FORUMS > News & Politics Forum Rules

Obama's Schizo Energy Policy: 20,000 Jobs Killed In One Day

  • southbeach150... Posts: 22369
    QUOTE Nov 11, 2011 8:16 PM GMT
    Here we have a pipeline that will take oil from Canada down to refineries in Texas and the Gulf states. It would have not only provided jobs (which are desperately needed by the construction sector) but also energy security.

    And what has Mr. Obama done? He's done just what he's done by shutting down drilling in the Gulf, forcing power plants to close, declaring war on our coal industry.... he's killed the project.

    Not only that, but that Canadian oil is now going to be sent to our good friends in China.

    Just another example of Mr. Obama's "fundamental transformation of America" policies.

    Obama Delays Oil Pipeline Plan, Discards 20,000 Jobs

    Roughly 20,000 oil industry construction jobs are being thrown under Obama’s 2012 campaign bus, largely because the president needs to pump up his sagging support among the environmentalists.

    The pitch came Thursday when President Barack Obama put his leadership behind a State Department plan to study alternative routes for the pipeline, which is intended to bring oil from Alberta in Canada to oil refineries along the Gulf Coast.

    “We should take the time to ensure that all questions are properly addressed and all the potential impacts are properly understood,” said Obama’s afternoon statement.

    The construction jobs, and the revenue from operating the Keystone XL pipeline, may now go to Canadian workers.

    That’s because Canadian government officials are already planning to help build a competing pipeline from Alberta’s oil fields to new West Coast ports near Vancouver. The likely destination point is the port of Kitimat in British Columbia.






    http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/10/obama-breaks-oil-pipeline-plan-discards-20000-jobs/#ixzz1dLoGlZX0
  • southbeach150... Posts: 22369
    QUOTE Nov 11, 2011 9:05 PM GMT
    More...


    The project has been under regulatory review for about three years, which is roughly the administration’s time in office. Because the pipeline crosses international borders, the State Department is charged with assessing the project’s environmental impact and whether it’s in the “national interest.” State had signaled a decision by the end of this year. In its announcement Thursday, it said the new review “could be completed as early as the first quarter of 2013.”

    You will note that, somehow, State can’t complete the new review before the November presidential election. You should also note that, had the project been approved, it was scheduled to begin operating in 2013. Finally, you should note that this is one of those large “infrastructure” projects that the administration repeatedly touts as desirable for long-term job growth.


    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obama-jobs-and-the-keystone-xl-pipeline/2011/11/11/gIQAdQVUCN_story.html
  • southbeach150... Posts: 22369
    QUOTE Nov 11, 2011 10:18 PM GMT
    More....

    ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

    An economic analysis of the project conducted by The Perryman group concluded the project would mean a $1.6 billion investment in Texas that would connect the state with the 4,000-mile Keystone Pipeline System.

    According the Perryman Group this would mean an estimated $2.3 billion in total expenditures, $2.0 billion in output and 50,365 person years of employment. It would generate an estimated $41.1 million to the state and $7.7 million to local taxing entities. This would mean a yield of $1.1 billion (on a present value basis) in property taxes to local governments over the expected 100-year life of the pipeline.

    SECURITY

    Proponents of the pipeline cite the creation of much-needed jobs, the economic advantages and the ability to buy oil from a country more stable than some of the other options such as Venezuela, Nigeria or the Middle East.


    http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/bay_area/news/keystone-xl-pipeline-decision-postponed-until/article_27b751e2-0c9e-11e1-b430-001cc4c002e0.html
  • NEWYORKGUY Posts: 768
    QUOTE Nov 11, 2011 10:20 PM GMT
    The Dems are going to be campaigning on this policy for 2012, its part of their jobs plan, hahahahahaha.
  • southbeach150... Posts: 22369
    QUOTE Nov 12, 2011 3:12 AM GMT
    CHRISTOPHER34 saidThe Dems are going to be campaigning on this policy for 2012, its part of their jobs plan, hahahahahaha.


    Yeah... jobs for CANADA. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • conservativej... Posts: 2212
    QUOTE Nov 12, 2011 10:52 PM GMT
    Ah....I think it was a very idiotic thing for the Obama admin to do, but my friends, it has opened a door.

    I think there is going to be a "reroute" of the pipeline where Nebraskans and American environmentalist will no longer have to worry about any old pipeline.

    icon_cool.gif
  • 6packabs Posts: 115
    QUOTE Nov 13, 2011 1:11 AM GMT
    In almost all ways, Obama is fulfilling the 3rd term of George W. Bush. Some would say not in this way, but surely in terms of ramping up Empire abroad and destroying wealth and liberties at home.
  • Suetonius Posts: 1467
    QUOTE Nov 13, 2011 1:49 AM GMT
    conservativejock saidAh....I think it was a very idiotic thing for the Obama admin to do, but my friends, it has opened a door.

    I think there is going to be a "reroute" of the pipeline where Nebraskans and American environmentalist will no longer have to worry about any old pipeline.

    icon_cool.gif

    It wasn't idiotic at all. Obama should have taken this action long ago -delayed approval so that an alternate route could be considered (Obama's such a wimp most of the time.) The pipeline will be a great asset for the US, but not if it leaks into the aquifer, and all pipelines leak eventually. It's not a question of if, but of when. A leak into this aquifer would be a major disaster which could probably never be remediated. If Transcanada had only routed the pipeline around the aquifer instead of over it (a few extra hundred miles) the pipeline would have been approved and construction could have been started by now.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Nov 13, 2011 2:01 AM GMT
    Suetonius, they're not bright enough to be careful what they wish for.

    ...and I doubt they'll read these articles, but one can always hope:

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4516d16e-8bab-11e0-a725-00144feab49a.html#axzz1dXwrQIjL


    and

    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/greenhouse/post/2011/06/us-canada-keystone-pipeline-hits-bumps/1
    "A 1,661-mile extension of a U.S.-Canadian pipeline carrying a controversial form of heavy crude oil is facing increased scrutiny amid recent leaks that prompted a one-week shutdown."






  • southbeach150... Posts: 22369
    QUOTE Nov 13, 2011 2:27 AM GMT
    meninlove said Suetonius, they're not bright enough to be careful what they wish for.

    ...and I doubt they'll read these articles, but one can always hope:

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4516d16e-8bab-11e0-a725-00144feab49a.html#axzz1dXwrQIjL


    and

    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/greenhouse/post/2011/06/us-canada-keystone-pipeline-hits-bumps/1
    "A 1,661-mile extension of a U.S.-Canadian pipeline carrying a controversial form of heavy crude oil is facing increased scrutiny amid recent leaks that prompted a one-week shutdown."


    All pipelines suffer minor leaks from time to time. It's the nature of the beast.

    As for a reroute... there is an aquifer everywhere - this is a fact. Obama is just playing re-election politics with this.






  • commoncoll Posts: 1222
    QUOTE Nov 13, 2011 2:30 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    All pipelines suffer minor leaks from time to time. It's the nature of the beast.

    As for a reroute... there is an aquifer everywhere - this is a fact. Obama is just playing re-election politics with this.
    [/quote]
    There are aquifers everywhere, but there are not aquifers as important or of this size everywhere.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Nov 13, 2011 2:31 AM GMT
    omg ROFL SB said, "All pipelines suffer minor leaks from time to time. It's the nature of the beast.

    As for a reroute... there is an aquifer everywhere - this is a fact. Obama is just playing re-election politics with this."


    Sorry, had to quote this for posterity. Amazing...( and showcasing how very un-bright you are being here).

  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Nov 13, 2011 2:34 AM GMT
    meninlove said omg ROFL SB said, "All pipelines suffer minor leaks from time to time. It's the nature of the beast.

    As for a reroute... there is an aquifer everywhere - this is a fact. Obama is just playing re-election politics with this."


    Sorry, had to quote this for posterity. Amazing...( and showcasing how very un-bright you are being here).



    You were so kind to say un-bright instead of something else icon_smile.gif
  • southbeach150... Posts: 22369
    QUOTE Nov 13, 2011 2:37 AM GMT
    commoncoll saidsouthbeach1500 said

    All pipelines suffer minor leaks from time to time. It's the nature of the beast.

    As for a reroute... there is an aquifer everywhere - this is a fact. Obama is just playing re-election politics with this.

    There are aquifers everywhere, but there are not aquifers as important or of this size everywhere.


    They're all important to somebody. icon_wink.gif
  • southbeach150... Posts: 22369
    QUOTE Nov 13, 2011 2:38 AM GMT
    conservativejock saidAh....I think it was a very idiotic thing for the Obama admin to do, but my friends, it has opened a door.

    I think there is going to be a "reroute" of the pipeline where Nebraskans and American environmentalist will no longer have to worry about any old pipeline.

    icon_cool.gif


    Sadly, the chances of this happening are that much greater now. It's great to be China!
  • Suetonius Posts: 1467
    QUOTE Nov 14, 2011 1:46 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    commoncoll saidsouthbeach1500 said

    All pipelines suffer minor leaks from time to time. It's the nature of the beast.

    As for a reroute... there is an aquifer everywhere - this is a fact. Obama is just playing re-election politics with this.

    There are aquifers everywhere, but there are not aquifers as important or of this size everywhere.


    They're all important to somebody. icon_wink.gif

    What not everyone understands about this aquifer (the Ogallala aquifer) is that most of its recharge (water entering it) is from rain and snowmelt percolating down through sandy and silty soils (there isn't 500 ft of limestone protecting the aquifer from whatever poisons leak from pipelines above it.) Any spill of oil or other accompanying nasty hydrocarbons on the areas that have permeable soils above it are going to leak down and mix with the water, where they can never be removed. Its bad enough that the oil companies spill oil all over the place and destroy water systems in Venezuela and Nigeria - but do we have to allow it here in our country as well - just so the oil companies (in this case Transcanada) can save a few dollars?
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Nov 15, 2011 8:26 PM GMT
    Eight years of Bush/Repub economic policies and the resulting 2007 Bush recession - 8,700,000 jobs lost.

    NO MORE TRICKLE DOWN REPUB ECONOMICS EVER.
  • southbeach150... Posts: 22369
    QUOTE Nov 15, 2011 8:32 PM GMT
    RickRick91 saidEight years of Bush/Repub economic policies and the resulting 2007 Bush recession - 8,700,000 jobs lost.

    NO MORE TRICKLE DOWN REPUB ECONOMICS EVER.



    RickRick,

    You seem to be irrationally posting rantings that have nothing to do with the topics in which you've posted! icon_eek.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Nov 15, 2011 9:32 PM GMT
    Suetonius said
    southbeach1500 said
    commoncoll saidsouthbeach1500 said

    All pipelines suffer minor leaks from time to time. It's the nature of the beast.

    As for a reroute... there is an aquifer everywhere - this is a fact. Obama is just playing re-election politics with this.

    There are aquifers everywhere, but there are not aquifers as important or of this size everywhere.


    They're all important to somebody. icon_wink.gif

    What not everyone understands about this aquifer (the Ogallala aquifer) is that most of its recharge (water entering it) is from rain and snowmelt percolating down through sandy and silty soils (there isn't 500 ft of limestone protecting the aquifer from whatever poisons leak from pipelines above it.) Any spill of oil or other accompanying nasty hydrocarbons on the areas that have permeable soils above it are going to leak down and mix with the water, where they can never be removed. Its bad enough that the oil companies spill oil all over the place and destroy water systems in Venezuela and Nigeria - but do we have to allow it here in our country as well - just so the oil companies (in this case Transcanada) can save a few dollars?


    Exactly. It's another example of corporations trying to privatize their profits and socialize the costs. icon_rolleyes.gif