It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
We know that the pipeline project itself will introduce far less carbon than trucks driving all over the country. The environmentalists are demanding that the tar sands be left in the ground. The pipeline itself is not an environmental problem, people want Canada to ignore the tar sands.
Obama said in June the project would serve U.S. interests only if it did not "significantly exacerbate" carbon pollution. The Times quoted him as saying that Canada could potentially be doing more to "mitigate carbon release."
A 2009 study by CERA estimated that production from Canada's oil sands emits "about 5 percent to 15 percent more carbon dioxide, over the "well-to-wheels" lifetime analysis of the fuel, than average crude oil."
But there's a huge snag. Obama hasn't said what he wants, or needs, to assuage environmentalists that Keystone XL is in America's national interest, or to convince congressional Democrats facing re-election next year that it can be approved without sabotaging their campaigns.
And the White House has yet to respond to the letter.
Other Canadian officials were quick to note that this country has done as much, or more, to curb emissions than the U.S. They say coal-fired electricity plants south of the border produce something like 32 times the amount of greenhouse gases as the oilsands, and argue the massive Keystone project will not significantly add to emissions.
And the president's own position on the project remains ambiguous, to say the least
"Give us a hard target," one source told CBC. "Don't make us guess."
Canada won't shut the operation down. So what do we do with the oilsands that are being produced?
My fiance lives in Alberta and the economy there is bustling according to him. The Albertan economy is not suffering because of the lack of approval for the Keystone XL pipeline. The job market in Alberta is quite healthy and actually draws people from all over Canada because of its opportunity, a fact which is fairly consistent with any oil laden area (see North Dakota's economy v. the rest of the US).
The Athabasca oil sands are often a topic in international trade talks, with energy rivals China and the United States negotiating with Canada for a bigger share of the rapidly increasing output. Production is expected to quadruple between 2005 and 2015, reaching 4 million barrels (640,000 m3) a day, with increasing political and economic importance. Currently, most of the oil sands production is exported to the United States.
And here, I will display my cynicism. Many studies have said it's fine, the risks are acceptable. Consider what Obama has done with other agencies, IRS, NSA, DOJ, etc. On this issue, the EPA will say whatever Obama wants them to say.
If the EPA says that there is not enough, it's reasonably safe to assume that there isn't enough information. Just because you may think that there has been enough "science done" does not make it so.
And he's quite right.
Stop sucking up Harper...It's our oil .. they don't want it .. no problem , there are other countries with money
“The REMI model forecasts that the XL expansion of the Keystone pipeline would create about 16,000 jobs over a two-year period,” said Nystrom. “After that two years, about 800 jobs would be sustainable moving forward.” “The pipeline will increase competition between Canadian and Middle East crude producers for position in Gulf Coast and Midwest refineries, but will not affect refined product prices,” according to Dr. Wade.
“The benefits of the Keystone XL pipeline would be concentrated largely in the pipeline states themselves,” said Wade. “These areas could see an increase in gross domestic product by as much as $3.1 billion as well as an increase in business sales by as much as $6 billion.”
His preference notwithstanding, Alberta will continue to drill for oil sands until the world says it will not buy it. The oils sands will be refined and used somewhere, whatever Obama wants. The world will have a fossil fuel and nuclear energy supply for the foreseeable future. In 2008, those sources provided a little over 87% of the world's energy usage.
To the best of my knowledge, he has not requested any concessions but has expressed concerns about the carbon emissions. My sense of it is that the reason why he is concerned about carbon emissions relating to Keystone XL is most likely due to him preferring that we do not continue to build an oil/gas based infrastructure.
Again, from whom? What does he want? The PM's wife? He hasn't told Canada even what area he wants concessions in. Even if he was playing a non-zero sum game, even a moderately competent negotiator could have brought it to conclusion in five years. As the clock ticks, Canada knows they are getting close to a time when they won't have to deal with Obama. When he leaves, it all starts over again. This isn't a negotiation, it's a stall.
So no, this does not mean that Obama is not interested in the environment. His approval for the pipeline will be only if the concessions offered most likely exceed his bar of expectation (see how much he can get).
And here, I'm afraid, I must strongly disagree. Currently the particulate matter (2.5) reading in Salt Lake City is 13.3.
Have you ever looked at the issues in Salt Lake City? It's as nasty as Beijing.
Because refined oil is valuable. If it wasn't, the industry would have said, "Don't build the pipeline." Besides, refineries have been running at less than 90% utilization since 2006, there's certainly room to refine more.
Tell me why we would chose to transport foreign oil from one end to the other of our country when we have ample oil in the US (and it's set to increase) that also needs refining.
Let me see, if Obama wants it, and the Canadian government wants it. Who has the power to stop it? I suppose somebody can try law suits, but anybody else? And law suits aren't a guaranteed win.
Just know that Keystone is not solely dependent on Obama's decision to approve or veto. There are other parties in play that can prevent it from ever being built.
The worst day in Salt Lake City is a good day in Beijing which often goes above 500.
The greater Salt Lake region had up to 130 micrograms of soot per cubic meter on Wednesday, or more than three times the federal clean-air limit, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
A new study released Sunday concludes that Koch Industries and its subsidiaries stand to make as much as $100 billion in profits if the controversial Keystone XL pipeline is given the go-ahead by President Obama.
IFG also finds that more than 1,000 reports and statements in support of the Keystone XL pipeline project have been made by policy groups and think tanks that receive funding from the Koch brothers and their philanthropic foundations.
“The Kochs have repeatedly claimed that they have no interest in the Keystone XL Pipeline, this report shows that is false.” Said Nathalie Lowenthal-Savy, a researcher with IFG. “We noticed Koch Funded Tea Party members and think tanks pushing for the pipeline. We dug deeper and found $100 billion in potential profit, $50 million sent to organizations supporting the pipeline, and perhaps 2 million acres of land. That sounds like an interest to me.” Nathalie continued, “We all know they will use that money to fund and expand their influence network, subvert democracy, crush unions like in Wisconsin, and get more extremists elected to congress.”
I am really having trouble with patience and tolerance these days. I don't know what kind of 'evil' - yes 'evil' can justify profit over life.
Everywhere I turn, it's profit over Life.
My rationale as to why is that once they are allowed to sue, these cases could very well end up before the Supreme Court and if the current judicial train of thought is that the right to profit is greater than the right to life, we're truly screwed.
Slush fund accounts of major US politicians identified and seized at Vatican Bank (Rome). Connection established with Daniel Dal Bosco RICO indictment, which cites Giancarlo Bruno, Silvio Berlusconi & Ban Ki Moon. On Wednesday 5th January 2011, it emerged that US establishment-related slush fund accounts had been located in, and seized from, the Vatican Bank in Rome. The source of funds for these accounts in almost every instance was found to be the US Treasury.
Beneficiaries of the covert Vatican accounts include Barack Obama, Michelle Obama and each of the Obama children, Michelle Obama’s mother, all the Bushes and the Clintons, including Chelsea Clinton, Joe Biden, Timothy Geithner, Janet Napolitano, several US Senators, including Mitch McConnell, several US Congressmen including John Boehner, several US Military Chiefs of Staff, the US Provost Marshal, the US Judge Advocate General, the US Supreme Court Chief Justice, John Roberts, several US Judges, the Pope, and several cardinals. Big money was found in each of the accounts.
I truly cannot understand it. Maybe I am crazy but I'd give up plenty to heal the planet and humanity.
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
Billions would die? That is just bs alarmism.
We would simply have to return to our roots of focusing our labor on food and shelter. If it wasn't possible then we would have never reached this stage in the first place.