XL Oil Pipeline

Sportello

Well-Known Member
More:

For transparency, I have worked in the Oilfield where the oil will come from, and in governmental affairs concerning oil. I no longer work in it and am now an avid environmentalist due largely to my previous work.


First off, don't get me wrong. I recognize the fact that without the oilsands the province I live in wouldn't be nearly as well off as we are now. I am not against pipelines or extracting oil resources, I am against improper environmental checks and balances that favour industry above all else. I am for science, sustainability, and using the best practices to ship and extract oil. There needs to be a balance, and so long as we let those with money call the shots, they will do as they please and it will be the taxpayers footing the dime when the :censored2: hits the fan.


If I were American I would be fighting this tooth and nail. Our provincial government has put industry above the environment and people for the past 30 years. Our federal government has eliminated a lot of environmental protections and is in a public relations war with environmental groups.


The same company who is proposing Keystone, TransCanada, recently made headlines in Canada along with our energy regulator, for not releasing information about a spill that happened 5 years ago. Our energy regulator, the NEB, withheld this information claiming it was an "administrative error” and delaying access to information as the negative publicity would put the proposed pipeline in jeopardy.


http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/02/04/transcanada-pipeline-rupture_n_4722126.html


Another company in Alberta is still allowing a leak to continue after 9 months!


http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/09/3268751/alberta-tar-sands-leaking/


The real winners if the pipeline gets approved? Not the working class who might get a few jobs, not the people who live in the states and provinces the pipeline will pass through. But shareholders to pipeline and oil companies, and oligarchies like the Koch brothers. The Koch brothers have bought up land in Alberta where the pipeline will pass through, and has been investing heavily into the oilsands in Alberta and stand to profit over $100 billion if it's approved.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/21/keystone-xl-koch-brothers_n_4136491.html


Yet, you're right about environmental cleanup and costs. Take a look what happened in Michigan, with the company being fined a measly $3.7 million.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/enbridge-faces-3-7m-fine-for-michigan-oil-spill-1.1246941


It's going to cost over $1 billion to clean it up, and who pays for it? Taxpayers.


http://desmog.ca/2013/08/26/official-price-enbridge-kalamazoo-spill-whopping-1-039-000-000


Not to mention the fact that the type of oil that will be shipped through this pipeline cannot be cleaned up. Diluted bitumen, tarsands or oilsands, is too thick to ship by itself and must be mixed with a bunch of other products. It sinks to the bed of waterways, making it near impossible to clean up.


http://www.desmog.ca/2014/01/14/it-s-official-federal-report-confirms-diluted-bitumen-sinks


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ediments-federal-report-says/article16335022/


Our neo-conservative government has allowed industry to write our environmental laws. They've repealed many regulations that made Canada a leader on environmental issues, and have done everything in their power to ram through these projects.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/energy-industry-letter-suggested-environmental-law-changes-1.1346258


In my province, the company leases land from the Alberta government, and it is federal law that they are to reclaim the land 100% once they leave it. The problem is you can't reclaim wetlands, where the oilsands are, and because of the cold it would take infinitely longer for the habitat to be reclaimed. Even with all that factored in, you will never reclaim a wetland 100% to what it originally was. It took a very long time for nature to do it on its own.


Here is a link that explores many of the environmental issues happening within Canada, concerning the federal and provincial government, how it will affect average Canadians, and the war of public relations with a collusion between government and industry, against environmentalists or scientists who go against their propaganda. It contains a lot of links and information. Our spy agency, similar to the NSA, is being used to spy on environmental groups who are causing problems with the government and industries propaganda. It is a scary time for the environment, when the people who are supposed to regulate industry and hold them to the fire, are directly working with them to subvert democracy and the right to a healthy ecosystem. The Canadian government uses taxpayers money to spend well over $100 million dollars solely to advertise our oil industry in the US and Canadian newspapers and TV instead of tightening regulations and spending that money on making industry less detrimental to the environment. Here in Canada we subsidize the oil industry to the tune of $32 Billion dollars, in the US it's even more.


This pipeline is good for rich people in both our countries. If trickle down economics was true, it would be good for everyone, despite the obvious environmental issues. Trickle down economics doesn't work. Thank you Americans, for fighting with us to protect this land in North America we call home.
 

Sportello

Well-Known Member
3400 people are needed for approximately one year. That's not a career, or even a full time job, it's temp work.

Who benefits from the XL pipeline? Not America, as a country, not Americans as a people. The Kochs make out pretty well, though.
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
3400 people are needed for approximately one year. That's not a career, or even a full time job, it's temp work.

Who benefits from the XL pipeline? Not America, as a country, not Americans as a people. The Kochs make out pretty well, though.
If they work 8 hours a day, it's a full time job.......full time job doesn't mean how long it lasts.
The temp. work for a year or so can help people who are now in permanent part-time jobs. I would much rather have the full time job....any really smart person would.
 

Sportello

Well-Known Member
If they work 8 hours a day, it's a full time job.......full time job doesn't mean how long it lasts.
The temp. work for a year or so can help people who are now in permanent part-time jobs. I would much rather have the full time job....any really smart person would.
No shortage of work for those people anyway. It's a fairly specialized workforce, not like working for UPS, not that you'd know.
No Keystone pipeline = more money in the pocket of Obama's buddy Warren Buffett.
Really? How so?
 

Sportello

Well-Known Member
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101460011

The Keystone oil pipeline is good idea for the United States, Warren Buffett said Monday, even though it would take away some business from his Berkshire Hathaway rail subsidiary BNSF.

The long-delayed leg from Alberta, Canada, to Nebraska should be approved, the billionaire investor told CNBC.

"I would vote 'yes,'" Buffett said in a "Squawk Box" interview, but added he has "no idea" if President Barack Obama will approve it.

"I don't believe in the Keystone pipeline because of the jobs you'd make building it. You can build anything and create jobs," he said. "I just believe it's a useful pipeline."
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
Actually Buffet favors Keystone. Buffet seems positioned to win regardless from which side of the table he has to ultimately sit...

One of the many reasons Buffett is as rich as he is...he sets up his investments (current and future) so that he wins either way.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
One of the many reasons Buffett is as rich as he is...he sets up his investments (current and future) so that he wins either way.

If you follow folks like Buffet, they all take this approach. With economies centrally planned where the emotions of politics rather than reason can steer the day, it seems the prudent thing to do. However the 2nd part of that is to also be the one steering both sides in the first place which helps also.

Hegel's thesis/antithesis/synthesis seems to be a very common approach, especially in such centrally planned societies.
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
This situation with the Keystone Pipeline is sort of comical...

Years ago, H. Clinton, as Secretary of State, was about to sign-off on the Keystone project in pro-forma fashion as it was relatively uncontroversial.

Until it became controversial when environmentalists decided to put Obama to the test.

It's sort of the dumb kind of project that will create some temporary construction jobs, but ultimately doesn't really do much for America - mostly it just continues to line the pockets of oil companies (not in the US) and refineries (some of which will be in the US).

I've heard that the number of permanent jobs will be around fifty - Wow!

Here's the comedy:

Obama is forced into a position where he feels like he needs to kow-tow to the people who elected him (even though he'll never be up for election again). He would have signed off on this project four years ago if not for the backlash by well-meaning but ultimately misinformed environmentalists.

The Republicans are quite aware that this project isn't quite the job-creator that Trans-National makes it out to be, and they're reduced to talking points about 'energy independence' and 'executive over-reach', neither of which hold water.

Someone tried to introduce a bill that would guarantee that all the oil flowing through Keystone would be sold in the US. As if that's even possible. Maybe that someone was running for election.

I don't know, build the damn pipeline. It's nothing special, and it's probably a better solution for transport than rail or tanker ship on the Ocean.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
I've always been fascinated by this whole debate on bothsides when I look at a map of the existing Keystone 1 pipeline and then the proposed Keystone XL. My other and main beef with Keystone XL is that our gov't granted a foreign (Canadian) corporation the powers of eminent domain and there are a number of cases of eminent domain abuse as a result. Where is the cry for the defense of property rights and where is the cry in defense of the free market principle of voluntary action in economic considerations?

Seems to me that Keystone is little more than an action of mass collectivism in the interests of an elite under the guise of nationalistic good. And the irony is the biggest defenders of such collectivism are the people who in rhetoric cry out as an almost involuntary reflex any other time collectivism is even hinted at. Yes, painted with the brush of nationalism and capitalism, these same people seem to just swallow anything fed to them as long as the correct rhetoric is painted over the top of it.
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
I've always been fascinated by this whole debate on bothsides when I look at a map of the existing Keystone 1 pipeline and then the proposed Keystone XL. My other and main beef with Keystone XL is that our gov't granted a foreign (Canadian) corporation the powers of eminent domain and there are a number of cases of eminent domain abuse as a result. Where is the cry for the defense of property rights and where is the cry in defense of the free market principle of voluntary action in economic considerations?...

The irony!

Or rather, the lack of genuine irony, and just more of the same grandstanding and political theater which has defined both sides in this passion-play.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
The irony!

Or rather, the lack of genuine irony, and just more of the same grandstanding and political theater which has defined both sides in this passion-play.

Another reason I find both sides of the grand political debate in this country pretty much useless and irrelevant. Most of it are mindless cries of 3 year olds complaining that the other 3 year old stole their cookie while neither recognize all the cookies were stolen from someone else to begin with.

To quote the late, great thinker H.L. Mencken:

Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods.

Another reason to see voting, regardless of outcome, as nothing more than the dividing up of stolen property, thus making the voter an accomplish to the crime! ;)
 

BrownArmy

Well-Known Member
...Another reason to see voting, regardless of outcome, as nothing more than the dividing up of stolen property, thus making the voter an accomplish to the crime! ;)

I've come to agree with you, but I'm still unsure of the path forward...if voting makes you an accomplice to 'violence' done to others, and not-voting removes you from that Faustian bargain, then...?

This is rhetorical on my part...
 
Top