• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

What is wrong with the Keystone XL?

SkinsNDeacs said:
Who is paying for the spills and clean ups now?
Click to expand...

Depends where. Almost always local citizens are paying costs directly or indirectly. Someone feel free to drop knowledge on me otherwise.

I find the strong demand for the pipeline by folks who really gain nothing from its existence to be as strange as strong opposition.
 
It's another scam. We will get none of the oil. It creates a total of thirty-five permanent jobs. There have been several oil spills with this type of oil and none have been completely cleaned up.

Very basically, we take significant, long-term ecological and economic risks for virtually gains. If this is such a good and safe idea, why don't the Canadians build the pipeline to BC?

This is another example of RW scare tactics and massive spending winning an issue that has no value to America. It's also another example of how weak the spines of Dem elected officials are.
 
Last edited:
I find it interesting purely from a political standpoint. Like I said in the OP, there doesn't appear to be the nation saving benefits that the Republicans claim but it is very strange (from a political standpoint) how the Dems are handling this. It goes to show you why extreme elements a party drive the party to demise. There are a lot of parallels on this to how Tea Party purist ruin the Republicans...relying on emotion rather than facts, driving the party to "purity" despite being in opposition to the majority of America.
 
RJKarl said:
It's another scam. We will get none of the it. It creates a total of thirty-five permanent jobs. There have been several oil spills with this type of oil and none have been completely cleaned up.

Very basically, we take significant, long-term ecological and economic risks for virtually gains. If this is such a good and safe idea, why don't the Canadians build the pipeline to BC?
Click to expand...

That is basically the opposite of what the well researched (Obama) State Department study concluded.
 
I don't think there is any great benefit or detriment to Keystone XL. Is there evidence of it being either?
 
We could probably have a thread called "What is right with the Keystone XL?"
 
I'm really surprised that a Cato article features the following line: "In this case, the fault lies squarely with President Obama."
 
Right now, the cost to extract and ship the oil requires the price of oil to be something like $75 / barrel in order to be profitable (I think the number is around there, but I won't swear to it).

Keystone XL reduces the cost of transporting the oil and lowers the price of oil required for the process to be profitable.
 
bym051d said:
Right now, the cost to extract and ship the oil requires the price of oil to be something like $75 / barrel in order to be profitable (I think the number is around there, but I won't swear to it).

Keystone XL reduces the cost of transporting the oil and lowers the price of oil required for the process to be profitable.
Click to expand...

Sure, but it's my understanding that this isn't oil that will be used domestically. So the impact for the average US citizen is pretty negligible.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Sure, but it's my understanding that this isn't oil that will be used domestically. So the impact for the average US citizen is pretty negligible.
Click to expand...

Correct. Oil is an international commodity. I think the people most impacted are the refiners in the gulf. Additional supply will have a price suppressing effect on the market (assuming there's no supply drops from other areas), but I don't know how much.

And remember, this is a Canadian company who profits most from Keystone XL.
 
bym051d said:
Correct. Oil is an international commodity. I think the people most impacted are the refiners in the gulf. Additional supply will have a price suppressing effect on the market (assuming there's no supply drops from other areas), but I don't know how much.

And remember, this is a Canadian company who profits most from Keystone XL.
Click to expand...

Do we levy taxes and fees for them to move oil across our land?
 
seems like in a sane world, the elephants and donkeys would get around a table and make a deal. The elephants can have their pipeline for their corporate cronies. The donkeys get some beefed up environmental protections, some spending on alternative energy, maybe a trust fund to pay for any spills, so their environmentalist/alternative energy corporate cronies are happy. Problem solved.

instead it seems like everyone is making it their hill to die on.
 
Why won't the EPA simply state- Prove you can clean up a spill; show a real plan for the clean up and put aside an escrow to pay for any leaks or problems.

If Keystone is so safe, they should have no problems with any of the above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top