Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Both sides turn up the heat in final pipeline hearing
The Washington Times ^ | October 7, 2011 | Tim Devaney

Posted on 10/07/2011 4:36:20 PM PDT by jazusamo

Administration decision due on $7 billion project

A final public hearing on the proposed $7 billion Canada-to-Texas Keystone XL oil pipeline on Friday turned into a heated and often testy battle, filled with boos and cheers for speakers who traveled from across the country to testify.

Protesters gathered outside the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center early in the morning, and then flooded into the hearing room, where a number of them pleaded with the State Department to reconsider its support for the pipeline. Supporters, which include both business and labor groups, say the project will provide needed energy from a reliable ally, reduce the nation’s reliance of overseas suppliers, and create thousands of new construction and maintenance jobs. Critics say the economic benefits are overstated and that the project bisecting the nation’s midsection will wreak environmental havoc on sensitive lands along its path.

The State Department, which must approve the proposal as the pipeline originates across the border in Canada, appears to be leaning toward approval despite a series of increasingly passionate public hearings in recent weeks, both in Washington and in the field, on the Keystone pipeline. Opponents say lobbying by TransCanada and U.S. energy interests has tilted the debate in favor of approval, a charge the State Department has rejected.

State Department officials will now review the public comments, and wrap up a 90-day review period in mid-November. Then, it will issue it’s final decision to the White House in December. President Obama has faced pressure from environmental groups, including a series of protests outside the White House, as the decision day has neared.

At Friday’s packed hearing, Robin Mann, director of Sierra Club, an environmental group, said she had come all the way from Pennsylvannia to make her voice heard...

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: canada; environuts; keystonexl; pipeline
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last
The enviro nuts turned out in force to ensure we stay dependent on oil from nations not friendly to us.
1 posted on 10/07/2011 4:36:23 PM PDT by jazusamo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

White House will never let this happen.


2 posted on 10/07/2011 4:38:49 PM PDT by ColdOne (I miss my poochie... Tasha 2000~3/14/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
What does piping oil to the gulf, at tax payers expense, so it can be sold on the world market, have to-do with our staying dependent on foreign oil, refine it in the north if you want to help the us market.
3 posted on 10/07/2011 4:40:18 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

It’s my undestanding it’s being piped to the refineries in Texas for our use.


4 posted on 10/07/2011 4:42:32 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Please bump the Freepathon or click above and donate or become a monthly donor!

5 posted on 10/07/2011 4:44:41 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Yeah, let’s waste more billions on solar panels and windmills that don’t work and damage the landscape way more than this pipeline ever will.


6 posted on 10/07/2011 4:50:07 PM PDT by Argus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

what do you mean taxpayer’s expense? evidence please.


7 posted on 10/07/2011 4:53:08 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Wrong, newt said the other-day, it was not. There is no way the existing refineries can take the load. Canadian oil companies want to run the pipe across the united states for the tax freebies. Let them pay for it and run it to Olympia.
8 posted on 10/07/2011 4:54:24 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
refine it in the north if you want to help the us market.

Why? There's already refineries in the south. How does refining and shipping separated product help, or how is it cost-effective?

9 posted on 10/07/2011 4:54:45 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Argus

Exactly! The enviro nuts consider any energy not renewable energy taboo but renewable energy is horribly inefficient and costs way more.


10 posted on 10/07/2011 4:54:51 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
i>What does piping oil to the gulf, at tax payers expense, so it can be sold on the world market, have to-do with our staying dependent on foreign oil, refine it in the north if you want to help the us market.

Once again, you reveal your ignorance.

The refined products will be consumed in the US of A. We no longer export finished product, except under special circumstances (i.e., under contract, in exchange for crude from Mexico, bunker fuel for ships returning to foreign ports).

All the distributive pipelines in the US market originate on the Gulf Coast, where the refineries are. In order to distribute from northern refineries, a whole new set of distributive pipelines would need to be built.

You can generally count on businesses to make the most efficient economic decisions. Whether you agree with them or not.

11 posted on 10/07/2011 4:55:00 PM PDT by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Link?


12 posted on 10/07/2011 4:56:19 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mamelukesabre

If you do not know what depreciation/and depletion is, it is to late for me to explain it to you.


13 posted on 10/07/2011 4:56:59 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

ditto.


14 posted on 10/07/2011 4:57:59 PM PDT by ken21 (ruling class dem + rino progressives -- destroying america for 150 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
So how is piping it south and piping it back north to market cost effective, are have they stopped driving in denver and chicago, etc. Etc.
15 posted on 10/07/2011 4:59:29 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
I live about 75 feet from a segment of pipe that was part of "The Big Inch". It bisects the nation for well over a thousand miles.

I've noticed that the squirrels two streets North are predominantly black this year, but on this side of the bisection they are gray. In other years they've been red here, gray there, or white there and black here.

Oh the humanity.

Who are these econuts who imagine a pipeline bisects anything. For the most part it's going to be 30 feet deep in the ground!

There's already a substantial pipeline into the area. This is an ADDITIONAL PIPELINE.

The great advantage is this will pipe the oil to EXISTING year round refineries.

16 posted on 10/07/2011 5:04:52 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
So how is piping it south and piping it back north to market cost effective, are have they stopped driving in denver and chicago, etc. Etc.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.

You realize that there is some profit derived by the refiner--why shouldn't it be in the U. S.? And, there's a pretty good transportation infrastructure centered around Oklahoma. Isn't that more centrally located than the Canadian field for distribution around the U. S.? And why build refineries up there if they exist here?

Now, if my assumptions are wrong, and the pipeline will cause some problems, tell me about it, and I'll reconsider my take on the situation.

17 posted on 10/07/2011 5:05:14 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mamelukesabre
Just think of the thousands of americans, forced to sell their property in a down real estate market. Guess bitching about cities taking property and selling to investors is not ok now.
18 posted on 10/07/2011 5:05:31 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
What tax freebies? Don't you realize that the pipeline that runs it West is a CHICOM pipeline. They are stealing oil that should be ours by all that's right and holy.

We don't need more Chicom interests in our country, or Canada! Americans who want to give stuff to the Chicoms should be investigated closely and punished appropriately.

19 posted on 10/07/2011 5:07:46 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

There is nothing wrong with building new refriners, just south of the border is there. At least they would not be shutting down and running up price everytime a storm hits the gulf.


20 posted on 10/07/2011 5:08:18 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

I think it’s more an issue of where the refineries are, and the difficulty in getting any new refineries built.


21 posted on 10/07/2011 5:08:26 PM PDT by SuzyQue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
There is nothing wrong with building new refriners, just south of the border is there. At least they would not be shutting down and running up price everytime a storm hits the gulf.

Refineries are expensive, and new ones are hard to get past the environmentalists. And yes, it would be nice if the Gulf weather didn't affect our oil supply as much as it does--but is it worth the cost to duplicate or replace it? And given the predictable opposition, how long would it take?

22 posted on 10/07/2011 5:11:06 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

The OIL comes from Canada. There is no depletion allowance for foreign origin oil. This stuff simply has no well head taxes or tax breaks in the American tax system.


23 posted on 10/07/2011 5:12:11 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat; All
Here's an excerpt from a piece in Forbes on September 20 and I believe they've got it right:

It blows my mind that there is even a question of approving construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. The oil sands will be developed one way or another. The U.S. will keep using oil for decades. Doesn’t it make more sense to import oil from Canada than from repressive, autocratic nations like Venezuela and Saudi Arabia? (And for those who conflate being anti-pipeline with a belief that Peak Oil is around the corner — what better reason could there be to secure strategic supplies of crude?)

Come On Already, Let's Build Keystone XL

24 posted on 10/07/2011 5:15:55 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

A lot less time than the legal battle, that will start shortly. Matter. Of fact I think the nature crowd file their first case a few days ago. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/05/groups-sue-to-block-construction-of-keystone-xl_n_996075.html


25 posted on 10/07/2011 5:16:12 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

Cost of the pipe line, is probably 100 times that of a refinery. That is cost effective. So which is the most cost effective. Building a refinery in the north, are a ten years legal fight, and stealing thousands of peoples property by eminent domain.


26 posted on 10/07/2011 5:20:29 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

Whiting Refinery Modernization Project

http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9030203&contentId=7055766#7205736

Today, BP is investing several billion dollars in Northwest Indiana to modernize its Whiting Refinery for the processing of heavier crudes. The modernization is essential to the long-term viability of the refinery, and includes well over a billion dollars in environmental improvements.

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/STAGING/global_assets/downloads/A/abp_wwd_us_whiting_refining_fact_sheet.pdf

The modernization
project will provide for greater energy security in the
Midwest, as conventional supplies of the lighter crudes
diminish, and are replaced by heavier crudes.

With this in mind, the project involves repositioning Whiting
to be able to run heavier sour crude oil. It involves a new
crude distillation unit, a 100kbd coker, world scale
hydrotreating and sulphur recovery, and improvements


27 posted on 10/07/2011 5:22:44 PM PDT by DUMBGRUNT (The best is the enemy of the good!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

I might ad that the oilsands will be exploited and production will be increased if this pipeline is built or not. If the US doesn’t want the oil a pipeline will be built over the mountains to the west coast. The oil will be loaded into tankers and sold to the Chicoms.


28 posted on 10/07/2011 5:23:07 PM PDT by Former Proud Canadian (Obamanomics-growing poverty one day at a time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
Cost of the pipe line, is probably 100 times that of a refinery.

Do you have some references for that? Obviously, the relative cost matters. Without any specific knowledge of my own, I would have though the pipeline cheaper.

29 posted on 10/07/2011 5:24:07 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Former Proud Canadian

You’re absolutely right, the Chicoms can’t wait to get their hands on it.


30 posted on 10/07/2011 5:28:36 PM PDT by jazusamo (The real minimum wage is zero: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Something else that never seems to get mentioned. The Keystone pipeline is routed through the Bakken field in North Dakota. It will pick up this new source of US crude and transport it to refineries.

I guess that is a bad thing too.

31 posted on 10/07/2011 5:36:31 PM PDT by Former Proud Canadian (Obamanomics-growing poverty one day at a time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
It cost 8 billion dollars, to build the Alaskan pipe line, it was 48 inches and 800 miles, the price is corrected to 1997 dollars., a large oil refinery costs about 6 billion are less. Now you do the math, but they have estimated the cost of the keystone to be about 13 billion, probably short 4 or 5 billion. Are you could build a refinery for the cost overruns.
32 posted on 10/07/2011 5:36:51 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
It cost 8 billion dollars, to build the Alaskan pipe line, it was 48 inches and 800 miles, the price is corrected to 1997 dollars., a large oil refinery costs about 6 billion are less. Now you do the math, but they have estimated the cost of the keystone to be about 13 billion, probably short 4 or 5 billion. Are you could build a refinery for the cost overruns.

Interesting--I didn't know that. It's not "100 times" though. I suppose there are ancillary costs and delays. I'll consider what you've said, but without knowing the rest of the story (refinery construction, who would have the expertise to own and build it, the rest of the transportation story) I can't really form a fully informed opinion. But, you've given me something to think about and look into, as I assumed the pipeline would just be a lot cheaper.

33 posted on 10/07/2011 5:42:17 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

It’s been awhile since I studied engineering economics and industrial engineering as an undergrad...refresh my memory.


34 posted on 10/07/2011 5:51:00 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

what does that have to do with a project “at tax payers expense”? Is the pipe privately owned or not?


35 posted on 10/07/2011 5:52:55 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
A refinery in the north is a win win, produces more jobs and brings oil to market, stabilizes price, which is what everyone wants to do. Stupid is pumping it south and then hauling it back north to sell it. The opposition melts away and the oil is on the market and several thousand people have not been screwed out of their property.
36 posted on 10/07/2011 5:57:56 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Listen up buddy, I like your posts on this thread. I don’t know if I agree with everything you say, but i do want you to keep talking.

btw, its starting to sound to me like you are in favor of building new refineries in north america. I like that idea. In fact, I’ve been wondering out loud why we don’t build a refinery in north dakota...along with all the other ancillaries that go with a refinery...as in hydro cracking and such.

Lots of jobs. lots of national security. lots of american know how and independence. Sure, maybe some ass*holes in DC and wallstreet won’t get as big a bonus on their stocks, but do I need to quantify my regrets on that to you?


37 posted on 10/07/2011 6:03:12 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mamelukesabre; thackney

You need to get into this discussion pronto, thackney!


38 posted on 10/07/2011 6:06:58 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

This is not at tax payer expense.

They are not asking for tax breaks, just permission to spend their money and go to work.


39 posted on 10/07/2011 6:30:44 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
There is no way the existing refineries can take the load.

Nonsense. You use the same refinery and refine North Americal petroleum instead of crude oil from OPEC.

There is no change in volume required, just a change in a more reliable and friendly source.

40 posted on 10/07/2011 6:32:16 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mamelukesabre
The last time we had a fuel shortage in the south and fuel shot up because of the shortage, i said this is stupid, we need refinery's somewhere else. Building them close to the source is win win, the fight is over. Jobs are jobs.

I do not grasp the need of the pipe line at all.. and bringing the Chinese into it is stupid as well, hell they will make the pipe no matter what.

41 posted on 10/07/2011 6:33:02 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: thackney

So they are going to give up the depreciation, I had no ideal.


42 posted on 10/07/2011 6:35:01 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
Cost of the pipe line, is probably 100 times that of a refinery.

More nonsense. And you are forgeting if you built refineries in North Dakota for this, you would have to also build product pipelines as well. Either case requires building pipelines.

43 posted on 10/07/2011 6:35:21 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

What tax break are you claiming would be used for crude oil / bitumen pipeline that would not be applied to a new refinery and refined product pipelines?


44 posted on 10/07/2011 6:41:14 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Let me cue you into a little known fact nowadays...

In america, nearly all steel production is derived from recycled scrap metal. You cannot get high grade cast iron anymore that is american origin...or wrought iron of high grade. These products require iron ore in large quantities and a process that is not friendly to the environmental gods of the hippy lefties.

Maybe this pipeline requires steel of such a grade that general run of the mill scrap is not sufficient for procurement...just a possibility that popped into my mind.


45 posted on 10/07/2011 6:43:29 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: thackney
The biggest check a crony capitalist can get is called eminent domain. Now when did they make this business exempt from depreciation write off.
46 posted on 10/07/2011 6:51:37 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: thackney; org.whodat

I just want to make sure all parties understand...

I did not intend for this to be me and thackney against whodat. I brought thackney into this fray so that me and whodat could battle against thackney as allies(on this matter only). I do not have very good memories of past grudges and i have no idea if I have a grudge against either of you. Even when I get abusive on FR I do not remember who it was I was abusive with or who was abusive to me. that is my way on FR. whatever happens on a thread, stays on that thread...as far as i’m concerned.

I just want to engage in a spirited debate. thackney appears to be up to the challenge of taking on two adversaries. So lets do it.


47 posted on 10/07/2011 6:52:35 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: mamelukesabre
Correct, and it is still cheaper and faster to go the refinery route, and if they build on an Indian reservation, they are probably exempt from all the environmental horse manure.
48 posted on 10/07/2011 6:57:58 PM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

thackney makes good points about the existing ancillaries in texas though. there is more to petroleum processing than refinement...then there is the issue of distribution of those petro-chemicals.

I am of the mindset that “if you build it, they will come”. But I have no technical proof.


49 posted on 10/07/2011 7:11:20 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

This new oil pipeline goes from western Canada to the US Midwest and then south to the Gulf for several reasons. It gives Canada a market for the vast amounts of oil in its oil sand area. It goes to the Midwest and Gulf because existing US refineries are located there to refine this type of heavy crude. The Gulf refineries are available as Chavez of Venezuela stopped send similar heavy crude up because he hates the US. Little of the refined product would leave the US as we want it and the price is right.


50 posted on 10/07/2011 7:49:11 PM PDT by RicocheT (Eat the rich only if you're certain it's your last meal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson