It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Keystone Pipeline Bill Passes

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Echo007 long as 20k people can have a job for a year or two.



Erm.... Nope
It's 50 permanent, 2000 temp for 2 years.




posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by masqua

Originally posted by peck420
They had to plan for 3 separate routes right from the beginning.

TransCanada offered one of the reserve routes almost immediately after Obama made the delay press release.


I hadn't heard that. The only alternate route that was mentioned by The Harper Government after the Obama hold-up, afaik, was the one to Kitimat BC, which would direct crude to the Pacific and China. I know that line has been discussed for some time now.

About that Ogallala aquifer... it's quite large, both in width and length:



Any idea how they were proposing the other two routes?





The Governor of Nebraska said it's not coming through our state. Because there is too much of a chance of it polluting the aquifer.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 01:07 AM
link   
Boy, first you guys leave the Big 12, now you don't want to play ball with the global oil companies...what's with you guys.

Just kidding.......well not about the Big 12 part.

Boomer Sooner!



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by AzureSky

Hempfacts.org

Farming 6% of the continental U.S. acreage with biomass crops would provide all of America's energy needs. 1
Hemp is Earth's number-one biomass resource; it is capable of producing 10 tons per acre in four months. 1
Biomass can be converted to methane, methanol, or gasoline at a cost comparable to petroleum, and hemp is much better for the environment. Pyrolysis (charcoalizing), or biochemical composting are two methods of turning hemp into fuel.2
Hemp can produce 10 times more methanol than corn.
Hemp fuel burns clean. Petroleum causes acid rain due to sulfur pollution.
The use of hemp fuel does not contribute to global warming.


The point is, we have much better ways of making fuel than this disaster. As you can see above. Hemp would revolutionize the way we do things.


Hemp could revolutionize the entire Earth. It's truly the "one size fits all" solution. Too bad the oil, cotton, and government cartels won't allow it to free us from our imprisonment.

/TOA



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Report from Friday from The New York Times saying the pipeline is still in the air :
www.nytimes.com...

Which means it's in limbo.


edit on 25-12-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Destinyone
Though Obama would prefer to not address this now...The Keystone Pipeline Bill being passed last night, has put his back against the wall. I've included some excerpts from an article, that fairly well represent my feelings.

It means jobs, much needed jobs. Yup, that's 20,000 new jobs. And not only the kind of jobs that someone with a degree can get, for good pay.


5000 to 6000 temporary construction jobs at best...



Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman said it would create "more than 100,000 American jobs."

And earlier Wednesday on the Senate floor, Republican Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas said the project "promises 20,000 immediate jobs and 118,000 spin-off jobs."

They all appear to be getting their numbers from the same source: TransCanada Corporation, the company behind the project.

Alex Pourbaix, an executive at TransCanada, told a House subcommittee earlier this month that the project would create 13,000 construction jobs.

"On top of that there are 7,000 manufacturing jobs associated with this project," said Pourbaix. "Twenty thousand jobs in all."




What he fails to mention is that the jobs numbers are based on "person years," meaning the number of people employed could be much lower.

"That may be in some cases one person working six months and another person working six months," says Ray Perryman, president of an economic research firm based in Texas. "Or it could be if one person works two years, that's two job years."

Perryman was hired by TransCanada to look at the broader economic impact of the project. And if you're wondering where Huntsman and Hutchison got the 100,000 jobs-created figure, look no further than Perryman. He adds up all the jobs at all the contractors and manufacturers and suppliers and restaurants and hotels along the way.




"It's unsubstantiated," says Sean Sweeney, who directs Cornell University's Global Labor Institute. He co-wrote a paper that found the numbers to be exaggerated.

"I'm not sure where 20,000 comes from," adds Sweeney. "We know the direct construction jobs are nowhere near 20,000. We know the steel, or a portion of it, is not produced in the United States; so where are the jobs?"

Perryman describes the Cornell paper as "advocacy."

A recent State Department study said the construction workforce would be 5,000 to 6,000 workers. And once the construction phase ends, almost all of these jobs, however many are created, would go away.


www.npr.org...



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by masqua
 


They don't advertise the routes for competition reasons. For example, if we are competing and you find out that I already have route B certified, but use route A, you could fast track a project on route B using my certifications as precedent.

As for the pipeline to Kitimat, that is not an alternate route. That is a separate pipeline by a separate oil company.

Kitimat is by Enbridge and is called the Nothern Gateway Pipeline, ve TransCanada and the Keystone XL.

Kitmat is currently on hold by communities that rely heavily on transfer payments funded by oil sands...ironic, no?



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


You would almost think the oil is going to refine itself...

And there is no economic spin offs what so ever...

Nobody is going to spend their money and boost the local economies...in fact it will probably be just like FtMac...oh wait...when is their boom going to end?



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by peck420
As for the pipeline to Kitimat, that is not an alternate route. That is a separate pipeline by a separate oil company.

Kitimat is by Enbridge and is called the Nothern Gateway Pipeline, ve TransCanada and the Keystone XL.
]

I still think, however, that the Keystone and Gateway pipelines are related politically:


OTTAWA — Canada could sell its oil to China and other overseas markets with or without approval of the Keystone XL oil pipeline in the United States, says Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

In a year-end television interview, Harper indicated he had doubts the $7-billion pipeline would receive political approval from U.S. President Barack Obama, and that Canada should be looking outside the United States for markets.

“I am very serious about selling our oil off this continent, selling our energy products off to Asia. I think we have to do that,” Harper said in the Monday interview with CTV National News.


Harper’s comments were released a day after the White House sent signals it might kill TransCanada’s oil sands pipeline if it is forced to make a decision on the project in 60 days, saying there wasn’t sufficient time to complete a new environmental review.

news.nationalpost.com...




Kitmat is currently on hold by communities that rely heavily on transfer payments funded by oil sands...ironic, no?


Yes, I've been watching that blockade with a keen interest. It's a political/corporate minefield, especially when you factor in the recent Attawapiskat revelations.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by peck420
reply to post by Indigo5
 


You would almost think the oil is going to refine itself...


No...As Reuters reported the Koch Brothers have refineries waiting for that oil already. No new refineries.

Koch Brothers Positioned To Be Big Winners If Keystone XL Pipeline Is Approved
www.reuters.com...


Originally posted by peck420
And there is no economic spin offs what so ever...


If you give 5k Americans temporary jobs and spread them out literally the length of the USA, you might create a drop of rain in demand.

Temporary jobs, 6 months to 2 years, the steel will come from Canada or India, as will many of the employees...and that is what Keystone itself acknowledges.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by peck420
 


See my thread here...

GOP Champions Government Seizure of Americans Land....!,

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

No...As Reuters reported the Koch Brothers have refineries waiting for that oil already. No new refineries.

Koch Brothers Positioned To Be Big Winners If Keystone XL Pipeline Is Approved
www.reuters.com...


And what will happen to those refineries (and their employees) with out a constant supply of oil? More to the welfare line?

The refineries in Texas (the ones that XL is going to) were built for one type of oil. Venezuelan heavy crude. Venezuelan heavy crude that Venezuela is currently building refineries to take car of themselves.

The funny thing about oil sand oil and Venezuelan heavy crude is that they are very close in density, which means that the Texan refineries can literally continue on without disruption.



If you give 5k Americans temporary jobs and spread them out literally the length of the USA, you might create a drop of rain in demand.

Temporary jobs, 6 months to 2 years, the steel will come from Canada or India, as will many of the employees...and that is what Keystone itself acknowledges.


And if the oil from the oil sands keeps currently employed Americans...employed, that doesn't count? These are valid economic benefits that those against the pipelines are trying very hard to mask.

This is not the 'black and white' issue that American politicians would like it to be. If Keystone is not built, there is the distinct possibility that within 10 years, Texan refineries will be at approx 30-50% capacity. That would mean somewhere between 10-20,000 Texans out of work. There is also the couple billion in royalty, transfer, land lease, and shipping fees that will be lost...per year.

There is far, far more at stake with this pipeline than most people realise.
edit on 27-12-2011 by peck420 because: Quote issues



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Did anyone happen to notice how similar the route of the main pipeline is following near identical to the North American Union Superhighway via Interstate 35?
edit on 27-12-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 


The pipeline has nothing to do with jobs, although that would help...IMO once Iran closes the straight of hormuz and prices start to rise, this pipeline will be seen as a savior for America. Also this will free the US and Saudi relations, the collapse of Saudi Arabia will probably be next year sometime from the likes of Qatar.

The one major concern will be terrorism and security of the pipeline, especially if Saudi relations sour.



posted on Dec, 27 2011 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Daedal
 


(Mods and Admins, keep this post intact as it has total relevance to the topic at hand as it's discussing a worst case scenario, thank you! D1!)

To add, the Saudi's aren't going to keep on backing our play as we create an empire in The Mid East because eventually they will grow tired and get sick of it and cut us off and close off diplomatic relations and ties! Eventually that's going to crumble and have The Saudi's linkup with Iran as Iran is linked with Russia and China and when (no longer an issue of if but is now when) that happens we'll have 5 nuclear powers looking right at us asking what's good with the 5th being Pakistan and what will we do then?
edit on 27-12-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Well, good ol' Obama decided to shelve this little project until 2013. Lucky us.

www.realclearpolitics.com...

Wait, it wasn't Obama....it was those dirty Repubilcans! Yeah, that's it!

How's that Socialism working for everyone?...enjoying that $4 a gallon gas in the US yet? Yep, lotsa hope and change from Obama.

Obama loves high gas prices. Why? Force people into electric or hybrid cars. He came out during his campaign and stated that he wanted them high. Gas was $1.83 average then; it's not about $4. Mission accomplished!

Here's an interesting read:

www.boortz.com...



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   
I utterly LOVE how folks think that the pipeline will mean lower prices... it won't, it just an easier way for the Corporations to make money!

Don't believe me, look at our fuel prices right now. Look at the market manipulation of '08.

Wake up, they're going to promise you the sky and jam oil drums up our @$$es.

Roosevelt's quote of:

"Defenders of the short-sighted men who in their greed and selfishness will, if permitted, rob our country of half its charm by their reckless extermination of all useful and beautiful wild things sometimes seek to champion them by saying the 'the game belongs to the people.' So it does; and not merely to the people now alive, but to the unborn people. The 'greatest good for the greatest number' applies to the number within the womb of time, compared to which those now alive form but an insignificant fraction. Our duty to the whole, including the unborn generations, bids us restrain an unprincipled present-day minority from wasting the heritage of these unborn generations. The movement for the conservation of wild life and the larger movement for the conservation of all our natural resources are essentially democratic in spirit, purpose, and method."

is apt. He is talking about saving animals and the environment here.

Derek



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Viesczy
 


What do you think the price of oil will be in 2 years without an increase in global supply? How about 5 or 10?

Demand is increasing. We will have an excess demand to supply by the end of the decade from India and China alone.

If you think prices are bad now, wait for the bidding wars to start on the limited supply.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Not one mention of the Bakken play in North Dakota?
Oil there was only around $70 a barrel last week...cause the pipelines are jammed full.
Unemployed? Go to Williston.
Let Canada sell their oil to China. The Bakken play is on land that makes moonscape look scenic.
It is sweet crude.
Anyone that still believes in "peak oil" is just ignorant.
Throw a couple refineries in North Dakota, maximize the amount of wells per spacing, and yes, you will see
the price of gas go down.....but they (oil companies/government) aren't going to do that, cause they don't want $40 a barrel. I believe if they wanted to, we could cut our oil imports by 50% in 5 years. Easily.

Before someone spouts off about since oil is fungible the prices don't vary as much as $30 a barrel within driving distance of more expensive oil, check it out for yourself first. Currently around $105 on the NYSMEX. I doubt Bakken oil has broken $80 and may even be less than last time I checked. North Dakota is turning down their production as a result.

While I am at it...What is with the other grasshugging anti oil threads? why would anyone think fracking could contribute to earthquakes? How far down do you think they drill for Pete's sake?!



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Res Ipsa
 


If the US actually tapped their full reserve capacity, and removed themselves from the global oil market (100% internal production and consumption), there is no reason for oil to be sold for anything (in the US) over $55/barrel.

I think that is still the amount required to make shale viable.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join