons. Two of the Dems’ biggest donors own railroads that carry Canadian oil to US refineries.

    Fact: If all industry in the US were shut down, population growth in the rest of the world would increase carbon dioxide emissions (breathing) in 5 years to more that replace it.

    [Reply]

  5. KShannon says:

    For the amount of $$ spent to transport all this oil half way across a continent, why isn’t Canada building the infrastructure and facilities at home in order to process their own products and to create jobs there? Are we their patsy and doing their dirty work long term?

    [Reply]

    Kevin Beck Reply:

    To answer the question about Canada building the refineries: If they built them, where would they be built? If they are built near the source, then they would STILL have to move the product out of Alberta. This would require building both refineries AND pipelines. How long do you think both projects would take? And our Gulf Coast refineries are already built to handle heavy crude. They were built this way after the oil crisis of the 70’s, so that they could process the heavier Saudi Arabian crude instead of the American oil, which is a lighter grade.

    Today, they are having to blend some heavier oil to the Texas/Dakota oil so these same refineries can handle our own oil.

    [Reply]

  6. Roger Stevenson says:

    Natural gas is abundant, we have a 300k mi. Underground infrastructure already in place, CNG as a vehicle fuel is available and much cleaner than oil, in Canada Cng can be purchased for under $1 GGE at the pump and they are 10 yrs. Ahead of us on converting vehicle use to run on cleaner cheaper fuel!
    Why don’t we convert to CNG and export our oil as are smarter neighbors to the North and forget about a above ground pipeline much more vulnerable than our under ground natural gas pipeline already in place?

    [Reply]

  7. Peter Nick says:

    US refiners have the proper capability to handle the heavy Canadian crudes. Our refiners will soon be having a shortage of those heavy ends that we can so efficiently convert into transportation fuels. That’s because fracked shale oils are here to stay and they are as clean as a whistle with little emissions required. CNG will never be as mechanically efficient (ask any heavy truck hauler) or as cost effective as petroleum naphtha or diesel = so why not optimize our energy resources and leave Saudi Arabia to the Chinese. Keep the natural gas for electrical power. And if the Canadian crude is heavier….so what. We have to clean it up to current limits regardless. That’s why its price is lower than the shale LTO. But I’ve been building refineries for 40 years and the emissions are all pretty innocuous these days. CO2 ? Its plant food …. get over your fairy tales.

    [Reply]

  8. Donald Knapp says:

    This has been politics since day one. It is private sector money and not Government or tax payer funds. The reality is that government will benefit from fees and export taxes and numerous regulations and licenses and red tape to hinder the progress of the project. The plus benefits are the employment of of laborers, welders,equipment operators,truck drivers and many other back up workers. Supervisors ,food service and field sanitation facilities. A large mobilization project that will employ many. I would hope this project would be open shop and not saddled with union labor. If this becomes a Political issue, consider employing both union and non union labor, each on similar segments of pipeline. Cost comparison.

    [Reply]

  9. Wildman says:

    Man Made Global Warming? Have you take a good look at the mid west, and the North East, ten on down the East Coast, at snow levels this year? How about the Polar Cap and the Ice? have you read what a big, very big group of climatologists say say is coming? 30 years of cooling? Last year, published as the hottest year, was proved a fake. Climate Change, yes, for millions of years. Man-Made? Nope. Just a brain washing scam to get more money out of the US working families. Look at the millions that Gore made: look at all the solar energy companies that the CEO’s got huge, very huge, bonus’s with, while they went bankrupt, all funded by Obama. Are we all daffy or what?

    [Reply]

  10. Donny D. says:

    Search for “Keystone Pipeline Map” on the internet. Look at the map. It shows 5 stages to the Keystone pipeline system. Stages 1, 2, and 3 were completed some time ago. Stage 4 will be completed this year. Stage 5 is planned, and is only a shortcut pipeline within the original system. Am I missing something in believing that some of this distribution system has been in operation for some time? Except for the stage 5 shortcut? Thanks.

    [Reply]

  11. Shelley Goldberg says:

    Dear Donny D,

    Thank you for your comment. You are correct in that much of the pipeline has already been built. The issue is surrounding an extension to the pipeline as seen in this map: http://keystone-xl.com/home/keystone-xl-kxl-oil-pipeline-maps/

    [Reply]

Add Comment