LadyJazzer wrote: Yeah, the Dems are sure chanting "Drill, baby, drill"...
Here's what that stupid pipeline will do to you:
Keystone pipeline isn't cure for gas prices The controversial link to bring oil from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico could raise prices at the gas pump, especially in the Midwest and Rocky Mountain regions.
"Rising gasoline prices have helped proponents of a controversial pipeline proposal press their case that the project would help ease supply bottlenecks and lower prices for consumers."
They’re half right.
The proposed pipeline would relieve a glut of crude oil backing up in the Midwest and redirect those barrels to Gulf of Mexico ports. From there they could be shipped to world markets and repriced at higher global prices. But that likely would mean higher prices for drivers in the nation's midsection, who currently are enjoying an unusual discount stemming from a lack of pipeline capacity.
That’s where the Keystone pipeline comes in. Proponents of the pipeline have argued it will help wean the U.S. off foreign imports and lower pump prices. But rather than pushing Gulf Coast prices lower, it will let oil producers charge more for their crude.
TransCanada Corp. estimates the pipeline would boost sales of Canadian-produced crude by $2 billion to $4 billion a year, according to an assessment submitted to Canada's National Energy Board.
“The prices for those crudes in North Dakota and Canada will fetch closer to Gulf Coast prices, which are tied into the higher international market price,” said Tim Hess, an Energy Department analyst.
Gee, you can hear the surprise in *MY* voice... Let TransCanada charge more, "boost sales by $2-$4 Billion/ A YEAR"
And here's the GOP "job creator" knuckle-draggers: :Koolaid: :Koolaid:
Keep twisting that pretzel logic! Without the pipeline going to Houston, the oil and jobs will go to China and Canada respectively. And the gas price will keep rising along with the unemployment rate, maybe Obama & Biden can creat more jobs instead by propping up another bankrupt alternative energy company. Until it fails like Solyandra.
No wonder the unemployment rate is so high, the administration thinks just like you.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
From the link LJ provided (she must have forgotten to cut and paste this part for some reason):
One reason crude is so plentiful in the Midwest is that new production technologies have boosted production in oilfields that were once thought to be exhausted or too costly to develop. After two decades of steady decline, total U.S. oil production began rising again in 2009, according to the EIA. Increased production from Canadian tar sands fields also has boosted Midwest supplies.
But as domestic and Canadian production have risen, pipeline bottlenecks have cropped up – especially over the 500 miles from Cushing, Okla., to Houston, the nation’s largest oil shipping port and home to about half its refining capacity.
“We lack infrastructure to catch up with the fact that there's been this big change in oil production,” said Yergin. “Eight years ago, North Dakota was not the fourth-largest oil producing state in the country. So we need new pipelines, and the lack of those pipelines -- the lack of catching up -- is reflected in the disparity (in prices).” [/u]
I'm also curious about what is harder on the environment long term, moving oil through a pipe, or on the back of trucks and in the holding tanks of ships.
It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy
CritiKalbILL wrote: From the link LJ provided (she must have forgotten to cut and paste this part for some reason):
One reason crude is so plentiful in the Midwest is that new production technologies have boosted production in oilfields that were once thought to be exhausted or too costly to develop. After two decades of steady decline, total U.S. oil production began rising again in 2009, according to the EIA. Increased production from Canadian tar sands fields also has boosted Midwest supplies.
But as domestic and Canadian production have risen, pipeline bottlenecks have cropped up – especially over the 500 miles from Cushing, Okla., to Houston, the nation’s largest oil shipping port and home to about half its refining capacity.
“We lack infrastructure to catch up with the fact that there's been this big change in oil production,” said Yergin. “Eight years ago, North Dakota was not the fourth-largest oil producing state in the country. So we need new pipelines, and the lack of those pipelines -- the lack of catching up -- is reflected in the disparity (in prices).” [/u]
I'm also curious about what is harder on the environment long term, moving oil through a pipe, or on the back of trucks and in the holding tanks of ships.
Along those lines.
Reporting from Seattle— The Canadian pipeline company thwarted last year in its bid to build the 1,700-mile Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast hasn't given up. The company on Monday announced its intention to reapply for a permit for the project -- and to proceed immediately with plans to build the southern portion of the pipeline, from Oklahoma to the coast.
I quoted the part that was relevant to the current condition; i.e., the pipeline will NOT create the jobs that the Righties keep asserting; the price at the pump will go up; and drilling more will NOT bring the price down.
The pipeline company wants to get its product to the ports so they can sell it to the speculators and the higher-priced world markets. It has NOTHING to do with bringing the prices down for the American consumer.
(And if I wanted to hide the other parts of the article, I would not have posted the link.) The rest is hardly relevant to the current situation, and no doubt if the prices went up because of the pipeline, the clowns would be blaming that on Obama too...
LadyJazzer wrote: the price at the pump will go up; and drilling more will NOT bring the price down.
Yet you fail to see the FACT that higher supply in our area is responsible for lower prices. You must also feel that transporting by truck and ship is more efficient and less risky for the environment....right?
And Obama loves to blame speculation for high prices, yet it was not proven to be a fact as indicated by the MSNBC video in your link.
It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy
Right now we have higher supplies and lower demand and still the price goes up. Gee...maybe something else is causing the price to rise...maybe speculators or world events. Do you think approving Keystone will fix that?
CritiKalbILL wrote: Yet you fail to see the FACT that higher supply in our area is responsible for lower prices.
So why pipe it away from the midwest, directly to the coastal refineries? Once the crude has a direct pipeline through and out of our nation, the supply in the midwest will go down…prices?...
Yes, like the Right parrots the phony numbers about how many "hundreds of thousands of [permanent] jobs will be created"... (It won't.) And how it will "bring down the price-at-the-pump" (It won't.)
Keep twisting that pretzel logic! Without the pipeline going to Houston, the oil and jobs will go to China and Canada respectively. And the gas price will keep rising along with the unemployment rate, maybe Obama & Biden can creat more jobs instead by propping up another bankrupt alternative energy company. Until it fails like Solyandra.
