Obama turning against the tar sands pipeline.

[cutthemdown]

http://news.yahoo.com/change-pipeline-plan-could-present-problems-215701253.html

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — The White House plan to seek alternate routes for a Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline presents a tangle of new problems for the project's backers, and any of those obstacles could still sink the proposal before the first spade of dirt is turned.

Shifting the path to avoid a major aquifer could increase the number of perilous stream crossings and put the line closer to populated areas. Major changes also risk alienating pipeline supporters, who tout the economic benefits of creating thousands of jobs. And the most vocal opponents plan to keep up their fight regardless of the route.

The obstacles are tall enough, some observers say, that Canada's oil-sands industry could even decide to bypass U.S. markets altogether and sell fuel directly to China using a pipeline through western Canada to the shores of the Pacific.


I knew as soon as he got protested over this he would cave. Obama flying left to try and win this thing again. He knows he has lost all the indies, so his only hope is firing up the blacks and the hard core lefties.

This is how he creates jobs people!

[barryr]

He will just create more jobs at the IRS and call it good.

[lonestar]

What a MORON.

Looks like he is doing everything in his power to increase the misery index. while the upper middle class and above are not affected like those below them..

IMO just creating more of a divide of class warfare..

HE wants nothing to do with anything not "green" so he can force us into not driving cars..

forcing electric production into natural gas, solar and geo thermal away from Coal even though those plants are greener than ever..

like I said

What a MORON.

[Rigs11]

The fellow rightards acting like they give a shet about jobs.too funny.we could create millions of jobs by just investing in our infastructure.but the rightards are against that as well.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

The fellow rightards acting like they give a shet about jobs.too funny.we could create millions of jobs by just investing in our infastructure.but the rightards are against that as well.

http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/1007/mrt-facepalm-demotivational-poster-1279120782.jpg

[pricejj]

The fellow rightards acting like they give a shet about jobs.too funny.we could create millions of jobs by just investing in our infastructure.but the rightards are against that as well.

...just put it on our $15T tab right?


You just don't get it.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I knew as soon as he got protested over this he would cave. Obama flying left to try and win this thing again. He knows he has lost all the indies, so his only hope is firing up the blacks and the hard core lefties.
This is how he creates jobs people!

While he tabled it for now, it was Republicans in a Republican state that demanded it be rerouted from it's current planned route through Nebraska.

[Rigs11]

...just put it on our $15T tab right?


You just don't get it.

Ah yes,the "lets not do anything"argument.When people have jobs they generate revenue for the government.the us is something like 36 in infastructure in the world.

[Rigs11]

While he tabled it for now, it was Republicans in a Republican state that demanded it be rerouted from it's current planned route through Nebraska.

Gasp!

[cutthemdown]

The fellow rightards acting like they give a shet about jobs.too funny.we could create millions of jobs by just investing in our infastructure.but the rightards are against that as well.

Yeah but that is just taxpayer money being spent. It's not a real fix. Plus infrastructure such a broad word. First stimulus also was supposed to go to infrastructure remember? Just didn't happen because a lot of the projects they want to do are not shovel ready, get bogged down by environmentalist. Like the high speed rail in calif. 10 billion in funds that hasn't started building yet because the lefties fighting over the route it will take.

Fact is this pipeline was pretty much ready to go until people started to protest. Now Obama saying maybe a different route, which takes it over so many river (which is really expensive to make safe) will force canada to just go a different route and straight to china with it from a port that will be pacific northwest area.

[NUB]

Oil pipelines get shot down all the time for one reason or another. This one, in particular, just doesn't sound like a very good idea and, as mentioned, it was the Republican bloc that put their hand up to ask the question of how safe this really was.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

'Obama turning against pipeline"
Fact is this pipeline was pretty much ready to go until people started to protest. Now Obama saying maybe a different route,

What part of this don't you understand?

Republicans in Nebraska blocked it, Obama says it's not dead because of Republican opposition.

[lonestar]

While he tabled it for now, it was Republicans in a Republican state that demanded it be rerouted from it's current planned route through Nebraska.

got a link? or talking out of your ass?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

got a link? or talking out of your ass?
Not my thread, so get up off your arse and do a little research on your own.
I know it's hard for you to swallow Republicans actually wanting to the protect the environment.

[cutthemdown]

got a link? or talking out of your ass?

Actually both sides of the aisle debating that, but really not sure if it's even their choice. Sort of like how Arizona probably could not have stopped the hoover dam even if they wanted to.

No doubt though Obama is looking for a way out without having to take responsibility for it. Sound familiar.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Actually both sides of the aisle debating that, but really not sure if it's even their choice. Baloney!
The Nebraska (Republican) governor called a special session and a bill was drafted to block it (by Republican lawmakers). After it was known the Nebraska laws would be changed to prevent the current planned route from being followed, the whole project was put into jeopardy with litigation.

[pricejj]

Ah yes,the "lets not do anything"argument.When people have jobs they generate revenue for the government.the us is something like 36 in infastructure in the world.

...and the US is 25th in math in the world even though we spend the most per capita on education, so what's your point?

...by the way, are you fronting the bill? Wer'e running a little short this month, but trust us, we're good for it.

[mhgaffney]

Baloney!
The Nebraska (Republican) governor called a special session and a bill was drafted to block it (by Republican lawmakers). After it was known the Nebraska laws would be changed to prevent the current planned route from being followed, the whole project was put into jeopardy with litigation.

Very happy to hear the Cornhuskers are on the same page with environmentalists.

This pipeline is a dog.

If the project moves ahead -- an area in Alberta the size of Florida would end up looking like the surface of the moon.

Bad idea.

[alkemical]

How can we make sure the Oil Companies will maintain the upkeep on the pipeline?

They haven't done a good job at re-investing in their own infrastructure.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

New news (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/11/transcanada-agrees-not-to-put-keystone-xl-pipeline-in-sandhills-.html).

I'm actually in favor of this pipeline if done right. It does two things for us..

(1) Lessens the amount of holes that would be punched into states looking for fossil fuels and

(2) Potentially reduces our dependence on Mideast oil by up to 25%.

(also creates 10s of thousands of jobs for years and years.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TransCanada agrees not to put Keystone XL pipeline in Sandhills

<style type="text/css">div.social_count_container { height: 20px; margin-top: 0px; }.comment_button_container { margin-right: 20px; }.comment_button { margin-top: 0px; width: 81px; height: 22px; cursor: pointer; background: url("http://www.latimes.com/includes/projects/img/blog-social-btn-comment.png") no-repeat scroll left bottom transparent; }.tweet_container { margin-right: 0px; min-width: 90px; }.plus_1_container { margin-left: 20px; }.social_count_center { float: left; height: 22px; min-width: 15px; max-width: 25px; padding-top: 4px; padding-right: 3px; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: center; background: url("http://www.latimes.com/includes/projects/img/blog-social-count-strip-2.png") repeat-x scroll left top transparent; }.social_count_left { float: left; width: 9px; height: 22px; background: url("http://www.latimes.com/includes/projects/img/blog-social-count-left.png") no-repeat scroll left top transparent; }.social_count_right { float: left; height: 22px; width: 5px; background: url("http://www.latimes.com/includes/projects/img/blog-social-count-right.png") no-repeat scroll left top transparent; }</style> November 14, 2011 | 2:52 pm

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0162fc6464ce970d-600wi (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0162fc6464ce970d-pi)
-- Kim Murphy
Photo: Rancher Bruce Boettcher looks out at the Nebraska Sandhills -- 20,000 square miles of northern Nebraska that is the biggest intact and undisturbed ecosystem in the Great Plains. Credit: Kim Murphy / Los Angeles Times

A Canadian pipeline company agreed Monday to move the controversial Keystone XL pipeline (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/11/nebraska-keystone-xl-pipeline-ranchers.html) outside the Sandhills region of Nebraska, where many feared it would threaten one of the nation’s most important agricultural aquifers.

Sen. Mike Flood, speaker of the Nebraska Legislature, announced on the floor that TransCanada Corp. would move the pipeline to another area of the state. Sources in Nebraska said it would likely be located farther east, nearer an existing Keystone pipeline that already carries Canadian tar sands oil into the U.S.

The announcement follows the Obama administration’s decision last week to postpone action on an international permit for the pipeline — one of the nation’s key environmental battle fronts as the 2012 elections approach — until after 2012. Federal officials said they would explore alternative routes to the Sandhills in Nebraska, the single most contentious location for the 1,700-mile-long pipeline.

FULL COVERAGE: Keystone XL pipeline (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-keystone-xl-sg,0,7046135.storygallery)

“We were at the Capitol building, they were in special session, and Speaker Flood stopped everything and said that everything was over, and TransCanada has voluntarily moved the pipeline out of the Sandhills of Nebraska,” said Todd Cone, a rancher who has been one of many battling the route through central Nebraska.

“We don’t have to worry about it anymore,” he said.
Matt Boever, spokesman for the speaker, confirmed that Flood had made the announcement after receiving a letter from the U.S. State Department confirming the department’s willingness to work with Nebraska state officials to explore other routes for the pipeline through Nebraska.

Sources close to the negotiations said the pipeline still is expected to enter the state at its original planned point. But legislation under review in a special session of the Nebraska Legislature would allow the state Department of Environmental Quality to work with the State Department on finding a route within the state that avoids the Sandhills, where groundwater is often inches from the permeable, sandy surface.
TransCanada officials have said that some alternative routes could result in equally sensitive streambed crossings and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars more. The company was expected to have a news conference discussing the announcement Monday afternoon.

[alkemical]

I'd just like to make sure the water supply won't be threatened. Water > Oil.

[cutthemdown]

They just said they will go the other route. What I wonder now is if the environmentalists still protest it. I think they want it scrapped not re routed.

[alkemical]

They just said they will go the other route. What I wonder now is if the environmentalists still protest it. I think they want it scrapped not re routed.

You did read that it was "conservatives" that shelved this at the state level, right?

I just think we need to understand that the way we do business, has to change. We can't have one sized fits all solutions. But the longer we wait to start changing, the greater the pain will be.

We need to really focus on investing in our future, and not the short gains. We need to look 20 years down the road IMO. Oil is only going to keep rising in cost, nothing is going to change that. We need to find more ways to include sustainability in our long term thinking.

In doing so, we'll have more production localized - relying less on imported energy and goods. which, over the long term - should help greatly in reducing the problems we are facing today.

[mhgaffney]

There is no right way to rape Alberta.

Sorry.

We need a Manhattan scale project to transition to abundant clean energy alternatives.

A first step would be to switch to LED lights. They are sooo efficient.
This alone would save 70% of energy costs -- which would allow us to close down all nuclear plants in the US -- and some coal plants.

MHG

[alkemical]

There is no right way to rape Alberta.

Sorry.

We need a Manhattan scale project to transition to abundant clean energy alternatives.

A first step would be to switch to LED lights. They are sooo efficient.
This alone would save 70% of energy costs -- which would allow us to close down all nuclear plants in the US -- and some coal plants.

MHG


Thin Client computers use 80% less power than PC's.

[cutthemdown]

You did read that it was "conservatives" that shelved this at the state level, right?

I just think we need to understand that the way we do business, has to change. We can't have one sized fits all solutions. But the longer we wait to start changing, the greater the pain will be.

We need to really focus on investing in our future, and not the short gains. We need to look 20 years down the road IMO. Oil is only going to keep rising in cost, nothing is going to change that. We need to find more ways to include sustainability in our long term thinking.

In doing so, we'll have more production localized - relying less on imported energy and goods. which, over the long term - should help greatly in reducing the problems we are facing today.

Yeah the repub gov but i stand by Obama changing his course on it. Once the White House got surrounded he went from its a state dept issue to I am going to look into it some more.

Good that is happening though it will give a ton of oil for our gulf refineries to work on.

You don't agree that Obama cooled on the issue once the protests started?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

You don't agree that Obama cooled on the issue once the protests started?"Protests" have been ongoing since the Bush administration.
Obama shelved it when Republicans in Nebraska asked him to, giving him the perfect excuse to do so.

Republican lawmakers in Nebraska have effectively shut the pipeline down now (reacting to their voters in that state).

"The key decision for current pipeline discussions is the permitting decision that will be made by the Obama administration, which is why I have urged President Obama and Secretary of State [Hilary] Clinton to deny the permit," the governor, a Republican, said in a statement Monday.

"The three-year final Environmental impact Statement concluded Keystone XL would have minimal impact on the environment. Fourteen routes were analyzed, eight that would impact Nebraska. The pipeline takes the safest route -- physically and environmentally," TransCanada said in a statement.

"By asking us to reroute, what people are asking us to do is ignore the rules we are required to follow, ignore the various reviews conducted under federal laws, which are specific to the route. You cannot redraw a pipeline route on a map and then tell the [State Department] and other agencies that it’s the same thing."

[Tombstone RJ]

Is this an above ground pipeline like the one in Alaska?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

It's above ground...

Keystone Pipeline Project (http://www.transcanada.com/keystone_pipeline_map.html)

* What People are Saying
* Economic Benefits
* Pipeline Safety
* Protecting the Environment
* Energy Security
* Landowner Relations
* Project Information
* Reports/Publications Archive
<a href="http://www.freeimagehosting.net/7b8bc"><img src="http://www.freeimagehosting.net/newuploads/7b8bc.jpg"></a>

[chadta]

our Prime Minister the other day said, fine if they dont want it, we will build a pipeline and send it straight to the coast, im sure china will be happy to take it.

Balls in your court, altho i honestly dont think we have any backup plans so you actually do have time to think about it, i hope our government puts pressure on you to either **** or get off the pot.

[cutthemdown]

"Protests" have been ongoing since the Bush administration.
Obama shelved it when Republicans in Nebraska asked him to, giving him the perfect excuse to do so.

Republican lawmakers in Nebraska have effectively shut the pipeline down now (reacting to their voters in that state).

You kidding? Before they surrounded the white house with protestors his line on it was it is a state dept issue. Now he is getting involved. Get over yourself and your partisanship.

[alkemical]

Yeah the repub gov but i stand by Obama changing his course on it. Once the White House got surrounded he went from its a state dept issue to I am going to look into it some more.

Good that is happening though it will give a ton of oil for our gulf refineries to work on.

You don't agree that Obama cooled on the issue once the protests started?

I think it's a big dog & pony show to distract from other issues going on.

[Tombstone RJ]

It's above ground...

Keystone Pipeline Project (http://www.transcanada.com/keystone_pipeline_map.html)

* What People are Saying
* Economic Benefits
* Pipeline Safety
* Protecting the Environment
* Energy Security
* Landowner Relations
* Project Information
* Reports/Publications Archive
<a href="http://www.freeimagehosting.net/7b8bc"><img src="http://www.freeimagehosting.net/newuploads/7b8bc.jpg"></a>

Then what is the big deal? I understand there are environmental concerns and the water basin should be avoided, that being said the maintenance and upkeep of an above ground pipe is pretty easy and if there is a problem, you can see it and fix it immediately.

If the USA manages to screw this up, this falls directly on BO's shoulders.

[alkemical]

Then what is the big deal? I understand there are environmental concerns and the water basin should be avoided, that being said the maintenance and upkeep of an above ground pipe is pretty easy and if there is a problem, you can see it and fix it immediately.

If the USA manages to screw this up, this falls directly on BO's shoulders.

What sort of accountability measures can we put in place to make sure the Energy companies do the right thing, and not let it fall into disrepair and spring leaks like in AK?

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/alyeska-ordered-resolve-leaky-trans-alaska-pipeline-issues

Alyeska ordered to resolve leaky trans-Alaska pipeline issues


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/business/energy-environment/10oil.html

[cutthemdown]

I think it's a big dog & pony show to distract from other issues going on.

Issues like this though are ones I would like to see the president step up on. This is a good deal for the USA and keeps that oil from China. We are in a competition for resources people, its not time yet to forget about oil unfortunately. This is also good for the gulf coast because they need oil to refine. I heard they are only like 60% of what they could be doing.

This helps us get a hedge against Hugos threats of cutting off oil to the USA which gets refined in the gulf region.

[alkemical]

Issues like this though are ones I would like to see the president step up on. This is a good deal for the USA and keeps that oil from China. We are in a competition for resources people, its not time yet to forget about oil unfortunately. This is also good for the gulf coast because they need oil to refine. I heard they are only like 60% of what they could be doing.

This helps us get a hedge against Hugos threats of cutting off oil to the USA which gets refined in the gulf region.

Or, we can start looking at ways to REPLACE the amount of oil that the USA consumes, no? I mean, if it's a limited supply, where cost is going to continually increase...would it be good to start looking at ways to reduce cost over the course of the long term?

Also, in regards to the Gulf Refineries not meeting production levels:

Well, BP kinda ****ed up on that...didn't they?

[cutthemdown]

What sort of accountability measures can we put in place to make sure the Energy companies do the right thing, and not let it fall into disrepair and spring leaks like in AK?

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/alyeska-ordered-resolve-leaky-trans-alaska-pipeline-issues

Alyeska ordered to resolve leaky trans-Alaska pipeline issues


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/business/energy-environment/10oil.html

Obviously there will be management that sometimes fails to live up to standards. You then fine, and make them fix. Really no way to insure that no leak will every spring, or some section may fall into disrepair because of bad maintenence.

We can't just thwart all projects though because something might happen. If something happens we clean it up and move on like we always do.

[cutthemdown]

Or, we can start looking at ways to REPLACE the amount of oil that the USA consumes, no? I mean, if it's a limited supply, where cost is going to continually increase...would it be good to start looking at ways to reduce cost over the course of the long term?

Also, in regards to the Gulf Refineries not meeting production levels:

Well, BP kinda ****ed up on that...didn't they?

You think we aren't trying right now? There is a push to new energy and the govt doing a whole lot to propagate that. Tax breaks, loans, pushing electric cars etc etc. But you don't forgo a good oil source like this just because you want to be green. We have to make decisions that are good for our economy right now and this project is a winner.

Canada a good friend, China not, this deal has to happen. Obama blows this and its just more he is doing to crush our economy. He is the Josh McDaniels of Presidents.

[alkemical]

Obviously there will be management that sometimes fails to live up to standards. You then fine, and make them fix. Really no way to insure that no leak will every spring, or some section may fall into disrepair because of bad maintenence.

We can't just thwart all projects though because something might happen. If something happens we clean it up and move on like we always do.

"Might" happen, it's inevitable...look at the performance record in the industry.

Are you eating Gulf seafood yet? Do you trust eating tainted food?

This is a short term solution, that will have a higher cost in the long term. It's a bad investment. it continues the problem instead of addressing it.

[cutthemdown]

"Might" happen, it's inevitable...look at the performance record in the industry.

Are you eating Gulf seafood yet? Do you trust eating tainted food?

This is a short term solution, that will have a higher cost in the long term. It's a bad investment. it continues the problem instead of addressing it.

Actually funny you should ask that. My good friend Shin is a great Sushi Chef. He is really careful about shrimp because the imported stuff from Asia really dirty. He loves gulf shrimp. Had some just the other day.

Also unemployment in LA is among the lowest in the country right? The BP oil spill was bad but it pumped billions into the gulf and right now they are better off then most.

[alkemical]

You think we aren't trying right now? There is a push to new energy and the govt doing a whole lot to propagate that. Tax breaks, loans, pushing electric cars etc etc. But you don't forgo a good oil source like this just because you want to be green. We have to make decisions that are good for our economy right now and this project is a winner.

Canada a good friend, China not, this deal has to happen. Obama blows this and its just more he is doing to crush our economy. He is the Josh McDaniels of Presidents.

This is a bad decision. The Gulf is going to be impacted for decades due to the accident.

Estimates range from $3billion to 1 trillion in terms of the cost of clean up, and lost industry in the Gulf Region.

That's not a good "investment".

What happens when a company is forced to clean up the mess it makes, oh yeah - it passes the cost along to the consumers. (Unless they get Socialism funds from the gov't for the clean up due to their negligence.)

[Tombstone RJ]

What sort of accountability measures can we put in place to make sure the Energy companies do the right thing, and not let it fall into disrepair and spring leaks like in AK?

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/alyeska-ordered-resolve-leaky-trans-alaska-pipeline-issues

Alyeska ordered to resolve leaky trans-Alaska pipeline issues


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/business/energy-environment/10oil.html

Well, like I said during the gulf coast oil spill (which BO failed on miserably) I'd fine the oil company $100m a day until the problem is fixed and the spill is contained and cleaned up.

Hit the oil companies HARD, HARD, HARD, in the wallet and you'll see some friggen people running around like their friggen lives depended on it to make sure the pipe line is functioning properly.

Again, it's about leadership from DC and BO is not it.

[alkemical]

Actually funny you should ask that. My good friend Shin is a great Sushi Chef. He is really careful about shrimp because the imported stuff from Asia really dirty. He loves gulf shrimp. Had some just the other day.

Also unemployment in LA is among the lowest in the country right? The BP oil spill was bad but it pumped billions into the gulf and right now they are better off then most.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/14/study-fda-allowed-oil-tainted-seafood-onto-market/

Study: FDA allowed oil-tainted seafood onto market

Ultimately, the FDA was responsible for allowing food with “10,000 times too much contamination” than should be permitted, the study’s authors said, failing to highlight the elevated risk to children and pregnant women.


I'll be glad to never eat at your friends' restaurant. You don't use tainted food.

[alkemical]

Well, like I said during the gulf coast oil spill (which BO failed on miserably) I'd fine the oil company $100m a day until the problem is fixed and the spill is contained and cleaned up.

Hit the oil companies HARD, HARD, HARD, in the wallet and you'll see some friggen people running around like their friggen lives depended on it to make sure the pipe line is functioning properly.

Again, it's about leadership from DC and BO is not it.


Wait, so explain to me when Gov't Regulation is needed, and when it's "getting in the way of making $"?

If you hit them "hard hard hard" in the wallet, doesn't that mean the cost of oil is going to go up? (increased regulations?)

The Energy Policy that the Bush Admin let the Energy companies write, is part of the "leadership" problem. I'm not here to point fingers, but it's hardly one person's fault (considering the problems with the TAPS/AK Pipeline going on since the 80's).

[cutthemdown]

http://www.frumforum.com/gulf-fishermen-doing-better-thanks-to-spill

South of New Orleans, in Venice, Louisiana, locals on the Gulf Coast are saying what no one seems to wants to acknowledge: that they’re thriving thanks to BP’s response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
Fishermen who have signed on to do BP oil spill cleanup work say that their contracts forbid them from speaking to reporters, but off the record, talk about the boon that the Deepwater Horizon incident has left in its wake.
“As a fisherman, I worked twelve hour days – ten to twelve dollars an hour,” says one Venice contractor. “I make much more money now than I did fishing.”
“People are working, are getting paid extremely well through the BP program. The local caterers who got to feed the people, they are doing quite well. Our concern is when BP is gone, how long it will take to recover,” says Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser, who runs the Louisiana parish most affected by the oil coming ashore. With some exceptions, he says, those who were doing okay before the spill are doing far better now.




the oil spill economically was a boom for the whole region. Thats what you do if they **** up. You screw them with huge fines and lawsuits and make out like a bandit.



Honestly you should never eat too much shrimp. It's a dirty animal that sucks up all the bad stuff of the seafloor. Same with Atlantic Bluefin right now. My friend actually really conscious of this stuff and its a great place to eat. Diamones on PCH in Sunset Beach!

[cutthemdown]

Also I read that is you test any shrimp, from anywhere under the methods that this article took you will find same thing. It's not endemic to the gulf.

In fact its the penned shrimp loaded with antibiotics that is the real threat to the food supply. Cheap farmed seafood from Asia is the culprit. Some low levels of oil won't hurt ya!

[alkemical]

Also I read that is you test any shrimp, from anywhere under the methods that this article took you will find same thing. It's not endemic to the gulf.

In fact its the penned shrimp loaded with antibiotics that is the real threat to the food supply. Cheap farmed seafood from Asia is the culprit. Some low levels of oil won't hurt ya!

http://www.pharmabiz.com/NewsDetails.aspx?aid=66094&sid=2

Occupational chemical exposure may be linked to Parkinson's risk: Study


nah, that's ok. I prefer NOT to have neurotoxins in my body (as much as possible).

[cutthemdown]

http://www.pharmabiz.com/NewsDetails.aspx?aid=66094&sid=2

Occupational chemical exposure may be linked to Parkinson's risk: Study


nah, that's ok. I prefer NOT to have neurotoxins in my body (as much as possible).

Sounds to me that has more to do with dry cleaning then oil. Whatever though fact is the gulf has the lowest unemployment and the fisherman made a ton off the cleanup. When you have an accident you clean it up and fine the company. You don't cry about it and stop a really good oil pipeline that can be totally safe.

[alkemical]

Sounds to me that has more to do with dry cleaning then oil. Whatever though fact is the gulf has the lowest unemployment and the fisherman made a ton off the cleanup. When you have an accident you clean it up and fine the company. You don't cry about it and stop a really good oil pipeline that can be totally safe.

So wait, you tell me you can't guarantee an accident, then tell me it's safe?

That's a logical paradox, it doesn't exist.

Who pays to clean it up?

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/bp-to-cut-tax-bill-by-13b-isnt-saying-what-it-paid-irs-for-2010.php?ref=fpa

BP plans to cut its overall tax bill by nearly $13 billion by writing off costs related to last year’s mammoth oil spill as the Gulf Coast continues to grapple with the devastating environmental and economic costs of the disaster one year later.

The international oil giant suffered a $40.9 billion loss as a result of the oil spill, making its net losses for 2010 a total of $4.8 billion (BP had $36.1 billion in profits before factoring in the spill), according to its annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and analysis by several tax experts consulted by TPM.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/05/big_oil_discount.html

The price tag for the Gulf Coast oil disaster could go as high as $14 billion. This includes cleanup expenses, which could cost as much as $7 billion, and related damages, such as losses to Louisiana’s fishing businesses of possibly $2.5 billion. British Petroleum, the company that operated the offshore drilling site that exploded, will pay for cleanup costs it directly incurs. But BP’s liability for economic damages inflicted on area residents and businesses is capped at $75 million under federal law (see sidebar, “The liability cap for oil spills”).


Oil companies also receive large subsidies through tax expenditures—special deductions, credits, exclusions, rates, exemptions, and deferrals that are delivered through the tax code. President Barack Obama’s fiscal year 2011 budget proposes cutting nine tax expenditures that primarily benefit oil companies (listed here), which would save about $45 billion over the next 10 years. These include the “percentage depletion allowance,” which provides oil companies a subsidy—at a cost of $10 billion over the next 10 years—to pump oil out of existing wells. And the tax expenditure for “intangible drilling costs” gives companies a subsidy worth $8 billion over the next 10 years to drill new oil wells.

The “foreign tax credit” provides another way for oil companies to avoid paying their taxes. This credit is intended to prevent the double taxation of corporate income that is taxed abroad but is also subject to tax in the United States. Companies have managed to exploit this subsidy even when they don’t pay income taxes abroad. Oil companies particularly abuse this tax expenditure. In total, companies will avoid about $8.5 billion in taxes over a 10-year period as a result.

[Tombstone RJ]

Wait, so explain to me when Gov't Regulation is needed, and when it's "getting in the way of making $"?

If you hit them "hard hard hard" in the wallet, doesn't that mean the cost of oil is going to go up? (increased regulations?)

The Energy Policy that the Bush Admin let the Energy companies write, is part of the "leadership" problem. I'm not here to point fingers, but it's hardly one person's fault (considering the problems with the TAPS/AK Pipeline going on since the 80's).

Again, you're just pointing out the failures of the fed gov. Here's what I'd do if I was the president: I'd write new legislation that does 2 things at once: 1. it increases domestic oil/energy production and 2. it allows energy companies the freedom to bring product to market as cheaply as possible for maximum profits.

Now, this legislation will also have one huge declaration: if any energy company has a problem like a 3 mile island problem or an exxon valdize problem or a gulf coast oil spill problem or any problem that adversly affects natural resouces like water then they will be fined up their friggen wazzoo until the problem is absolutely and 100% fixed.

That would by the caveat that holds the energy companies in check. In essence the legislation would say "go for it, but if you fail we are going to make you pay through the nose until the problem is fixed, so you better be very careful, and you better be clean and work according to undustry standards and laws otherwise you will be shut down immediately by the huge financial liabilities if you fail."

that's it. Simple and direct and there's no way the energy company could win in a court because they signed the agreement.

[alkemical]

Again, you're just pointing out the failures of the fed gov. Here's what I'd do if I was the president: I'd write new legislation that does 2 things at once: 1. it increases domestic oil production and 2. it allows energy companies the freedom to bring product to market as cheaply as possible for maximum profits.

Now, this legislation will also have one huge declaration: if any energy company has a problem like a 3 mile island problem or an exxon valdize problem or a gulf coast oil spill problem or any problem that adversly affects natural resouces like water then they will be fined up their friggen wazzoo until the problem is absolutely and 100% fixed.

That would by the caveat that holds the energy companies in check. In essence the legislation would say "go for it, but if you fail we are going to make you pay through the nose until the problem is fixed, so you better be very careful, and you better be clean and work according to undustry standards and laws otherwise you will be shut down immediately by the huge financial liabilities if you fail."

that's it. Simple and direct and there's no way the energy company could win in a court because they signed the agreement.

I guess that's why they buy the politicians though, right... ;)

it's a ****ty fact - we're a Corporate-Socialist nation. Since i've been alive, "leadership" has sold us out. (I can't go back further, cuz my debt clock didn't tick till '79).

;)


It's an interesting idea - but why not give...say GE more ability to produce better/cheaper solar panels?


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/10/14/ge-solar-power-plant-to-be-built-in-colorado/

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/partner/green-power-conferences-3234/news/article/2011/11/saudi-electric-company-inaugurates-saudi-arabias-first-solar-power-plant

If GE & Saudi Arabia are seeing solar as "the next big thing". By no means do I think solar solves all the problems (What works in AZ, won't work in NH (at least to the capacity AZ can provide)...but you follow what i'm saying (there is no "one sized fits all solution" - it will have to be regional).

Maybe that's where we're at as a nation:

There is no "one sized fits all" anything anymore. Time to look for regional solutions to regional problems.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug View Post
"Protests" have been ongoing since the Bush administration.
Obama shelved it when Republicans in Nebraska asked him to, giving him the perfect excuse to do so.

Republican lawmakers in Nebraska have effectively shut the pipeline down now (reacting to their voters in that state).

You kidding? Before they surrounded the white house with protestors his line on it was it is a state dept issue. Now he is getting involved. Get over yourself and your partisanship.

Once again, REPUBLICANS have blocked this pipeline, not ANYONE else. The route was approved by the federal government as the least damaging path environmentally.

Your bias to anything Obama is obvious and your lack of information and "feigned" ignorance on this subject is just as obvious.


If the USA manages to screw this up, this falls directly on BO's shoulders.
See above (and below).

"The key decision for current pipeline discussions is the permitting decision that will be made by the Obama administration, which is why I have urged President Obama and Secretary of State [Hilary] Clinton to deny the permit," the governor, a Republican, said in a statement Monday.

"The three-year final Environmental impact Statement concluded Keystone XL would have minimal impact on the environment. Fourteen routes were analyzed, eight that would impact Nebraska. The pipeline takes the safest route -- physically and environmentally," TransCanada said in a statement.

"By asking us to reroute, what people are asking us to do is ignore the rules we are required to follow, ignore the various reviews conducted under federal laws, which are specific to the route. You cannot redraw a pipeline route on a map and then tell the [State Department] and other agencies that it’s the same thing."

[Tombstone RJ]

Once again, REPUBLICANS have blocked this pipeline, not ANYONE else. The route was approved by the federal government as the least damaging path environmentally.

Your bias to anything Obama is obvious and your lack of information and "feigned" ignorance on this subject is just as obvious.


See above (and below).

I understand what you are saying Beerslug but what I am saying is that BO must overcome these objections/problems to the pipeline via strong leadership to ensure the pipeline comes to fruition.

That is called "leadership" and it falls on BO's shoulders. This is why I lay the responsibility directly on BO's shoulders.

He's the leader of this country. Lead, BO, Lead.

[chadta]

The “foreign tax credit” provides another way for oil companies to avoid paying their taxes. This credit is intended to prevent the double taxation of corporate income that is taxed abroad but is also subject to tax in the United States. Companies have managed to exploit this subsidy even when they don’t pay income taxes abroad. Oil companies particularly abuse this tax expenditure. In total, companies will avoid about $8.5 billion in taxes over a 10-year period as a result.

Sounds like tax laws need to be fixed, thats messed up.

Again, you're just pointing out the failures of the fed gov. Here's what I'd do if I was the president: I'd write new legislation that does 2 things at once: 1. it increases domestic oil/energy production and 2. it allows energy companies the freedom to bring product to market as cheaply as possible for maximum profits.

Now, this legislation will also have one huge declaration: if any energy company has a problem like a 3 mile island problem or an exxon valdize problem or a gulf coast oil spill problem or any problem that adversly affects natural resouces like water then they will be fined up their friggen wazzoo until the problem is absolutely and 100% fixed.

That would by the caveat that holds the energy companies in check. In essence the legislation would say "go for it, but if you fail we are going to make you pay through the nose until the problem is fixed, so you better be very careful, and you better be clean and work according to undustry standards and laws otherwise you will be shut down immediately by the huge financial liabilities if you fail."

that's it. Simple and direct and there's no way the energy company could win in a court because they signed the agreement.

Take it one step farther, here in ontario, our workplace safety laws hold the company responsible for any accident, but also hold all levels of managment, right down to the floor supervisor personally responsible.

When i worked in the auto parts plant, a guy got molten aluminum down his back in an accident, the plant was fined $125,000, plant manger was fined $22,500, and the supervisor on duty was fined $7,500. You would be amazed at how the threat of being held personally responsible makes these people that used to push push push for parts and ignore safety, do a complete 180.

[mhgaffney]

Even if the route were environmentally benign -- which I doubt -- -- this would not alter the impact on Alberta -- which will be catastrophic.

There is no way to justify turning a vast swathe of Canada into a moonscape.

You guys have petroleum on the brain. Think L-E-D lights.

Think W-I-N-D energy. Think S-O-L-A-R energy.

Above all -- Think P-A-R-A-D-I-G-M shift.

[Spider]

While he tabled it for now, it was Republicans in a Republican state that demanded it be rerouted from it's current planned route through Nebraska.

LMAO these Idiots on this thread dont have the first clue what is involved or what they are slamming Obama about ....... Funny shiat

[Spider]

I understand what you are saying Beerslug but what I am saying is that BO must overcome these objections/problems to the pipeline via strong leadership to ensure the pipeline comes to fruition.

That is called "leadership" and it falls on BO's shoulders. This is why I lay the responsibility directly on BO's shoulders.

He's the leader of this country. Lead, BO, Lead.

for sand oil ? Seriously ? Do you even know whats in your Own back Yard here ? ..... or the Bakin for that matter ?

[Spider]

Yeah the repub gov but i stand by Obama changing his course on it. Once the White House got surrounded he went from its a state dept issue to I am going to look into it some more.

Good that is happening though it will give a ton of oil for our gulf refineries to work on.

You don't agree that Obama cooled on the issue once the protests started?

Just stop trust me ...... The Pipe line is and will be a shiatty Idea , we have enough Canadian oil as it is now ........ besides why build a ****ing pipeline when you got the Bakin and Colorado ?

[cutthemdown]

Just stop trust me ...... The Pipe line is and will be a shiatty Idea , we have enough Canadian oil as it is now ........ besides why build a ****ing pipeline when you got the Bakin and Colorado ?

this is whole different oil reserve. You do go for all of them Spider. The pipeline is going to happen.

[Spider]

this is whole different oil reserve. You do go for all of them Spider. The pipeline is going to happen.

i know dayum well what it is **** sakes cut i forgot more about crude then you will know ,so you think this is a good idea do you?

[Spider]

Oil pipelines get shot down all the time for one reason or another. This one, in particular, just doesn't sound like a very good idea and, as mentioned, it was the Republican bloc that put their hand up to ask the question of how safe this really was.

How safe it is isnt really the problem , alot of these shiatheads down here are yapping just to hear themselfs yap , the real problem is the tar sands crude itsself , Hell yeah canada wants us to buy it , but the stuff is lower quality then Shale , once you take in the cost of actually retrieving this oil ,construction , maintenance , and the annual pressure test , no ****ing way is this a good deal for us...There is a pipeline that was just built , It was sold to us as a cheaper way to get Natty gas out of the Rockies then truck .........We see how that is working for us

[Tombstone RJ]

for sand oil ? Seriously ? Do you even know whats in your Own back Yard here ? ..... or the Bakin for that matter ?

fair enough but do you think for one minute BO will support bringing more domestic oil to market with all the environmentalist flakes in this country? We can't even get more oil out of Alaska and pumping it out of the lower 48 will cause environmental extremists to riot in the streets.

[Spider]

fair enough but do you think for one minute BO will support bringing more domestic oil to market with all the environmentalist flakes in this country? We can't even get more oil out of Alaska and pumping it out of the lower 48 will cause environmental extremists to riot in the streets.

what ever dude your mind already made up about Obama , nothing I say willl make a difference

[Bronco_Beerslug]

fair enough but do you think for one minute BO will support bringing more domestic oil to market with all the environmentalist flakes in this country? We can't even get more oil out of Alaska and pumping it out of the lower 48 will cause environmental extremists to riot in the streets.

What are you talking about? You do know that under Obama, oil production is up over 11%?

The blind hatred and amount of uninformed people on the Right in this country is disappointing to say the least.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, oil production is booming under Obama. No, it hasn’t lowered gas prices. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/yes-oil-production-is-booming-under-obama-no-it-hasnt-lowered-gas-prices/2011/08/31/gIQAWv8bsJ_blog.html)
Posted by Brad Plumer at 04:45 PM ET, 08/31/2011

Remember Michele Bachmann’s critique of President Obama’s energy policy? “We have resources from coal to oil to natural gas,” she said. “The problem is, under the EPA, they’ve been busy locking up (supplies), especially under President Obama.” Now, the Interior Department controls oil and gas leases, not the EPA, but never mind. Obama, the argument goes, is preventing us from harnessing our vast oil supplies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_296w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/drilling%20rigs.jpg?uuid=omnsGtQOEeCA3DHdQxseSw

But is this actually true? Not according to the chart on the right, courtesy of the Wall Street Journal. The number of rigs in the United States has been soaring during the Obama years. Oil drilling is up nearly 60 percent in the past year alone. True, Obama administration actions aren’t really responsible for the frenzy. As the Journal notes, the main contributing factors are better drilling technology and high crude prices, both of which make it possible — and profitable — for companies to tap new reserves in North Dakota, Texas, Ohio and elsewhere. Bottom-scraping natural gas prices have also prodded energy companies to shift their focus to oil. But in any case, Obama doesn’t appear to have thwarted the boom in oil production.

Over at Climate Progress, Joe Romm puts together his own chart, using data from the Energy Information Administration, showing that U.S. field production of crude oil is up significantly since 2008. As a result, oil imports have shrunk 11 percent in the past year. The United States is becoming more energy independent. But here’s the kicker — gas prices are still significantly higher this year than they were in 2010. It’s almost as if additional U.S. oil production is too small in the global scheme of things to affect prices at the pump in any sizeable way. (Though one could argue that extra production is keeping oil prices from going even higher than they otherwise would.)

CONT...

[Bronx33]

what ever dude your mind already made up about Obama , nothing I say willl make a difference


So basically you have been rendered silent which is extremely rare.

[Spider]

So basically you have been rendered silent which is extremely rare.

LOL No just didnt know how to answer his bullshiat , you know how you Bedwetters are , just like this pipelne , you guys cried , carried on , Oil Producton is up under obama ,I have had job offer after Job Offer to go to North Dakota , But tell you idiots this doesnt mean much , you guys dont want facts or the truth , so why waste my time ?