Obama Blocks Pipeline to Get Cheap Canadian Oil

#2
#2
Just a guess on my part, he's spineless?


He would rather pay brazil billions of dollars to drill. Seriously, if this guy is re-elected, we have no hope.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3
#3
Somehow he managed to blame this on Republicans

Obama's Keystone Denial Prompts Canada to Look to China Sales

"I'm disappointed that Republicans in Congress forced this decision, but it does not change my administration's commitment to American-made energy," Obama said today in a statement. "We will continue to look for new ways to partner with the oil and gas industry to increase our energy security."
Click to expand...

:blink:
 
#6
#6
Bad decision on his part. But the pipeline will still be built, it will just have to find a different route. Lot of wasted time and money - but what else is new?
 
#7
#7
He apparently needs another 10 months to make a decision on an item that's been on his desk since he took office.
 
#8
#8
OldandStillaVol said:
Bad decision on his part. But the pipeline will still be built, it will just have to find a different route. Lot of wasted time and money - but what else is new?
Click to expand...

Canada said they are going to export the oil to China already. They aren't going to wait on the US anymore and can you blame them?

$5/gallon gasoline is already predicted for this summer. This won't help eleviate that.
 
#9
#9
bamawriter said:
He apparently needs another 10 months to make a decision on an item that's been on his desk since he took office.
Click to expand...

He needs another 10 months but how long did it take for Solyndra to get their multi-billion $$ loan from the taxpayers? I bet it didn't take 10 months.
 
#10
#10
I really wish I knew more about this. I am having a hard time finding neutral discussion of it as it seems everyone lines up on one side or the other and coverage is harsh in both directions.
 
#12
#12
theFallGuy said:
Canada said they are going to export the oil to China already. They aren't going to wait on the US anymore and can you blame them?

$5/gallon gasoline is already predicted for this summer. This won't help eleviate that.
Click to expand...

I think Canada was always going to build another pipeline to the west coast to export oil to Asia. Shame that our govn can't get its s.... together to expediate a project that would benefit everyone.
 
#14
#14
lawgator1 said:
I really wish I knew more about this. I am having a hard time finding neutral discussion of it as it seems everyone lines up on one side or the other and coverage is harsh in both directions.
Click to expand...

If you don't know enough about this it's because you have chosen not to look it up, not because of biased coverage.
 
#15
#15
volinbham said:
What info are you missing? (I'm asking seriously)
Click to expand...


I've heard all sorts of wild claims about how many jobs it would create, but I've also hear a lot of skepticism about that.

I've heard that the path of the pipeline was only recently changed. I don't know if the change was meaningful.

I've heard that it would take a long time to build. I've heard it would be online fairly soon.

I've heard that the product to be delivered is not all that helpful because its "dirty." I don't even really know what that means.

I've heard that it could be a real boon for lower gas prices in the U.S. I've heard it will have virtually no effect.

I've heard it could be terrible for the environment. I've heard it would have no effect.


bamawriter said:
If you don't know enough about this it's because you have chosen not to look it up, not because of biased coverage.
Click to expand...


When I do "look it up," it seems like everything I read is by an advocate from side or the other.
 
#16
#16
LG,

There are so many indisputable facts that make this thing a no brainer. The only opposition is the environmental lobby. Even the hardcore left isn't united in its opposition.
 
#17
#17
The pipeline is 2000 miles long and will be built in 40 foot sections with pumping stations every few miles. That going to take a lot of jobs to get the pipe to the location, dig the trench, and weld it all together. A lot of people will be employed in maintance, and these construction/maintance jobs are well paying.

The oil is crappy, but will go through ND and the Bakken oil field (which is the best type of oil) will even out the "bad oil". Once it gets to LA/TX the refineries turn it into gas no problems and put it in the Colonial pipeline that goes from LA to NY.

Wont really change oil prices b/c oil is a global commodity. Envirmental concerns are legit, but theses states already have thousands of miles of pipeline crisscrossing them.

It just depends on how and where you want your oil to come from. Canada via a pipeline or the ME via tanker or we can truck it in on our highways 180 barrles at a time
 
#18
#18
A good assessment of the decision making process and further proof we are screwed

COLUMN-Keystone symbolises what is wrong with US policy: Kemp | Reuters

There are more good points in the article but thought this section really nailed the "blame others" routine Obama loves to use.

POLITICAL EXCUSES

The president was not entirely accurate when he blasted congressional Republicans for forcing the decision on him. The language expediting the Keystone review passed the House of Representatives on a largely party-line vote of 234-193 but was approved in the Senate by a lopsided bipartisan margin of 89-10.

Granted, it was bundled with the extension of payroll tax cuts, which many legislators considered a must-pass item. But in the Senate the Keystone language was offered as part of an "amendment in the nature of a substitute" by none other than Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid.

In a bid to pre-empt criticism, the president emphasised "my administration's commitment to American-made energy that creates jobs and reduces our dependence on oil".

He also sought to take credit for rising domestic fossil fuel production and a reduction in energy imports. "Under my administration, domestic oil and natural gas production is up, while imports of foreign oil are down."

That claim is likely to ring hollow among oil and gas companies. Growing domestic production is largely the result of hydraulic fracturing.

The administration has yet to take a position on fracking, which is fiercely opposed by the same groups that forced the administration to block Keystone. It is not clear whether the White House will stand up for the technology.
Click to expand...
 
#19
#19
He also sought to take credit for rising domestic fossil fuel production and a reduction in energy imports. "Under my administration, domestic oil and natural gas production is up, while imports of foreign oil are down."
Click to expand...

Thats because O&G Cos. signed leases everywhere during the Bush Admin before the 2008 economic collapse and are forced to drill now b/c they would lose the right to drill on the land they paid boatloads to lease.

If he bans fracing (which Jim Cramer thinks he will, and I think he will if re-elected) it will be a disaster for the economy
 
#20
#20
VolsNSkinsFan said:
The pipeline is 2000 miles long and will be built in 40 foot sections with pumping stations every few miles. That going to take a lot of jobs to get the pipe to the location, dig the trench, and weld it all together. A lot of people will be employed in maintance, and these construction/maintance jobs are well paying.

The oil is crappy, but will go through ND and the Bakken oil field (which is the best type of oil) will even out the "bad oil". Once it gets to LA/TX the refineries turn it into gas no problems and put it in the Colonial pipeline that goes from LA to NY.

Wont really change oil prices b/c oil is a global commodity. Envirmental concerns are legit, but theses states already have thousands of miles of pipeline crisscrossing them.

It just depends on how and where you want your oil to come from. Canada via a pipeline or the ME via tanker or we can truck it in on our highways 180 barrles at a time
Click to expand...

I guess he doesn't really want shovel ready jobs.
 
#21
#21
How are the employment numbers in question LG?

If you want to invest in immediate jobs for the economy you do it in oil & gas. Look at the flocks of people moving to North Dakota because of the boom of these types of high paying jobs. (and we aren't talking about minimum wage jobs at walmart)

The effects it will have on the environment is an absurd claim. We have tons of miles of pipeline carrying all kinds of things across this country.

We can either spend our money buying oil from Hugo Chavez, whom I guarantee isn't going to reinvest that money back into America, or we can purchase it from Canada whom is our #1 trade parter, is friendly with us, and will more than likely trickle that money back into the states.

This is a no brainer to me. But once again, the President shows how stupid he is when it comes to real life impacting policies and economics. Obama should've stayed in a classroom where he belonged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#22
#22
theFallGuy said:
How are the employment numbers in question LG?

If you want to invest in immediate jobs for the economy you do it in oil & gas. Look at the flocks of people moving to North Dakota because of the boom of these types of high paying jobs. (and we aren't talking about minimum wage jobs at walmart)

The effects it will have on the environment is an absurd claim. We have tons of miles of pipeline carrying all kinds of things across this country.

We can either spend our money buying oil from Hugo Chavez, whom I guarantee isn't going to reinvest that money back into America, or we can purchase it from Canada whom is our #1 trade parter, is friendly with us, and will more than likely trickle that money back into the states.

This is a no brainer to me. But once again, the President shows how stupid he is when it comes to real life impacting policies and economics. Obama should've stayed in a classroom where he belonged.
Click to expand...


I am almost afraid to go look for some of the articles I read questioning the numbers for fear that, by posting them here, I would appear to be arguing the point.

I don't know what to believe about it. Would really like to find a neutral source for accurate information on this issue.
 
#23
#23
VolsNSkinsFan said:
Thats because O&G Cos. signed leases everywhere during the Bush Admin before the 2008 economic collapse and are forced to drill now b/c they would lose the right to drill on the land they paid boatloads to lease.

If he bans fracing (which Jim Cramer thinks he will, and I think he will if re-elected) it will be a disaster for the economy
Click to expand...

Know much about fracking?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top