XL Oil Pipeline

[MAKAVELI]

So you are against the pipeline.
And you don't think it will create 42,000 jobs.

In reality we have thousands of oil pipelines. Were you against building those too?
Even if it requires less than 42,000 people to build this pipeline, it still should be built. We need it. And I am sure than anyone getting hired to work on that XL pipeline would be grateful for a change to earn some money. Those guys get paid really well.

Well I guess you'll have to wait till a republican is in office for those 4,000 temporary jobs. Maybe in 2020.

 

[realbrown1]

Well I guess you'll have to wait till a republican is in office for those 4,000 temporary jobs. Maybe in 2020.

Wow. 4000 workers are going to build a pipeline 2147 miles long? That's less than 2 workers per mile. Money well spent if you ask me.

 

[Harry Manback]

Wow. 4000 workers are going to build a pipeline 2147 miles long? That's less than 2 workers per mile. Money well spent if you ask me.

 

[realbrown1]

 

[Harry Manback]

I stand behind my last post.

 

[The Other Side]

If the pipeline puts money in working families pockets then I say build and maintain it.

Like the rest of these right wing Experts on oil, you also dont understand what is at play with the pipeline. You are proposing that the USA allow a foreign country to TAKE PROPERTY of land owners in the United States to build this pipeline, then profit off that land leaving the original landowner without a dime of those profits.

Since when did you people turn on american land owners? WHY would you support taking land away from americans to give to a foreign company for profit?

The measley 4000 jobs that the pipeline would create would only last for two years. Hardly worth the making. There are tons of pipelines already running into this country from Canada.

With the OIL companies CAPPING wells and cutting production, the XL pipeline would server NO purpose.

The republicans in the senate a couple of weeks ago, killed a bill that would have made it mandatory for ALL THE OIL transported through the XL pipeline to be used HERE IN THE UNITED STATES.

But you dummies think its going to end up in your tanks.

When the OIL companies UNCAP all the producing wells in this country and we run out, then maybe I could support this pipeline, but as we already see, there is NO NEED for this oil in the USA.

I stand with the american land owner fighting to hold on to their land and homes.

You all can stand with a foreign company tossing americans off their lands. Then call yourselves Patriots.

TOS.

 

[Babagounj]

Offshore of Gloucester Mass. there is an LNG site with a pipeline to shore .. Millions were spent to survey the seabeds , transport men & materials to the site , build it , test it and not use it .
A ship is always on station to warn others away from the area. A weekly resupply barge goes out to the patrol ship .
Another off shore site is in the planning , the survey boats have for years been working thru out the planned route .
Even not being used , it provides many year round jobs .

 

[bottomups]

So the keystone pipeline will not carry crude that would have ended up going by rail?
That makes absolutely no sense.
Then how does the oil get from the north to the gulf now?

There is already an existing Keystone pipline from the oil sands down to Oklahoma. Why do they need another one?

Why not build some refineries in North Dakota and then ship the fuel from there? What sense does it make to ship the crude to the coast to be refined and then ship the gas back north?

 

[MAKAVELI]

There is already an existing Keystone pipline from the oil sands down to Oklahoma. Why do they need another one?

Why not build some refineries in North Dakota and then ship the fuel from there? What sense does it make to ship the crude to the coast to be refined and then ship the gas back north?

Because most of the oil sent to the gulf coast will be refined and exported. Americans will see no benefit at the pump from Keystone.

 

[realbrown1]

Because most of the oil sent to the gulf coast will be refined and exported. Americans will see no benefit at the pump from Keystone.

You are either lying intentionally or you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

I wonder which one?

 

[bottomups]

You are either lying intentionally or you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

I wonder which one?

We are already a net exporter of refined oil products. We export quite a bit more than we imported last year. What makes you think that a large increase in crude flowing into these refineries will then be used here. Those products will go to the highest bidder.

 

[realbrown1]

We are already a net exporter of refined oil products. We export quite a bit more than we imported last year. What makes you think that a large increase in crude flowing into these refineries will then be used here. Those products will go to the highest bidder.

Try the part about SEE NO BENEFITS AT THE PUMP FROM KEYSTONE, and tell us how the WORLD oil market works in regards to prices and supply.

 

[MAKAVELI]

You are either lying intentionally or you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

I wonder which one?

Apparently you are the one who is clueless.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-would-the-keystone-pipeline-affect-oil-and-gas-prices/

 

[Babagounj]

Let's see ;
The refineries would continue to operate , their workers would still have jobs , and the local economy would continue to grow .
Exporting the fuels will require ships , those ships need a crew , supplies , and docks .
So the harbors will need to be upgraded , the roads will need to be improved , and people hired to make everything run smoothly .

And this makes the idea of a pipeline bad ?

 

[MAKAVELI]

Let's see ;
The refineries would continue to operate , their workers would still have jobs , and the local economy would continue to grow .
Exporting the fuels will require ships , those ships need a crew , supplies , and docks .
So the harbors will need to be upgraded , the roads will need to be improved , and people hired to make everything run smoothly .

And this makes the idea of a pipeline bad ?

Adding more oil to an already over saturated market will only reduce pumping and jobs elsewhere. So your argument falls flat on its face. Just face it, Keystone XL is dead and a bridge to nowhere.

 

[superballs63]

Hmm, and Republicans are the party of "no", right? Lol

 

[realbrown1]

Apparently you are the one who is clueless.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-would-the-keystone-pipeline-affect-oil-and-gas-prices/

The article backs up 100% what I said.

The Keystone XL pipeline would take Canadian oil and add it to the WORLD OIL MARKET, increasing the supply resulting in lower worldwide oil prices.

This just must be a bad day for trolls.

 

[Morsi]

The article backs up 100% what I said.

The Keystone XL pipeline would take Canadian oil and add it to the WORLD OIL MARKET, increasing the supply resulting in lower worldwide oil prices.

This just must be a bad day for trolls.

I actually agree with this analysis. In the short more oil production means lower prices which means consumers will have a direct benefit at the pump. It also helps out the economy as more and more consumers will have more money to spend. The long term effects however are a bit more complex. Keep in mind that low gas prices are exactly why projects like the Keystone pipeline are starting to become unprofitable. If the the low prices trend continues this will probably have a negative effect on states that depend on the oil industry (Texas, S.Dakota Alaska etc) and this will definitely have a negative impact on the U.S economy as a whole.

The trillion dollar question is will increased consumer spending be enough to offset the negative effects of decreased oil production? Impossible to accurately predict since there are so many variables involved. In the short term it has provided a much needed boost to the economy. In the long term however, it might actually hurt the economy considering lower gas prices has already contributed to rate of deflation which is not a good thing right now considering our current rate of inflation is already way below the 2% mark that the fed is trying to get to back too.

Only time will tell. For now the oil market is too volatile. IF the market ever stabilizes we'll have a better picture then.

 

[MAKAVELI]

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/533981/low-oil-prices-mean-keystone-pipeline-makes-no-sense/
If prices stay in the low $50 range, “the necessity for Keystone XL may disappear,” says Pete Howard, the president emeritus of the Canadian Energy Research Institute in Calgary, Alberta. “We’ve got rail [transportation] right now as a safety valve, and if we build up rail capacity to carry three-quarters of a million barrels, that pretty much takes up all the projects that are under construction right now.”

Last summer, rail capacity handled 240,000 barrels daily, and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers projects that rail capacity will grow to 700,000 barrels per day by 2016.

Oil prices today stand around $50 a barrel, a plunge of more than 50 percent since last summer due to a glut of production, including from the United States. Saudi Arabia’s recent decision to not scale back production has also softened demand.

Canada holds the world’s largest known reserves of bitumen, a tar-like form of petroleum, in underground sands in the province of Alberta. Recovering this oil is done in two basic ways: washing the sands with hot water and chemicals, or injecting steam through horizontal shafts underground. Both processes are more costly than traditional oil drilling, and emit more greenhouse gases (see “Canada’s Oil Sands on the Verge of a Boom Again”).

Right now there are at least 20 oil sands projects under construction in Alberta that are due to come online between now and the end of 2017. Regardless of oil prices, they will be finished because much of the capital expenditure is already sunk. However, Howard adds, “by this time next year, if the oil price hasn’t moved back upwards, the next stream of projects will start to be delayed.”

Last year, a London-based think tank, Carbon Tracker Initiative, issued a report carrying even more conservative predictions. It said oil prices would need to be at $95 per barrel or higher for 92 percent of Canada’s tar sands production to make economic sense.

 

[MAKAVELI]

The article backs up 100% what I said.

The Keystone XL pipeline would take Canadian oil and add it to the WORLD OIL MARKET, increasing the supply resulting in lower worldwide oil prices.

This just must be a bad day for trolls.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-would-the-keystone-pipeline-affect-oil-and-gas-prices/
Some critics contend that the pipeline could cause gas prices to rise, especially in the Midwest.That's because the oil that would be transported is not intended for American consumers. Rather, the Canadian oil currently sent to refineries in Illinois, Ohio and elsewhere in the Midwest would end up being diverted to Keystone, chiefly for export to markets overseas.


Play VIDEO
Senate Democrats end block on Keystone XL vote
"Midwest drivers would be hardest hit because the region currently imports more than half of its oil for refining from Canada," according to Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit public interest group. "Increases at the pump could range from 25 cents to 40 cents a gallon, depending on how regional refineries respond to paying $20 to $30 more per 42-gallon barrel for Canadian crude oil."

A 2011 report by Cornell University's Global Labor Institute projected that the Keystone's rerouting of oil from the Midwest would end up costing the region up to $4 billion in higher gas prices, which it said would "suppress other spending and will therefore cost jobs."