Billionaire Obama Donor will Profit with Demise of Keystone Pipeline

[BruSan]

Originally Posted by AONE

You understand that this product is so nasty, even provinces in Canada won't allow it to be piped through their territory? Were you also aware they don't call it oil so they can keep from putting any funds towards clean up should the event that happened in Arkansas happen again....

Were you also aware ALEC is for the pipeline because it advances their corporate goals?

Aaah; you've got to do a bit more reading there, as it is NOT being denied by the one and only one province for environmental reasons but because the one province wants ROYALTIES for every gallon piped over there territory. The evironmental excuse is a sham to give their denial legitimacy and to keep the aboriginals from demanding a slice of the same pie.

Were you aware that the Can. Federal government is calling for a fund to be set up in the amount of 1 billion to offset emergency clean up response costs?

They know full well that ANY pipeline has a far, far better environmental record than ANY railroad tracks through those same areas. Hell; you can take a train through the Canadian Rockies and still see abandoned rail cars down in the gorges that have been there for over 50 years. You cannot get to them to recover them so there they stay. Picture a tank car or twelve down in one of those gorges leaking crude.

Demanding a chunk of the profits in the form of royalties is contrary to our energy policy and also freemarket economics.

Keystone I is already piping over a half a million barrels daily of the "nasty stuff" into over and through your states to refineries in your mid-west and those gulf upgraders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline

Here's a somewhat greater concern for some; a pipeline east to Ontario and then to a great lakes port has been discussed but great lakes shippers are losing millions each month because they're having to ship light due to lower lake levels and not enough water under their keels.

Think about that little canard; we're squabbling over a pipeline and running low on lake water. HELLLOOOOO!

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by michiganmoon

The US will refine the oil before exporting it.

So?

Originally Posted by michiganmoon

We are already a net exporter of refined oil.

So?

[michiganmoon]

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

So?


So?

You are naively or deceptively ignoring the fact that the refining process is profitable, creates jobs, and will cause less pollution then if it happens in China.

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by michiganmoon

You are naively or deceptively ignoring the fact that the refining process is profitable, creates jobs, and will cause less pollution then if it happens in China.

No. I am ignoring your frantic moving of the goal posts when your original arguments are shown to be stupid. But if you insist:

1. Tar sands produce really crummy oil. It cannot be refined (for example) into gasoline at all, or any number of the other high value petroleum volatiles that actually make refining "profitable."

2. You say it "will cause less pollution then (sic) if it happens in China." Not from pipeline leaks it won't. And not only are tar sand pipelines far more prone to failure than conventional oil (it's essentially asphalt that has to be heated and pressurized to move in a pipe at all), this type of oil has so few volatiles that when it spills it creates disasters that are harder to clean up, and that can last for decades or centuries.

3. US refining is currently already operating at between 80 and 90% capacity. Whatever jobs might be added, none will be in refining.

Understand... I'm not even really particularly opposed to the pipeline. I just think all the arguments in its favor are pretty dumb.