Keystone Pipeline Goes up in Flames.

[Nice Squirrel]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/06/politics/keystone-xl-pipeline-decision-rejection-kerry/index.html

Kerry rejects Keystone XL pipeline, spelling certain death for project

Certain DEATH.

for millions of jobs.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

That's good. Hopefully new environmental regulations will be implemented in Alberta as well to make the oil sands as unprofitable as possible and help encourage investment in more climate friendly technologies.

 

[Derec]

Very bad decision. Of course, the only beneficiaries are the railroads transporting this stuff now and other tar sands producers like the Venezuelans. Venezuela is being run by a left-wing dictatorship which is probably a big reason why the far left in the US is so adamantly opposed to Keystone XL - it would make Venezuelan feedstock to heavy oil capable refineries in the Gulf of Mexico superfluous. After all, you never see Bill McKibbon&Bits or James "not the Muppet guy" Hansen ever say anything bad about Venezuelan oil sands.

Also, now that all Demcratic candidates are against the pipeline as well, this purely political decision will become an albatross around the Dems necks if, as is likely, oil prices increase by Summer/Fall 2016.

 

[Bacillus anthracis]

Stupid. People act as if this pipeline would have been the first and/or somehow the worst thing to happen to the environment in the U.S. since Three Mile Island, which, by the way, didn't injure or kill a single person. But you wouldn't know it to read all the hoopla. The following link is to a map showing where all the oil pipelines are in the U.S.

http://www.pipeline101.org/where-are-pipelines-located

Now, that being the case, what was so awful or dangerous about this particular pipeline? Seriously. Articulate just how this one would have been any different than all the rest.

This isn't a victory for the environment. It's just a costly pain in the ass. One of the ways to "get off" foreign oil, is to not have to buy it from ME nations or the dreaded Venezuelans. Of course that's another subject altogether, but it should be obvious that with petroleum use not going away anytime soon, that it would be better to get it from Canada and have thousands of jobs created in the process than to have to ship one more goddamn barrel of the shit from Saudi Arabia.

 

[Nexus]

Of course that's another subject altogether, but it should be obvious that with petroleum use not going away anytime soon, that it would be better to get it from Canada and have thousands of jobs created in the process than to have to ship one more goddamn barrel of the shit from Saudi Arabia.

From a long term strategic standpoint wouldn't it be better you use up every other nations oil first so they will be the first to crash into a pre-industrial society while you still have reserves in your backyard?

 

[maxparrish]

Of course that's another subject altogether, but it should be obvious that with petroleum use not going away anytime soon, that it would be better to get it from Canada and have thousands of jobs created in the process than to have to ship one more goddamn barrel of the shit from Saudi Arabia.

From a long term strategic standpoint wouldn't it be better you use up every other nations oil first so they will be the first to crash into a pre-industrial society while you still have reserves in your backyard?

That was my thought. Obama claimed that the decision was partially motivated for "security". And draining domestic supplies is secure how?

 

[SimpleDon]

This won't stop the tar sands oil from being transported, it will just make it more likely to have a series of small to medium environmental disasters because of the comparatively risky rail transportation instead of the much safer transportation by pipeline.

The construction of the pipeline would result in tens of thousands of jobs, not millions. But the long term impact would be an overall reduction in the number of jobs, of course. Transport by truck or rail requires more manhours per thousand tons transported.

 

[SimpleDon]

Of course that's another subject altogether, but it should be obvious that with petroleum use not going away anytime soon, that it would be better to get it from Canada and have thousands of jobs created in the process than to have to ship one more goddamn barrel of the shit from Saudi Arabia.

From a long term strategic standpoint wouldn't it be better you use up every other nations oil first so they will be the first to crash into a pre-industrial society while you still have reserves in your backyard?

The more important question is how meaningful is it to find new oil reserves when we have more proven oil reserves than we can ever burn because of the impact on our climate?

 

[dismal]

This won't stop the tar sands oil from being transported, it will just make it more likely to have a series of small to medium environmental disasters because of the comparatively risky rail transportation instead of the much safer transportation by pipeline.

The construction of the pipeline would result in tens of thousands of jobs, not millions. But the long term impact would be an overall reduction in the number of jobs, of course. Transport by truck or rail requires more manhours per thousand tons transported.

It turns out that while environmentalists people have had their panties wadded up about Keystone a bunch of other pipelines through the corridor have been permitted and have been or are in the process of being built.

Most analysts project there to be plenty of north-south oil pipeline capacity within a few years, particularly with the downturn in drilling of late.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

This won't stop the tar sands oil from being transported, it will just make it more likely to have a series of small to medium environmental disasters because of the comparatively risky rail transportation instead of the much safer transportation by pipeline.

The construction of the pipeline would result in tens of thousands of jobs, not millions. But the long term impact would be an overall reduction in the number of jobs, of course. Transport by truck or rail requires more manhours per thousand tons transported.

It turns out that while environmentalists people have had their panties wadded up about Keystone a bunch of other pipelines through the corridor have been permitted and have been or are in the process of being built.

Most analysts project there to be plenty of north-south oil pipeline capacity within a few years, particularly with the downturn in drilling of late.

And the Canadians turning against the tar sands.

 

[SimpleDon]

This won't stop the tar sands oil from being transported, it will just make it more likely to have a series of small to medium environmental disasters because of the comparatively risky rail transportation instead of the much safer transportation by pipeline.

The construction of the pipeline would result in tens of thousands of jobs, not millions. But the long term impact would be an overall reduction in the number of jobs, of course. Transport by truck or rail requires more manhours per thousand tons transported.

It turns out that while environmentalists people have had their panties wadded up about Keystone a bunch of other pipelines through the corridor have been permitted and have been or are in the process of being built.

Most analysts project there to be plenty of north-south oil pipeline capacity within a few years, particularly with the downturn in drilling of late.

The only reason that the Keystone pipeline had to be approved by the state department is because it crossed an International border. Pipelines inside the US have received routine approvals all during this process. I know that a tar sand pipeline was approved and I think completed from Alberta to the Chicago area to put the oil on the lakes and then to the Atlantic during this drawn out review. The Keystone for some reason became a cause, a misguided one.

 

[dismal]

It turns out that while environmentalists people have had their panties wadded up about Keystone a bunch of other pipelines through the corridor have been permitted and have been or are in the process of being built.

Most analysts project there to be plenty of north-south oil pipeline capacity within a few years, particularly with the downturn in drilling of late.

The only reason that the Keystone pipeline had to be approved by the state department is because it crossed an International border. Pipelines inside the US have received routine approvals all during this process. I know that a tar sand pipeline was approved and I think completed from Alberta to the Chicago area to put the oil on the lakes and then to the Atlantic during this drawn out review. The Keystone for some reason became a cause, a misguided one.

I thought the part that crossed the border was already built, but you may be right.

You are definitely right about the oddness of the cause. The amount of time and effort spent fighting it is grotesquely out of proportion to the significance of the project in the overall picture of North American crude logistics.

 

[SimpleDon]

It turns out that while environmentalists people have had their panties wadded up about Keystone a bunch of other pipelines through the corridor have been permitted and have been or are in the process of being built.

Most analysts project there to be plenty of north-south oil pipeline capacity within a few years, particularly with the downturn in drilling of late.

And the Canadians turning against the tar sands.

It is reasonable to believe that the tar sands are one of the worse, most expensive ways to extract oil. I would be surprised if they are making anything because of the low price of oil now.

As I pointed out there is no reason to find more oil, we have more oil proven in the ground tan we can burn safely due to the CO2 emissions.

 

[dismal]

It turns out that while environmentalists people have had their panties wadded up about Keystone a bunch of other pipelines through the corridor have been permitted and have been or are in the process of being built.

Most analysts project there to be plenty of north-south oil pipeline capacity within a few years, particularly with the downturn in drilling of late.

And the Canadians turning against the tar sands.

As a side note, a far more relevant and effective way of stopping the development of the tar sands would be to pass a law stopping the development of the tar sands.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

And the Canadians turning against the tar sands.

As a side note, a far more relevant and effective way of stopping the development of the tar sands would be to pass a law stopping the development of the tar sands.

Too politically risky. Better to blame it on some foreigner.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

The only reason that the Keystone pipeline had to be approved by the state department is because it crossed an International border. Pipelines inside the US have received routine approvals all during this process. I know that a tar sand pipeline was approved and I think completed from Alberta to the Chicago area to put the oil on the lakes and then to the Atlantic during this drawn out review. The Keystone for some reason became a cause, a misguided one.

I thought the part that crossed the border was already built, but you may be right.

And it is connected to the pipeline that runs five miles from where I am sitting.

 

[SimpleDon]

The only reason that the Keystone pipeline had to be approved by the state department is because it crossed an International border. Pipelines inside the US have received routine approvals all during this process. I know that a tar sand pipeline was approved and I think completed from Alberta to the Chicago area to put the oil on the lakes and then to the Atlantic during this drawn out review. The Keystone for some reason became a cause, a misguided one.

I thought the part that crossed the border was already built, but you may be right.

You are definitely right about the oddness of the cause. The amount of time and effort spent fighting it is grotesquely out of proportion to the significance of the project in the overall picture of North American crude logistics.

I think that section was the one taken to the Great Lakes so that it wouldn't be called "Keystone."

The main interest that US oilmen had was the section from the Cushing Junction of pipelines in Oklahoma to the Gulf of Mexico. There were a lot of pipelines that went the other way, but as long as the oil couldn't be pumped to the ocean somewhere we got a lower than world price in Cushing. But the Obama administration approved reversing one of the Cushing to Gulf Coast pipelines and the building of the same section of the Keystone Cushing to the Gulf, but with a different name. It wouldn't surprise me that they have approved a pipeline from Chicago to Cushing to have effectively approved the Keystone in everything but name.

I am a Texas oil baron with a single well near Denton, Texas. Take my comments as you will considering that. I have cleared oil riches of four figures a year in good times with high prices.

 

[whichphilosophy]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/06/politics/keystone-xl-pipeline-decision-rejection-kerry/index.html

Kerry rejects Keystone XL pipeline, spelling certain death for project

Certain DEATH.

for millions of jobs.

The US will just buy oil from abroad.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Also, now that all Demcratic candidates are against the pipeline as well, this purely political decision will become an albatross around the Dems necks if, as is likely, oil prices increase by Summer/Fall 2016.

Increase to what, you think? With US fracked oil coming in in the low fifties on average, Canadian oil production increasing due to projects already in progress, all other oil producing nations fighting to maintain oil revenue, and Saudi Arabia undercutting everyone, barring any world crisis, how do we get much past sixty dollar oil in the foreseeable future?

 

[dismal]

Also, now that all Demcratic candidates are against the pipeline as well, this purely political decision will become an albatross around the Dems necks if, as is likely, oil prices increase by Summer/Fall 2016.

Increase to what, you think? With US fracked oil coming in in the low fifties on average, Canadian oil production increasing due to projects already in progress, all other oil producing nations fighting to maintain oil revenue, and Saudi Arabia undercutting everyone, barring any world crisis, how do we get much past sixty dollar oil in the foreseeable future?

Demand growth would be the main answer, though I am not saying I agree with a rosy oil price forecast. At this point we don't know how fast (if at all) US production will drop in the current price climate.

But if wordwide demand keeps ticking up 1 or 2 million bopd per year I don't know where it would come from if the price is low enough to put the US on decline.