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

Skip to comments.

Oil industry: 'Huge political consequences' if pipeline rejected
The Hill ^ | 1/4/12 | Andrew Restuccia

Posted on 01/04/2012 3:23:22 PM PST by Nachum

A top oil industry official delivered a clear warning to President Obama Wednesday: approve the Keystone XL pipeline or face “huge political consequences.” American Petroleum Institute President Jack Gerard urged Obama to quickly approve the pipeline, which would carry oil sands crude from Alberta, Canada, to refineries along the Gulf Coast. A payroll tax cut package signed into law by Obama last month includes a GOP-backed provision requiring the president to make a final decision on the pipeline within 60 days.

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


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: china; consequences; economy; industry; iran; keystonepipline; markets; oil; political
Sounds like a threat.

I'm getting my popcorn

1 posted on 01/04/2012 3:23:24 PM PST by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; EricTheRed_VocalMinority; ...

The list, Ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/


2 posted on 01/04/2012 3:24:27 PM PST by Nachum (The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I guess he was getting old waiting for Boehner to take it to zero.

Good on’im!


3 posted on 01/04/2012 3:27:18 PM PST by txhurl (Perry/Pence 2012 OR Perry/Ryan 2012 or even better Perry/Abbott 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

He’s going to start approving stuff all over the place.


4 posted on 01/04/2012 3:29:17 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

if we had any kind of decent President, this would NEVER have even been an issue. How much I despise Obama!!!


5 posted on 01/04/2012 3:29:51 PM PST by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

You know, if gas prices went up to 4.50/gallon about a week before election day- that might be one way to make a point.


6 posted on 01/04/2012 3:31:20 PM PST by Nachum (The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All


Help End The Obama Era In 2012
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


7 posted on 01/04/2012 3:32:13 PM PST by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Exactly what it is, a threat.

Until some entities that highly in favor come forward with an ordered campaign, and plenty of financial backing to make this pipeline happen, then it becomes a promise.

Among other things that could be getting under way YESTERDAY, is developing an infrastructure for the distribution of compressed natural gas as a motor fuel, and a well developed scheme for retrofitting the existing fleet of personal and commercial vehicles to use CNG as a motor fuel. This would solve several problems simultaneously.

1. Much lowered emissions, as far less of various pollutants (particulate carbon, unburned hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide) would be produced.

2. Right now, CNG is selling for approximately half the cost in terms of BTU’s of energy produced, compared to either gasoline or Diesel fuel.

3. The vast stores of this domestic source of energy would go far to eliminate dependence on imported petroleum, and further restore our balance of trade with the world, as well as vastly shifting the potential for economic warfare with countries that have no compunction about depriving the US of any advantage.

4. If it is going to take so many years for new nuclear plants to go online, we need SOMETHING as a transition from dependence on coal and heavier petroleum fractions, because wind and solar are incapable of taking up the slack. Natural gas fired turbines with cogeneration plants using the exhaust heat to drive steam boilers, to produce electrical energy, the TRUE basis of increasing wealth in this country and the world.


8 posted on 01/04/2012 3:41:07 PM PST by alloysteel (Are Democrats truly "better angels"? They are lousy stewards for America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Obama doesn’t care about his threats. He considers himself a king not an elected president. If he cared about consequences he wouldn’t do most of the stuff he does.


9 posted on 01/04/2012 3:41:56 PM PST by formosa (Formosa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Hope Gerard has his taxes in order....he could be in for a rough ride through the IRS


10 posted on 01/04/2012 3:47:45 PM PST by goodnesswins (Adversity makes us bitter or better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Let’s get on with it but with the following important caveat. Absolutely no taking land by eminent domain unless it broadly benefits the USA.

Build the pipeline in non-aquifer areas. If it is done with the use of eminent domain for private enterprise, then private Canadian enterprise must provide benefits to Americans, and require that the oil be sold on the USA market.

Anything else is an outrage to the core belief in private ownership of property. I own it and if you want to buy it then pay the market price or build a pipeline around it.

Otherwise this oil should not be on the global market for the benefit of only oil companies and China. Also require that USA refineries be used in the refining process.

The risk of this pipeline (just as with gas drilling) is to every American. Any gain should be shared between the oil companies and Americans.

How does globalizing our energy resources help our energy independence? It doesn’t unless we have a production surplus and have filled our strategic reserve. Then offer the surplus product to the world. Until then we need cheap energy in the USA to be competitive.

When the choice comes down to a strong USA versus more profits for global oil companies, there is no choice. I support the USA before I support global corporations.


11 posted on 01/04/2012 3:51:34 PM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel
Among other things that could be getting under way YESTERDAY, is developing an infrastructure for the distribution of compressed natural gas as a motor fuel, and a well developed scheme for retrofitting the existing fleet of personal and commercial vehicles to use CNG as a motor fuel.

When, as and if CNG becomes an economic alternative, private industry will address the opportunity.

Until then, government needs to stay the hell out of it!!!

12 posted on 01/04/2012 4:01:26 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

I would first like to see where eminent has been used, when running a pipeline you don’t buy the land you pay for a right of way.


13 posted on 01/04/2012 4:09:57 PM PST by Dusty Road
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

What do you think will happen to your heating bill when everything is running on natural gas?


14 posted on 01/04/2012 4:11:03 PM PST by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

The pipeline’s been held up and might be rejected for a few rich NIMBYs with land in remote Nebraska. ...”property values,” you know. The environmentalist complaints from them are only fallacious arguments, as usual.

We won’t see such outrages so often after the other end of the real estate crash 20 years or so from now (due to the Baby Boomer die-off).


15 posted on 01/04/2012 4:26:53 PM PST by familyop ("Wanna cigarette? You're never too young to start." --Deacon, "Waterworld")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01

Granted, this would have to be a private initiative, but the government is going to have to remove a LOT of roadblocks to let this happen.

As it happens, there are some parts of the infrastructure already in place, with all the natural gas lines already criscrossing the country, so the basis is already there.

If the machinery for refueling vehicles can be put in place without overwhelming and highly redundant approval protocols being placed as an obstacle, that part would also be streamlined.

As to the vehicles themselves, starting a clean design as a new manufacture would be the best option, but for all the older vehicles now out there, a retrofit to use CNG as a fuel is currently a pretty expensive deal. For instance, there would have to be solid reliable fittings for the storage of CNG on board, controlled means of fueling the engine, and the engine parts (valves and cylinder heads, in particular) would have to be modified to take full advantage of the potential output of CNG as a fuel source.
Compression can be raised quite a bit, because natural gas has an equivalent octane rating of 130+, and also a much hotter burn, which makes demands on exhaust valves and exhaust pipes, requiring either replacement with a more durable part, or engineering the power and exhaust cycle to take advantage of something called “adiabatic cooling”, in which the exhaust temperature is somewhat lowered because of the rapid expansion of the burned fuel-air mixture. Engineers know these terms, and in fact, a number of automobile engines have already been built that take advantage of this fact of thermodynamics, enabling them to run with little or no coolant left in the system.

Doable. And for an economically favorable cost, if the various regulatory agencies do not build up a trumped-up set of regulations to make this enterprise fiscally infeasible.


16 posted on 01/04/2012 4:27:54 PM PST by alloysteel (Are Democrats truly "better angels"? They are lousy stewards for America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone
Build the pipeline in non-aquifer areas. If it is done with the use of eminent domain for private enterprise, then private Canadian enterprise must provide benefits to Americans, and require that the oil be sold on the USA market.

The oil will be refined in Gulf Coast refineries. The oil and pipeline are privately owned so the owners can determine the most productive uses of their product. The landowners will still be compensated under eminent domain. There are other pipelines traversing acquifers. Several environmental studies have been performed on this project with only minimal risks determined.

When the choice comes down to a strong USA versus more profits for global oil companies, there is no choice. I support the USA before I support global corporations.

The oil and pipeline are private property. The US government maintains a reserve but I do not see the pipeline contributing to the reserve unless there is a national emergency. Your screed against global corporations is just leftist screed. Most publicly traded corporations are global both US based and non US based. Oil is a fungible commodity. The market should determine best allocations of resources, not central planners like yourself.
17 posted on 01/04/2012 4:35:51 PM PST by businessprofessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel
Outstanding post.

Look into LPG IMHO that is the fuel for cars.

Check out the Australian Ford "Falcon EcoLPI"

http://www.motoring.com.au/news/2011/large-passenger/ford/falcon/no-export-potential-in-lpi-25821

Google it, it goes faster with lower emissions on LPG than gasoline.

I can't wait for direct injected LPG, some firms in Europe have conversion kits NOW!

18 posted on 01/04/2012 4:36:19 PM PST by taildragger (( Palin / Mulally 2012 ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

.......Alloysteel is your real name T Boon?


19 posted on 01/04/2012 4:45:02 PM PST by Recon Dad (Gas & Petroleum Junkie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dusty Road

Nebraska has tons of pipelines. Are they above ground? Is Keystone to be above ground. I assumed they were buried.


20 posted on 01/04/2012 4:51:12 PM PST by chiller ( Elect another batch of TPartiers and it won't matter which R we elect. WE will lead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dusty Road

Nebraska has tons of pipelines. Are they above ground? Is Keystone to be above ground. I assumed they were buried.


21 posted on 01/04/2012 4:51:28 PM PST by chiller ( Elect another batch of TPartiers and it won't matter which R we elect. WE will lead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

His original plan was to delay the decision on the pipeline in favor of the environmentalists who he desperately needs to help in his re-election campaign. On the other side of the coin he promised the unions that he would approve it after the election, but he needed to appease his environmentalists first. The problem is he no longer has time, because the Canadians said if the US doesn’t want the oil, they will pump it to the west coast and sell it to China. Now he also has the 60 day decision timeline. What will he do? It sucks to be Obama.


22 posted on 01/04/2012 4:54:57 PM PST by Harley (Will Rogers never met Harry Reid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

Its not a threat.

It is reality.
The Chinese are in there buying and buying.

At some point they will build their own pipeline to the west coast.


23 posted on 01/04/2012 4:59:04 PM PST by himno hero (Obamas theme...Death to America...The crusaders will pay!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: businessprofessor
The oil will be refined in Gulf Coast refineries. The oil and pipeline are privately owned so the owners can determine the most productive uses of their product. The landowners will still be compensated under eminent domain.

So where does the USA get any guarantee that our refineries will be used and that the oil will be used for USA consumption? We don't. The only thing the USA gets is forcibly giving up right of way so Canadian business can profit. Instead USA citizen landowners are forced by the GOP to give up their property for the profits of private foreign enterprise.

The US government maintains a reserve but I do not see the pipeline contributing to the reserve unless there is a national emergency. Your screed against global corporations is just leftist screed.

My screed against globalism is leftist???? I suppose you love the UN too? The only way eminent domain in the USA can ever be justified is if it obviously serves the greater good of the USA. Canadian oil is not our greater good. If it was my land they wanted for a right of way, I'd fight them up to the Supreme Court. These global corporations would be required to take it over my dead body unless they offered me enough to convince me to sell. My land is my land, not big oil or not corporate Canada. If you believe otherwise you are a corporatist and not a conservative. Unfortunately for the USA that has become the GOP creed.

It is total hypocrisy version 2012 to claim eminent domain is fine for global corporations but not in Kelo vs City of New London case - Connecticut 2005 with developers. Make no mistake that eminent domain for private enterprise is about stealing private property rights regardless.

To quote Scalia who ruled against eminent domain in this Kelo case: Justice Antonin Scalia, for example, suggested that a ruling in favor of the city would destroy "the distinction between private use and public use," asserting that a private use which provided merely incidental benefits to the state was "not enough to justify use of the condemnation power."[10]

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London

Too many "conservatives" now listen to the hypocrisy of well rewarded and leased politicians instead of listening to conscience and consistency.

24 posted on 01/04/2012 5:36:41 PM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Dusty Road
I would first like to see where eminent has been used, when running a pipeline you don’t buy the land you pay for a right of way.

To hear a bunch of suburban or city conservatives talk about this as though - so what, is a sad state of affairs.

I happen to be a land owner, and right of way means that the land owner loses the right of use of said right of way and land. To lose land by right of way is not insignificant and means that access be permanently provided and that property value declines and that use of that land is lost. Crops can not be planted, structures are disallowed as are roads and who wants to live next to major pipeline? Yeah NIMBY means something if it is in your back yard.

Any taking of private property by private enterprise is in direct opposition to property rights. In my view it is non-negotiable, only unless it can be proven to benefit the greater good and not just private pockets and crooked politicians, and then I would still fight it unless landowners were paid properly, but they are not.

.

25 posted on 01/04/2012 5:52:39 PM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dusty Road
I would first like to see where eminent has been used, when running a pipeline you don’t buy the land you pay for a right of way.

To hear a bunch of suburban or city conservatives talk about this as though - so what, is a sad state of affairs.

I happen to be a land owner, and right of way means that the land owner loses the right of use of said right of way and land. To lose land by right of way is not insignificant and means that access be permanently provided and that property value declines and that use of that land is lost. Crops can not be planted, structures are disallowed as are roads and who wants to live next to major pipeline? Yeah NIMBY means something if it is in your back yard.

Any taking of private property by private enterprise is in direct opposition to property rights. In my view it is non-negotiable, only unless it can be proven to benefit the greater good and not just private pockets and crooked politicians, and then I would still fight it unless landowners were paid properly, but they are not.

.

26 posted on 01/04/2012 5:52:55 PM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

Sir we have a total of 51 sections in West TX with multiple pipeline crossing, we have roads crossing them and crops planted over them, they’ve been no inconvienence to us at all. Plus we were paid nicely for that access.


27 posted on 01/05/2012 3:21:15 AM PST by Dusty Road
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone
I might add that the going rate for a pipeline easement in South TX is going from 400 to 600 dollars per rod with damages at 125 to 200 per rod. We're in negotiation for another easement across the north end of the ranch which will cover just over 3 and 1/2 miles. There's 320 rods per mile.
28 posted on 01/05/2012 3:45:00 AM PST by Dusty Road
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

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