Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Democrats Who Oppose Keystone XL Pipeline Own Shares in Competing Companies

page: 2
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by peck420
 


This is laughably naive.

If you wish to see 'bad'...just wait until it's all being transported by rail.


I appreciate your strong opinion on this. I'll keep it out of personally calling you naive..if you can return the favor. No need to be personal over it, anyway. Neither of us works for or is hands on to this project..are we?

Now my feelings aren't off MSM, pulled from thin air or just knee jerk against Oil. Drill baby Drill are words to live by, in my personaly opinion.....at least until viable alternatives exist AT SCALE to replace oil in some of it's highest use industries.

My opinions on the filthy and highly corrosive nature of the Alberta (and other) tar sands Oil being carried across the United States territory in pipeline networks, already failing, come from experiences like the Mayflower, Arkansas pipeline rupture that has all but erased Mayflower from the map as a town...or damn sure one part of it, anyway.

In researching that story for some very personal connections I had to it, I came to learn Mayflower wasn't unique and in fact, another Pipe in the same network had a failure in Southeast Missouri at or around the same time Mayflower was going on.

It's not naive to state Tar Sands oil is among the most destructive to the infrastructure which carries it. It's also not naive to say the Keystone XL pipeline is largely designed to BYPASS American Markets in a clean leap frog from Canadian soil to the "International Trade Zones" of the gulf coast where the oil can be processed outside the technical tax structure of the United States.

As long as the Keystone XL Oil makes products which go OUT for export and not through the gate and "onto American soil", the international breaks of the Free Trade Zones work...and THAT is what this god forsaken pipeline is really all about. Screwing us again for use of facilities and land for EXPORT profits with overseas markets. It's a complex story...and certainly takes more than MSM to fully appreciate the complexity to.




posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by peck420
 


I do not always agree with Mr Wrabbit but on this issue we are in agreement.

He authored an extremely informative Thread on this issue last March, and while he may be too modest to "plug it", I will.

Wrabbit2000's Thread...

Big Oil, Free Trade and How We Get Pumped at the Pump, Every Day



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   

BritofTexas
reply to post by peck420
 


I do not always agree with Mr Wrabbit but on this issue we are in agreement.

He authored an extremely informative Thread on this issue last March, and while he may be too modest to "plug it", I will.

Wrabbit2000's Thread...

Big Oil, Free Trade and How We Get Pumped at the Pump, Every Day


An informative thread?

Hardly...

An informative thread would have pointed out, actually would have heavily emphasized, just what kind of environmental nightmare we will be facing if we don't start transporting dilbit over dedicated systems.
edit on 18-2-2014 by peck420 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Wrabbit2000

If you want me stop calling you naive, stop acting it.

You claim that you aren't getting your info from MSN, yet you parrot the same disinformation as the MSN. In that regard, actions speak far louder then words.

As for my investment in Keystone, I don't really have anything more invested then anybody else...the fate of our land, here in NA.

To that end, watching people stop the something that will greatly diminish the risk to this land, is a little frustrating...actually, it's more then a little frustrating.

As you so aptly stated, dilbit over crude transportation is folly...so why are you against a purpose built dilbit pipeline? Is it so that we can continue to pump via crude lines and crude cars?

As for none of the profits staying in the US...again, naive and laughable. Where does oil gain most of it's 'value'? Why, at the refinement stage! Nice...oh wait, not nice, not for Canada anyways...as Keystone will be taking the dilbit where? To US refineries! Yay!

As to what those US companies do with their profits is their business, but they will be making US taxable profits. And, contrary to modern fallacy, they will be paying at least some of those taxes. And you know what that is a lot better then? A lot of nothing.

So, let's recap:
The dilbit will go to those refineries regardless of shipment method.
The dilbit will be forced to remain on crude specific lines unless an alternative like Keystone is built.
The bulk of the 'value' will be made at the refinement stage.
The refinement will occur on US soil, making it a US taxable product.





edit on 18-2-2014 by peck420 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Only way I would be in favor of this pipeline if an agreement was made to not export any of it. I believe the truth is that they will build this and will just send the oil through the country and then out, benefiting the company pocketbook but not consumers in the least.

I would prefer they build refineries in the areas needed up north and then build the pipelines to them.



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 05:36 PM
link   

peck420
The bulk of the 'value' will be made at the refinement stage.
The refinement will occur on US soil, making it a US taxable product.


You obviously did not read the Thread.

If you had you would know the refinement will occur in a Tax Free Zone where it is not a Taxable product unless it is sold to the U.S.

As it is all going to be exported the U.S. will not see one shiny sixpence in Tax after taking all the ecological risk.



posted on Feb, 19 2014 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


Thanks for that context to add in.

I'd also add, as I believe I covered in that other thread I'd written far more extensively about this for, they outright made the statement that the Midwestern states (to include Missouri and Oklahoma specifically) had a glut and surplus of oil, since we sit on major transshipment points and refinement centers for the US. Gas here has traditionally been measurably under national average and it's been a perk of living in this area, to be plain about it. Not anymore, apparently, and we shall all suffer equally together. Equality carries to misery as well as happiness, as has been made very clear with that 'glut' comment recorded during one of the series of hearings to lawmakers on this whole issue.

Some miss the forest for the trees in arguing quality of physical pipes or specific routing over one creek but not another. All great detail to get lost in...but as you note so well, the devil in THIS case, isn't in the details. He's sitting right on the project itself with a big grin back at us. We're going to take the risks and downsides for Canadian oil to export to international markets.....transshipped across U.S. soil.

What a deal...and yes, I do miss the benefit we're supposed to get from any of this. I just don't see anything...at all.
edit on 19-2-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join