Read and pay attention to the last paragraph. This should be the first piece of business taken up when the GOP takes the Senate back.

http://fuelfix.com/blog/2014/09/19/why-k...-counting/

"We have a choice: we can create thousands of jobs and opportunities in America, and invest in our domestic industries. Or we can continue to send those investments, jobs, and opportunities overseas. Let’s make the smart choice, and approve KXL"

Its not so simple. Here's what the Pipeline will do

1) Provide jobs for construction companies building the pipe, but might cost jobs in other parts of the oilpatch. There's a lot of oil trapped in Canada. Do we want to harm Williston or Eagle Ford or the Bakken?

2) Will provide some lower gas prices, but not by as much as one might think. If there was some sort of minimum requirement to actually refine and market the oil in the USA, then there might be a bigger impact. Unfortunately, much of that oil will simply be refined in the US and then shipped out. Its good for the refiners, but actually might make the refining spread higher, thus mitigating any 'at the pump' benefit to consumers

3) Provide more energy independence for North America from a Crude Oil perspective. True, but absent a new pipeline to BC (which doesn't appear to be in the cards for a variety of reasons), that oil isn't really going anywhere.

Keystone will either be built or not. But either way, the impact for the average American consumer is likely to be very small either way.

(11-03-2014 12:12 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its not so simple. Here's what the Pipeline will do

1) Provide jobs for construction companies building the pipe, but might cost jobs in other parts of the oilpatch. There's a lot of oil trapped in Canada. Do we want to harm Williston or Eagle Ford or the Bakken?

2) Will provide some lower gas prices, but not by as much as one might think. If there was some sort of minimum requirement to actually refine and market the oil in the USA, then there might be a bigger impact. Unfortunately, much of that oil will simply be refined in the US and then shipped out. Its good for the refiners, but actually might make the refining spread higher, thus mitigating any 'at the pump' benefit to consumers

3) Provide more energy independence for North America from a Crude Oil perspective. True, but absent a new pipeline to BC (which doesn't appear to be in the cards for a variety of reasons), that oil isn't really going anywhere.

Keystone will either be built or not. But either way, the impact for the average American consumer is likely to be very small either way.

I hope you're sitting down. OK, ready..... I sort of agree with all three of your points.

Nonetheless, there is a bit of nuance that I believe you are missing. On each point:

1. Construction jobs will rise, as well as refining jobs. I don't really think that the US oil jobs will suffer, as the added production will be absorbed into the global system. However, job losses could occur in trucking and rail, which have been shown to be polluting and much more dangerous than pipelines.

2. Absolutely true, but no one (well not most people) ever said that Keystone would have a big impact on pump prices directly. How this added product affects global supply, will possibly lower our prices, but not by much.

3. All crude affects the global supply, even if it doesn't leave the producing continent. If we have more oil and import less, then we benefit in a myriad of ways, not the least of which is geopolitical. Just think that oil the US/Canada refines, is done at a lower production cost than Russia, thus reducing Russia's receipts of badly needed hard currencies.

KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

(11-03-2014 07:57 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

Lulz.

(11-03-2014 08:04 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 07:57 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

Lulz.

Very insightful. Thanks for really adding to the discussion.

(11-03-2014 07:57 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

Its not a bad deal for America. Its just not anywhere near the deal that the proponents say it will be.

Calgary needs to understand that "America just isn't into your oil sands that much anymore"

My guess is that the pipeline will eventually be built. But its going to be a while before it is. I think Obama is actually protecting the American oil producers while using the environmentalists as a foil.

(11-03-2014 08:16 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 07:57 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

Its not a bad deal for America. Its just not anywhere near the deal that the proponents say it will be.

Calgary needs to understand that "America just isn't into your oil sands that much anymore"

My guess is that the pipeline will eventually be built. But its going to be a while before it is. I think Obama is actually protecting the American oil producers while using the environmentalists as a foil.

It's a very bad deal for America. We bear tons of risk with virtually no reward.

(11-03-2014 08:18 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 08:16 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 07:57 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

Its not a bad deal for America. Its just not anywhere near the deal that the proponents say it will be.

Calgary needs to understand that "America just isn't into your oil sands that much anymore"

My guess is that the pipeline will eventually be built. But its going to be a while before it is. I think Obama is actually protecting the American oil producers while using the environmentalists as a foil.

It's a very bad deal for America. We bear tons of risk with virtually no reward.

I'm pretty ambivalent on the pipeline, but have to ask the following:

What's the risk? A spill in the Ogallala? I don't think the pipeline isn't going to be built near it anymore. Its isn't damaging to the US per se, but certainly is bad for the environment in Fort MacMurray and Grande Prairie (which are in Canada).

If the pipeline isn't built, its possible (but currently unlikely) that a pipeline will be built to untrap that oil to the Pacific Coast of British Columbia, where the oil will all be sold to the Chinese. I think the bigger threat is that they simply expand existing pipelines to Eastern Canada. The only way that oil stays out of Chinese hands is if it remains trapped. So long as oil prices are around 70 a bbl, then it might remain trapped, but if oil prices go back up to 90 and stay there, someone will figure a way to untrap it.

But I do agree with those that say the benefits to America from this pipeline have been grossly oversold.

(11-03-2014 07:57 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

Wow, could you be more hysterical.

(11-03-2014 09:37 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 07:57 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

Wow, could you be more hysterical.

I'm being factual. It's pretty sad how the right-wing can't recognize such things anymore.

By the way, there will be no action on KXL anytime soon. Opinion polls say Canada is getting a new PM next year, and Obama doesn't have to face another election of any kind after tomorrow. There's no need to make a decision at all.

(11-03-2014 09:55 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  By the way, there will be no action on KXL anytime soon. Opinion polls say Canada is getting a new PM next year, and Obama doesn't have to face another election of any kind after tomorrow. There's no need to make a decision at all.

I would really like Canada to get a new PM. But I'm not sure it will actually happen. Canada's first past the post system lends itself to a huge built in advantage for the Tories (the NDP and the Liberals split the left of center vote). There's no runoff in Canada, so if a Tory gets 34% of the vote and has the highest vote total, the Tory wins that riding. The right wing in Canada is on the rise, as you could see from Rob Ford winning a City Council seat and his brother almost winning election as Mayor of Toronto last week (after the voters knew about his buffoonery). You also have a hard right "wildrose' movement in Alberta. Right now, I'd say that Justin Trudeau has a good shot to knock Harper off, but it is by no means a done deal. I think perhaps a grand coalition of NDP, Liberals, and the PQ/Greens could possibly form a government.

Calgary and Alberta needs that pipeline built (or the pipeline to BC) badly. Harper is a Calgarian btw. But the fall in the price of crude oil might be more damaging to the pipeline's prospects than anything on the political front. A lot of the crude is quite expensive to produce (oilsands crude is really expensive) so there might be some slowdown or shutting in of production if WTI falls to 70 and stays there for a while.

I think the pipeline gets built. I don't think Obama really is terribly opposed to the pipeline. I think that he wants to protect American producers, or perhaps trade permitting rights for a GOP cavein on other issues, like Cap and trade.

It won't really do much one way or another for oil prices or pump prices. It will help some refiners. It will hurt American producers and royalty owners. That's about it.

Anybody who thinks the pipeline won't create jobs knows nothing about the oil and gas industry.

Hopefully some of the jobs will be ongoing maintenance workers for the pipeline, if they still bother to do maintenance on pipelines nowadays without pending government lawsuits.

It will create some construction jobs. It will create/protect some jobs in Canada. It will lead to some mild increase in refining and port jobs in the US as well as some pipeline maintenance jobs. But it will threaten (perhaps not significantly - its not clear at this point) American oil production jobs as a result of lower spot prices in the US markets. I don't see it as a home run for the economy. More like a base hit or a sacrifice fly (something gained - something lost) It will be built - eventually. It will create some jobs. But there will be winners and losers in all of this.

(11-03-2014 09:46 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 09:37 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 07:57 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

Wow, could you be more hysterical.

I'm being factual. It's pretty sad how the right-wing can't recognize such things anymore.

One through five are false. The whole world gets more oil. Our oil companies make more money. Simple facts. Smarten up and stop try being an arrogant know-it-all, who knows nothing.

(11-03-2014 10:59 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 09:46 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 09:37 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 07:57 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

Wow, could you be more hysterical.

I'm being factual. It's pretty sad how the right-wing can't recognize such things anymore.

One through five are false. The whole world gets more oil. Our oil companies make more money. Simple facts. Smarten up and stop try being an arrogant know-it-all, who knows nothing.

1-6 are absolutely true. If you think otherwise, then you're ignorant.

(11-03-2014 11:08 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 10:59 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 09:46 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 09:37 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 07:57 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

Wow, could you be more hysterical.

I'm being factual. It's pretty sad how the right-wing can't recognize such things anymore.

One through five are false. The whole world gets more oil. Our oil companies make more money. Simple facts. Smarten up and stop try being an arrogant know-it-all, who knows nothing.

1-6 are absolutely true. If you think otherwise, then you're ignorant.

1 is questionable. I think you could make a better argument that it is bad for the environment of Canada. There's the risk of a spill in the States I suppose

2 is absolutely true.
3 is questionable. I would think the pipeline would reduce costs for all refiners as it would increase total supply. Whether that translates into any lower prices at the pump, well - that's a different question (I think the refiners might expand the spread more than anything else - that becoming the real constraint). The real reason that the Upper Midwest has really high gasoline prices is more related to deficiencies with refining and transport capabilities in that region.
4 is unlikely. However, I seriously doubt that the pipeline will result in much lower prices either.
5 is partially true. What would be more true is to say that it creates a lot of jobs in Canada, as well as a few jobs here.
6 is true but it doesn't really matter whether Keystone gets built, China will purchase the oil that it needs.

(11-03-2014 11:08 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 10:59 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 09:46 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 09:37 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(11-03-2014 07:57 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  KXL is an export project. The tarsands oil is currently being kept in the USA. KXL will allow that oil to be refined and shipped overseas. Gas prices will rise in the USA and there are very few permanent jobs associated with the project.

Recap:
1) Environmental risks increase for USA
2) More incredibly dirty oil makes it out of the ground
3) Midwest refiners lose a cheap source of oil
4) Americans pay more for gas
5) Only a handful of permanent jobs get created
6) China gets more oil

It's a bad deal for America. Thank goodness we have rational leaders who haven't approved this terrible project.

Wow, could you be more hysterical.

I'm being factual. It's pretty sad how the right-wing can't recognize such things anymore.

One through five are false. The whole world gets more oil. Our oil companies make more money. Simple facts. Smarten up and stop try being an arrogant know-it-all, who knows nothing.

1-6 are absolutely true. If you think otherwise, then you're ignorant.

Oh please. Intelligent people know the difference between facts and opinions. The intellectually challenged consider their opinions as facts. The intellectually vacuous argue talking points as factual sources. You seem to fall into the latter category.