You'd think. Uranium is at surface in many locations too but there are no glowing spruce trees or three headed fish.
U.S. to re-route Keystone XL due to environmental concerns
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
Again, there is nothing in your spin that shows uranium or other possible contaminants are not a concern.
And for someone who is a devout critic of Harper, you're doing your best to defend him.
And for someone who is a devout critic of Harper, you're doing your best to defend him.
I spent a bit of time as a junior inspector and rep for Encanna,not only did he fail but he allowed everyone under him doing the work to fail and then signed off on it.
Does anyone know off-hand how much Keystone XL is supposed to add for exports to the US, in thousands of barrels per day? I'm curious about the claims of reducing Middle East imports into the US.
Ahh, I found it. The figure is 700,000 barrels a day. The latest release from the US Energy Information Administration has American refinery production capacity with 921,000 barrels a day of idle capacity.
So I guess the next question is, is there a reason for keeping refining capacity at roughly 85%, or could they push capacity to greater than 95% without too many hurdles? If they can absorb the Alberta exports, then they really wouldn't cut down on Middle East imports, they would just have more product to sell on the global market.
Ahh, I found it. The figure is 700,000 barrels a day. The latest release from the US Energy Information Administration has American refinery production capacity with 921,000 barrels a day of idle capacity.
So I guess the next question is, is there a reason for keeping refining capacity at roughly 85%, or could they push capacity to greater than 95% without too many hurdles? If they can absorb the Alberta exports, then they really wouldn't cut down on Middle East imports, they would just have more product to sell on the global market.
By 2020, the U.S. import level will be the same as without Keystone XL.
The total crude imports are as follows:
With Keystone XL (million bpd)
2015: 10.08
2020: 9.62
2025: 10.00
2030: 10.34
Without Keystone XL
2015: 10.06
2020: 9.62
2025: 10.00
2030: 10.36
Variations in WCSB (Canadian) import volumes into the U.S. will lead to equivalent offsetting variations in crude oil imports from other foreign sources. Model projections are that, when increased volumes of WCSB crudes move to Asia instead of the U.S., the “gap” would be filled by offsetting increases in crude oil imports from other foreign sources, especially the Middle East (as the primary balancing supplier).
So, it appears that as we ramp up our oil export to China, the U.S. will have to rely on the Middle East (to greater effect than it does now).
http://www.keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/clientsite/keystonexl.nsf/AssmtDrftAccpt.pdf
Higher consumption would only make the situation worse. Lower consumption = better.
Ah, I found the figures specifically on the middle east.
The crude imports from the Middle East are as follows:
With Keystone XL (million bpd)
2015: 1.96
2020: 1.93
2025: 2.08
2030: 2.46
With Keystone XL and Northern Gateway
2015: 1.96
2020: 2.13
2025: 2.46
2030: 2.68
Without Keystone XL or Northern Gateway
2015: 2.13
2020: 1.99
2025: 2.08
2030: 2.42
This seems to make sense based on the earlier analysis of China exports. With Keystone XL alone, there will be a natural dip in the short term and then the U.S. will actually start to import more from the Middle East than without the pipeline. If you add Northern Gateway, then the U.S. will demand more from the Middle East sooner to compete with China.
Without either pipeline, it is true that the U.S. would forsake our 'ethical oil' in favour of the Middle East. But Ezra's perspective is only limited to the next five years (which is not much after our next election, lol). After that, the U.S. ramps up again and goes to their #1 anti-democratic supplier.
Last edited:
Oil's caused more grief than it's been of help. Should have left the stuff where it was to begin with.
Business organizations admit Keystone XL makes no economic sense for America
The American Sustainable Business Council (ASBC), a coalition of 45 business organizations, urged President Obama to reject the Keystone XL Pipeline. ASBC Executive Director David Levine, said
Most of the oil that Keystone XL would carry from Canada to the Gulf Coast of Texas is destined for export, and the jobs the pipeline would create would be just as fleeting. The State Department estimated the pipeline construction workforce at 5,000 to 6,000 workers and as the Vice President of Keystone Pipeline for TransCanada told CNN, long-term jobs would be in the “hundreds, certainly not in the thousands.”
Keystone would deliver far less bang for the buck when it comes to job creation than alternative energy. A dollar of spending in clean energy generates three times as many jobs as a dollar spent on oil and gas, according to U.S. Commerce Department data.
Tar Sands Fuel is A Boon for Oil Companies, Not for America
Keystone is a boondoggle for oil companies, not an investment in our nation’s economic competitiveness. Keystone will leave us even further behind Germany, China and other countries that are dominating the rapidly growing global clean technology market.
A Keystone XL Oil Spill Can Threaten Drinking & Irrigation Water Supplies
Keystone would increase the kind of catastrophic environmental risk the World Economic Forum warns about in its just released Global Risks 2012. Keystone oil will be extracted from tar sands and its carbon emissions are 82% greater than the average crude refined in the United States, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Keystone will increase carbon emissions and environmental risk. The pipeline would threaten the Ogallala aquifer, a large and irreplaceable supply of drinking water and irrigation in the Great Plains. If this supply were contaminated by an oil spill, the costs to the public and business would be incalculable, and some of America’s most productive farmland would be lost.
Oil for Export Will Not Bring Energy Independence
Frank Knapp, Vice Chairman of ASBC and CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce said,
Keystone XL Makes no Economic Sense for America
“Contrary to the claims of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, American Petroleum Institute and other pipeline advocates who threaten political retaliation if the pipeline is not approved, Keystone XL would not deliver on jobs, energy, safety or economic competitiveness.”
Keystone XL Won’t Create Longterm Jobs
Most of the oil that Keystone XL would carry from Canada to the Gulf Coast of Texas is destined for export, and the jobs the pipeline would create would be just as fleeting. The State Department estimated the pipeline construction workforce at 5,000 to 6,000 workers and as the Vice President of Keystone Pipeline for TransCanada told CNN, long-term jobs would be in the “hundreds, certainly not in the thousands.”
Keystone would deliver far less bang for the buck when it comes to job creation than alternative energy. A dollar of spending in clean energy generates three times as many jobs as a dollar spent on oil and gas, according to U.S. Commerce Department data.
Tar Sands Fuel is A Boon for Oil Companies, Not for America
Keystone is a boondoggle for oil companies, not an investment in our nation’s economic competitiveness. Keystone will leave us even further behind Germany, China and other countries that are dominating the rapidly growing global clean technology market.
A Keystone XL Oil Spill Can Threaten Drinking & Irrigation Water Supplies
Keystone would increase the kind of catastrophic environmental risk the World Economic Forum warns about in its just released Global Risks 2012. Keystone oil will be extracted from tar sands and its carbon emissions are 82% greater than the average crude refined in the United States, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Keystone will increase carbon emissions and environmental risk. The pipeline would threaten the Ogallala aquifer, a large and irreplaceable supply of drinking water and irrigation in the Great Plains. If this supply were contaminated by an oil spill, the costs to the public and business would be incalculable, and some of America’s most productive farmland would be lost.
Oil for Export Will Not Bring Energy Independence
Frank Knapp, Vice Chairman of ASBC and CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce said,
“Keystone is a sneak attack on American’s wallets. Its real aim is to import oil from Canada, refine it, and then export it to foreign buyers. For most businesses and consumers in the mid-west, the pipeline will serve up higher energy prices and higher food prices, since food prices include the price of energy and oil-based fertilizer needed to grow crops. That’s the last thing we need for real economic recovery.”
“Keystone makes no economic sense for America,” said ASBC co-founder and Director David Brodwin. “Once we take into account the true cost of oil including subsidies, environmental damage, and military costs, oil is far more expensive than the alternatives. The best thing we can do for the American economy and for American businesses as a whole is to wean ourselves from oil as quickly as possible.”
Keystone XL Makes no Economic Sense for America
So let the US buy middle east oil or freeze in the dark. Who cares? We are far better off with the Northern Gateway anyway as it gives us better access to world markets rather than bet our future on fickle US governments.
You would rather take an Ox cart to town? Besides without oil there would be no jets for Susuki and others of his ilk to get to the protest de jour.
Fun Fact for ya Taxslave... Suzuki can always jump in his 12 cyl diesel bus and drive across the country to attend a fund raising dinner... It's one of those little niceties that he decided to treat himself to.
... All of them filled with 'articles' directly authored by the eco-lobbies.
Pretty sad when that's the last line of attack on the issue.
Pretty sad when that's the last line of attack on the issue.
Keystone XL decision coming today
Current project proposal to be denied, according to reports
The U.S. State Department is set to announce Wednesday whether it will approve TransCanada's controversial Keystone XL pipeline extension, U.S. media are reporting.
The reports vary as to what the decision will be, but most say the current proposal will be denied.
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird is scheduled to talk about Canada-U.S. trade Wednesday in Toronto.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper, in an interview with CBC chief correspondent Peter Mansbridge, said it's clear now that Canada has to diversify its trade beyond the United States after U.S. President Barack Obama said he would delay a decision on Keystone XL until the end of next year. That deadline would put a decision after the next presidential election.
"I think what's happened around the Keystone is a wakeup call, the degree to which we are dependent or possibly held hostage to decisions in the United States, and especially decisions that may be made for very bad political reasons," Harper said.
"It puts an emphasis on the fact that we must perform our regulatory processes to get timely decisions on diversification of our markets."
A spokesman for TransCanada wouldn't comment ahead of an official announcement.
Baird's spokesman couldn't immediately be reached for comment.
Keystone XL decision coming today, U.S. media reports say - Politics - CBC News
Current project proposal to be denied, according to reports
The U.S. State Department is set to announce Wednesday whether it will approve TransCanada's controversial Keystone XL pipeline extension, U.S. media are reporting.
The reports vary as to what the decision will be, but most say the current proposal will be denied.
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird is scheduled to talk about Canada-U.S. trade Wednesday in Toronto.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper, in an interview with CBC chief correspondent Peter Mansbridge, said it's clear now that Canada has to diversify its trade beyond the United States after U.S. President Barack Obama said he would delay a decision on Keystone XL until the end of next year. That deadline would put a decision after the next presidential election.
"I think what's happened around the Keystone is a wakeup call, the degree to which we are dependent or possibly held hostage to decisions in the United States, and especially decisions that may be made for very bad political reasons," Harper said.
"It puts an emphasis on the fact that we must perform our regulatory processes to get timely decisions on diversification of our markets."
A spokesman for TransCanada wouldn't comment ahead of an official announcement.
Baird's spokesman couldn't immediately be reached for comment.
Keystone XL decision coming today, U.S. media reports say - Politics - CBC News