Could the Keystone Pipeline get passed?

[cptau 169]

Keystone XL will pump Canadian tar sand oil, but it will also pick up US crude oil from Montana and North Dakota.

If the pipeline is not built 40% of the Canadian oil will moved by rail into the U.S.

The Canadians are also looking at expanding an existing pipeline that crosses into Wisconsin to carry some of the oil into the U.S. The Canadians are also planning to pump some of the oil into British Columbia and ship it out on tanker ships.

[DKW 86 7,426]

Keystone XL will pump Canadian tar sand oil, but it will also pick up US crude oil from Montana and North Dakota.

If the pipeline is not built 40% of the Canadian oil will moved by rail into the U.S.

The Canadians are also looking at expanding an existing pipeline that crosses into Wisconsin to carry some of the oil into the U.S. The Canadians are also planning to pump some of the oil into British Columbia and ship it out on tanker ships.

Man give it up...the ACA fans are dead set against anything that would help American workers or common folks. They got no problems tossing the XLP over a senate seat tho.

[TheBlueVue 177]

WTHeck are you talking about? My degree certainly took far longer than two semesters. Where did you get that? I am responding to a host of folks here on this forum whose entire identity was in being "more intelligent" than the rest of us. Now we find out that the ACA Braintrust built the plan on the ""Stupidity" of the ACA Voter. We have heard multiple times from Gruber about the assumed stupidity of the ACA Voters. Now as the Supremes get to hear the case about whether "punishing" the states was the right call vis-a-vis the subsidies.

The real question about the XLP is that no one seems to care that the Dems seem to be swapping sides to save Landrieu's career. All that passion vanished as soon as ONE senate seat was in question. Doesn't that bother you that ONE seat changes the whole dynamic of 6 years of crap logic against the American working people? This argument against the XLP was never about economics or even pollution. It was about a group of Eilitist Prigs trying to impose their will against common sense in an effort to prove their supposed superiority. Now we know that all that was crap. The very people proclaiming their superiority will now being remembered as the dupes in the real debate.

Thanks Gruber. Your commentary has flipped the field by showing that the DC Elites have been playing the Stupids for their votes.

There is a contingency of posters in this forum,. as you know, who base all their posts on their presumed intellectual superiority over us common 'murican morons" It seems they all believe anything and everything this admin does is worth defending due to our simple minded inability to intellectually grasp the idea that the govt knows what best for us in all instances, across the board. So, they will never be able to understand questions about why is the XL pipeline suddenly something Harry Reid is willing to allow to come to a vote over the 300 plus other bills he has kept hidden from clear view. The answer, as you so eloquently exposed is, the same as it is with EVERYTHING ELSE, with the left, .its always politics above good policy always and forever, Amen.

Some may argue the pipeline is not good policy..if that's the case, let the proposal stand on its own with an up or down vote after debating it in Senate Chambers. That doesn't take 6 years but, every issue doesn't have a Tom Steyer behind it waving $100 million dollars in the democrats face to oppose it, which, constitutes the political pressures that have drawn this thing out for that length of time. But just let a Senate seat from a state come into play that would benefit from that pipeline and voila, it becomes politically attractive all of a sudden.

[cooltigger21 0]

Bottom line is this. Canada is going to produce this oil whether we build that pipeline or not. Question is are we going to get what benefit we can out of it. You may not like oil but as of right now there is nothing that can replace it and there is nothing on the horizon that can replace it. Natural gas can replace some of it and we should use it where we can but it can't take it's place completely.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Bottom line is this. Canada is going to produce this oil whether we build that pipeline or not. Question is are we going to get what benefit we can out of it. You may not like oil but as of right now there is nothing that can replace it and there is nothing on the horizon that can replace it. Natural gas can replace some of it and we should use it where we can but it can't take it's place completely.

If the opposition is on environmental grounds, it should additionally pointed out that Canadian oil is currently being railed into the US and that's not going to stop for the reasons you cited. The environmentalists should favor the pipeline because it will create a smaller carbon footprint that using the railroad does.

[cooltigger21 0]

It's much safer than railroads and it would free up space for moving agricultural goods to market that can't get there right now.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

It seems to make sense to everybody but the Gruber Goobers

[alexava 6,973]

You have a handful of already rich people who are going to get richer. It will create about 100 permanent jobs. That is it. No better gas prices for us. I can get past environmental concerns if the benefit is there. I don't think it is.

[cooltigger21 0]

You have a handful of already rich people who are going to get richer. It will create about 100 permanent jobs. That is it. No better gas prices for us. I can get past environmental concerns if the benefit is there. I don't think it is.

Would you rather have that oil running on railroads? Without that pipeline that is what is going to happen. It's what is happening. That oil is going to get out and moved one way or the other. It's that simple. It's not just for canadian oil but the oil coming out of North Dakota as well. The environmental concerns are way overblown by people who hate oil and capitalism.

[DKW 86 7,426]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

[homersapien 11,386]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

So the Keystone is going to impact global gas prices?

I wouldn't say something like that while featuring a "dumb and dumber" joke.

[aubfaninga 16]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

I have a few questions if you do not mind. The environmental benefits seem to be a no brainer for me. Here is two things that I can't wrap my head around...

#1 I keep hearing people say "they will use trains anyway". If this is the case, will the Keystone significantly increase oil production into the world market vs using trains?

#2 The Jobs created by the pipeline vs the effects to our railroad business financially (basically, are we going to be taking x amount of dollars in shipping and creating jobs using 1/4 that amount)

[DKW 86 7,426]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

I have a few questions if you do not mind. The environmental benefits seem to be a no brainer for me. Here is two things that I can't wrap my head around...

#1 I keep hearing people say "they will use trains anyway". If this is the case, will the Keystone significantly increase oil production into the world market vs using trains?

#2 The Jobs created by the pipeline vs the effects to our railroad business financially (basically, are we going to be taking x amount of dollars in shipping and creating jobs using 1/4 that amount)

1) Ask a coherent question and and we will talk.

1) The increase is an increase, using trains or pipeline will not effect it one iota.

2) We are doing this to LESSEN the bad effects of oil spills. Trains are much more likely to spill that an pipeline.

3) Anything that will get this economy moving like it is in N Dakota is a good thing.

4) Any of the ACA Voters here that "thinks" (I use that term EXTREMELY loosely) that increasing the world supply of oil will not decrease the price, well all i can say is that the Administration and Dr Gruber have yall spec'ed out perfectly. You will believe anything that agrees with your warped view of the world. That is why when the rest of humanity was telling you the ACA was a logically and reasonably a tax, you could not plainly see it. When Roberts pointed it out that the ACA was indeed a tax, You could not see that either. You were reacting as the low information voters Gruber and the Dems expected you to be.You acted just as they predicted you would. Just as you are reacting now.

Example: 5 Years from now, China finds Oil in the South China Sea. They start producing their own oil. NEWSFLASH: the oil in Canada is not just designated for China for perpetuity! Even at that, taking China off the world market in any way will lower the demand for oil and will drop prices. The market is still the market, no matter how much crack Krugman did last nite.

[DKW 86 7,426]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

So the Keystone is going to impact global gas prices?

I wouldn't say something like that while featuring a "dumb and dumber" joke.

And here ladies and gentlemen is an exquisite example of a Gruber-Goober.

Throws centuries of economic thought and science away so he can rationalize the anti-intellectualism he has been embracing for some time now.

This is why the ineptitude in DC gets rewarded every 4 years...

[cooltigger21 0]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

I have a few questions if you do not mind. The environmental benefits seem to be a no brainer for me. Here is two things that I can't wrap my head around...

#1 I keep hearing people say "they will use trains anyway". If this is the case, will the Keystone significantly increase oil production into the world market vs using trains?

#2 The Jobs created by the pipeline vs the effects to our railroad business financially (basically, are we going to be taking x amount of dollars in shipping and creating jobs using 1/4 that amount)

The railroad business won't be affected as far as hurting their business. We have grain and other agricultural goods that have been harvested but they can't get to market because we are using the railroads to transport oil. It' s not just the Canadian oil but the oil coming out of North Dakota and other areas of the country. The pipeline would take that oil that is now being transported by rail, which is much more of an environmental hazard than the pipeline, would go through Keystone. We need more refinery capacity and we need to lift the ban on exporting oil and natural gas. By doing that we could sell some of it to Europe and other places and take away some of the market for Russian oil and gas.

[TheBlueVue 177]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

I have a few questions if you do not mind. The environmental benefits seem to be a no brainer for me. Here is two things that I can't wrap my head around...

#1 I keep hearing people say "they will use trains anyway". If this is the case, will the Keystone significantly increase oil production into the world market vs using trains?

#2 The Jobs created by the pipeline vs the effects to our railroad business financially (basically, are we going to be taking x amount of dollars in shipping and creating jobs using 1/4 that amount)

The railroad business won't be affected as far as hurting their business. We have grain and other agricultural goods that have been harvested but they can't get to market because we are using the railroads to transport oil. It' s not just the Canadian oil but the oil coming out of North Dakota and other areas of the country. The pipeline would take that oil that is now being transported by rail, which is much more of an environmental hazard than the pipeline, would go through Keystone. We need more refinery capacity and we need to lift the ban on exporting oil and natural gas. By doing that we could sell some of it to Europe and other places and take away some of the market for Russian oil and gas.

It probably wont but Berkshire Hathaway aka Warren Buffett owns the railroad companies and if we have learned ANYTHING about this admin is that they do whatever is necessary to protect their friends and accordingly to punish their enemies. I doubt Obama would veto the pipeline solely to protect Buffett but he IS a huge democrat benefactor and along with Tom Steyer I expect the pipeline, if passed, to be vetoed by Obama. Follow the money..these are 2 of the biggest democrat donors to go along with George Soros and all these people are against the pipeline for their own self serving reasons. Obama doesn't want to disrupt those income streams to the democrat party.

[homersapien 11,386]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

I have a few questions if you do not mind. The environmental benefits seem to be a no brainer for me. Here is two things that I can't wrap my head around...

#1 I keep hearing people say "they will use trains anyway". If this is the case, will the Keystone significantly increase oil production into the world market vs using trains?

#2 The Jobs created by the pipeline vs the effects to our railroad business financially (basically, are we going to be taking x amount of dollars in shipping and creating jobs using 1/4 that amount)

1) Ask a coherent question and and we will talk.

1) The increase is an increase, using trains or pipeline will not effect it one iota.

2) We are doing this to LESSEN the bad effects of oil spills. Trains are much more likely to spill that an pipeline.

3) Anything that will get this economy moving like it is in N Dakota is a good thing.

4) Any of the ACA Voters here that "thinks" (I use that term EXTREMELY loosely) that increasing the world supply of oil will not decrease the price, well all i can say is that the Administration and Dr Gruber have yall spec'ed out perfectly. You will believe anything that agrees with your warped view of the world. That is why when the rest of humanity was telling you the ACA was a logically and reasonably a tax, you could not plainly see it. When Roberts pointed it out that the ACA was indeed a tax, You could not see that either. You were reacting as the low information voters Gruber and the Dems expected you to be.You acted just as they predicted you would. Just as you are reacting now.

Example: 5 Years from now, China finds Oil in the South China Sea. They start producing their own oil. NEWSFLASH: the oil in Canada is not just designated for China for perpetuity! Even at that, taking China off the world market in any way will lower the demand for oil and will drop prices. The market is still the market, no matter how much crack Krugman did last nite.

Doesn't that put the kabash on your "pipeline will decrease the price of gas" claim?

[homersapien 11,386]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

So the Keystone is going to impact global gas prices?

I wouldn't say something like that while featuring a "dumb and dumber" joke.

And here ladies and gentlemen is an exquisite example of a Gruber-Goober.

Throws centuries of economic thought and science away so he can rationalize the anti-intellectualism he has been embracing for some time now.

This is why the ineptitude in DC gets rewarded every 4 years...

And here ladies and gentlemen is confirmation of my point. Your claim that the Keystone Pipeline will reduce the global price of gas is absolutely ridiculous.

If you are serious - which I find difficult to believe - then you truly are dumb.

[homersapien 11,386]

Here's a hint: The total amount of oil available for refining into gas is controlled by the people who own the truly large reserves, not by the amount of oil that is available from North America, which even as you say will be available with or without the pipeline.

I won't bother to discuss the "management" of global refining capacity. It's not really necessary.

[TheBlueVue 177]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

So the Keystone is going to impact global gas prices?

I wouldn't say something like that while featuring a "dumb and dumber" joke.

And here ladies and gentlemen is an exquisite example of a Gruber-Goober.

Throws centuries of economic thought and science away so he can rationalize the anti-intellectualism he has been embracing for some time now.

This is why the ineptitude in DC gets rewarded every 4 years...

And here ladies and gentlemen is confirmation of my point. Your claim that the Keystone Pipeline will reduce the global price of gas is absolutely ridiculous.

If you are serious - which I find difficult to believe - then you truly are dumb.

Oh, Im not sure precisely how much affect the pipeline will have on world oil prices but in keeping with simple supply and demand it could be a piece of the overall dynamic that continues putting downward pressure on oil prices. Logistically, I would imagine the pipeline would funnel significantly more oil to the refineries than current levels provided by the rail system.

[homersapien 11,386]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

I have a few questions if you do not mind. The environmental benefits seem to be a no brainer for me. Here is two things that I can't wrap my head around...

#1 I keep hearing people say "they will use trains anyway". If this is the case, will the Keystone significantly increase oil production into the world market vs using trains?

#2 The Jobs created by the pipeline vs the effects to our railroad business financially (basically, are we going to be taking x amount of dollars in shipping and creating jobs using 1/4 that amount)

The railroad business won't be affected as far as hurting their business. We have grain and other agricultural goods that have been harvested but they can't get to market because we are using the railroads to transport oil. It' s not just the Canadian oil but the oil coming out of North Dakota and other areas of the country. The pipeline would take that oil that is now being transported by rail, which is much more of an environmental hazard than the pipeline, would go through Keystone. We need more refinery capacity and we need to lift the ban on exporting oil and natural gas. By doing that we could sell some of it to Europe and other places and take away some of the market for Russian oil and gas.

Errrr... grain is not transported in oil tankers. :-\ And I don't think the amount of track available is a limiting factor. Are you suggesting we don't have enough engines?

[homersapien 11,386]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

So the Keystone is going to impact global gas prices?

I wouldn't say something like that while featuring a "dumb and dumber" joke.

And here ladies and gentlemen is an exquisite example of a Gruber-Goober.

Throws centuries of economic thought and science away so he can rationalize the anti-intellectualism he has been embracing for some time now.

This is why the ineptitude in DC gets rewarded every 4 years...

And here ladies and gentlemen is confirmation of my point. Your claim that the Keystone Pipeline will reduce the global price of gas is absolutely ridiculous.

If you are serious - which I find difficult to believe - then you truly are dumb.

Oh, Im not sure precisely how much affect the pipeline will have on world oil prices but in keeping with simple supply and demand it could be a piece of the overall dynamic that continues putting downward pressure on oil prices. Logistically, I would imagine the pipeline would funnel significantly more oil to the refineries than current levels provided by the rail system.

That wasn't addressed to you. But come back if and when you have some facts to contribute.

[TheBlueVue 177]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

So the Keystone is going to impact global gas prices?

I wouldn't say something like that while featuring a "dumb and dumber" joke.

And here ladies and gentlemen is an exquisite example of a Gruber-Goober.

Throws centuries of economic thought and science away so he can rationalize the anti-intellectualism he has been embracing for some time now.

This is why the ineptitude in DC gets rewarded every 4 years...

And here ladies and gentlemen is confirmation of my point. Your claim that the Keystone Pipeline will reduce the global price of gas is absolutely ridiculous.

If you are serious - which I find difficult to believe - then you truly are dumb.

Oh, Im not sure precisely how much affect the pipeline will have on world oil prices but in keeping with simple supply and demand it could be a piece of the overall dynamic that continues putting downward pressure on oil prices. Logistically, I would imagine the pipeline would funnel significantly more oil to the refineries than current levels provided by the rail system.

That wasn't addressed to you. But come back if and when you have some facts to contribute.

You know little buddy, you're just a pathetic cartoon character. You butt into other's exchanges with alarming regularity yet, always have serious heartburn when anyone else returns the favor. Oh and BTW, railroad lines have capacities just like everything else.The observations that oil tankers dont move grains is just a "Gruberism". Oil tankers tax the capacity of the railroads and could very well limit the movement of other agricultural commodities

[homersapien 11,386]

N Dakota has extremely low unemployment. Canada same thing. I know folks just cannot let it go about some low number of jobs. I am not buying it. More gas won't drop world wide gas prices? Yeah right. Keep on with the silly predictions. This pipeline is gonna happen. It is gonna make a lot of jobs, lower prices, benefit so many.

Remember the Clinton years? They were fueled with low gas prices too. We need some good times again AS WE MOVE TOWARD a more sane energy policy down the road.

So the Keystone is going to impact global gas prices?

I wouldn't say something like that while featuring a "dumb and dumber" joke.

And here ladies and gentlemen is an exquisite example of a Gruber-Goober.

Throws centuries of economic thought and science away so he can rationalize the anti-intellectualism he has been embracing for some time now.

This is why the ineptitude in DC gets rewarded every 4 years...

And here ladies and gentlemen is confirmation of my point. Your claim that the Keystone Pipeline will reduce the global price of gas is absolutely ridiculous.

If you are serious - which I find difficult to believe - then you truly are dumb.

Oh, Im not sure precisely how much affect the pipeline will have on world oil prices but in keeping with simple supply and demand it could be a piece of the overall dynamic that continues putting downward pressure on oil prices. Logistically, I would imagine the pipeline would funnel significantly more oil to the refineries than current levels provided by the rail system.

That wasn't addressed to you. But come back if and when you have some facts to contribute.

You know little buddy, you're just a pathetic cartoon character. You butt into other's exchanges with alarming regularity yet, always have serious heartburn when anyone else returns the favor. Oh and BTW, railroad lines have capacities just like everything else.The observations that oil tankers dont move grains is just a "Gruberism". Oil tankers tax the capacity of the railroads and could very well limit the movement of other agricultural commodities

What "heartburn"? You responded as if I was talking about you, so I wanted to clarify I wasn't. Are you trying to rescue DK?

And the part of railroads that determine capacity is rolling stock, such as tank cars for chemicals and petroleum vs cars for grain. I seriously doubt that there is a shortage of engines to pull trains, so in effect, there's no conflict in capacity.

But I could be wrong. You could provide some facts that demonstrate the country is not transporting agriculture crops because all available engines are being used to transport Canadian oil, but I kind of doubt you will.

[cooltigger21 0]

If anybody with even half an interest in anything related to truth would take two minutes they would see that oil being transported on railroads is way up over the past five years. Grain is being held up and not being delivered. Even people like CNBC, who I would hardly label as a right wing source, has reported that. http://www.cnbc.com/id/102021264#. Besides that trains are not as efficient as a pipeline at moving oil. Trains inevitably move through populated areas increasing the risk to the population. Of course some would like to see us quit using oil altogether regardless of the consequences.