Keystone XL won't impact oilsands growth, U.S. State Dept. says

[Joe Shlabotnik]

BULLSHIT!!!!!!

The fix is in?!1!!!?!11!?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/03/01/keystone-review.html

The U.S. State Department says building the northern leg of TransCanada's controversial Keystone XL pipeline won't have a major impact on Alberta's oilsands development —a finding that might make it easier for the White House to approve the controversial project.

A State Department official said the pipeline "remains unlikely to significantly impact the rate of development of the oilsands or the demand for heavy crude oil in the United States."

BULLSHIT.

Without Keystone XL, there is no mass transit route available other than conventional rail to exploit the tar sands for Chinese markets. There is not going to be a pipeline through BC, therefore keystone will enable rapid resource exploitation.

[Joe Shlabotnik]

1. kicking,

and shameless self rec.

[octoberlib]

2. K&R!

[limpyhobbler]

3. Defies common sense.

The more straws you stick in the milkshake, the faster you can drink it.

[blm]

4. The deal was done 4 years ago. Once the backlash hit, Hillary backed off and set up this 'analysis'

from a firm already friendly to Keystone. She just didn't want to be seen signing the deal - she wants to breeze through the primaries this time.

[limpyhobbler]

8. The deal is not done until Obama decides. Hillary does not override Obama.

[Joe Shlabotnik]

9. exactly,

'blaming' it on the Clintons, and shrugging it off as inevitable is exactly the same bullshit that the establishment uses to persuade folks that resistance is futile.

[blm]

13. Just being real. Hillary was 100% behind Keystone and so was Bill. She had this 'assessment'

done by a firm she already knew to be friendly to Keystone deal.

Obama is being handed that 'assessment' which Hillary rigged to get the result she wanted.

You are welcome to pretend the last 4 years of HIllary's dog and pony show on Keystone 'assessment' and 'analysis' was earnest action on her part.

[Beacool]

15. At this point your nonsensical insistence that this is Hillary's fault is funny.

Once again, Obama is the one who will make the final decision. He is the president.

[blm]

18. The president making a decision based on WHAT 'information' developed under Hillary's direction?

Did Hillary NOT direct a firm friendly to Keystone deal she wanted to provide the assessment the president would be using as a determining factor in his decision? If she didn't then where did the president get the assessment?

Is Hillary's PR team now trying to claim Hillary was NOT the most 'independent' and 'influential' Sec of State as they had been claiming just recently?

[Beacool]

19. An independent study was commissioned by the State Department.

The then SOS didn't guide their hand. It will be up to Obama to approve or reject the deal.

Ever try dealing with reality and not being guided by your extreme dislike of Hillary?

Too funny.............

[blm]

21. LOLOL- an 'assessment' rigged from the get go by Hillary tapping a campaign aide to

perform the 'assessment' that you claim has nothing at all to do with her, even though the outcome of the 'assessment' coincides with exactly what Hillary wanted in the first place. Gee, Beacool - you're a regular coincidence theorist, aren't you?

[Beacool]

24. Be careful not to cut yourself with your tin foil hat.

[blm]

27. Sure, Beacool - you are welcome to point out what was incorrect. But, of course, you can't.

You never do. You think attacking me changes the truth, but, it never does, does it? You COULD post a fact based rebuttal, IF you had one. But, we know you don't.

[Beacool]

42. By now I'm bored with the whole argument.

Bottom line, it's up to Obama.

[limpyhobbler]

20. If the decision making process was rigged and Obama approves it, he should be impeached.

[blm]

22. Does he read DU? Does he KNOW Clinton rigged it to fit her approval of Keystone by

tapping a firm friendly to the deal involving a longtime Clinton loyalist?

Kerry and Obama will be stuck on the smear end of a deal orchestrated by two masterful political opportunists who have no problem at all burdening other Democrats with their deals.

[limpyhobbler]

23. Where did you get the info that the process was rigged?

[Beacool]

25. From her own mind.

There's a group of Clinton haters on DU who will believe anything against them, no matter how outrageous. At times it feels like reading the nutty stuff they write at the Freepers' site.

[blm]

32. You are welcome to counter with facts that prove otherwise, Beacool, but, you can't

can you? So, you do what you always do - attack those who know how orchestrated this whole deal has been the last few years and BEFORE the years of 'analysis' by the State Dept ends up on the president's reading list.

gee...where did that 'assessment' come from, Beacool?

[blm]

30. The 'assessment' was done by a firm tapped by Clinton that was already friendly to the deal.

Every step of the way the State Dept showed particular regard for TransCanada and its needs.

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20110926/state-department-keystone-xl-pipeline-delay-transcanada-paul-elliott-hillary-clinton-friends-of-the-earth-foia

[limpyhobbler]

31. OK you convinced me. It was rigged. I just sent an email to the President informing him.

I sent him a copy of that link. Now that he knows it was rigged, he'll have a good reason to deny it. He won't stand by and facilitate that sort of corruption.

[blm]

35. Who says Obama will see these posts or emails?

His administration made a huge mistake when they brought in so many Clintonites early on. It was his biggest mistake, imo. It showed he trusted their 'experience' over his ability to organize a government that could hit the road running in Jan 2009. He relied too heavily on some who working hand in hand with the corporatists.

[limpyhobbler]

37. LOL sorry, We're repeating a conversation we had earlier.

I thought I knew from somewhere

This represents an absurd level of corruption and cronyism:

For more than a year now, it’s been one of Washington’s worst-kept secrets that Clinton wants the pipeline approved. And why not? Its builder, TransCanada, hired her old deputy campaign manager as its chief lobbyist and gave lobbying contracts to several of her big bundlers. Leaked emails show embassy officials rooting on the project; it’s classic D.C. insiderism.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022337957#post16

If the President is not aware of this then I would say must be willfully ignoring it.

Either that or he's incompetent.

This is some pretty scandalous stuff.

He could justify stopping the pipeline based on this scandal alone.

[blm]

38. Look - we know he had a lot on his plate the last 2 years. We also know Bill Clinton went

to great lengths to be seen as indispensable to Obama during the campaign. Sure, I think Obama knows they manipulated the outcome to their preferred conclusion, but, there's also what we don't know.

There have to have been trade-offs negotiated that are still unknown to us. I can't imagine Obama, and especially Kerry, not demanding something important relative to climate change in return for accepting this deal and bearing the cost of the backlash. That's the politics of it all - the part I abhor.

[karynnj]

39. From the ASSUMPTION in the reportn that Canada will produce the same amount of oil

with and without the pipeline. This is not a result of analysis, this is an assumption on which the analysis is based. It means that the known fact that it is dirtier - as the report says by 5 to 19 % vs other crude - is NOT relevant as it is produced with or without the pipeline.

The question I have is who asked for a report done under this assumption - the assumption least likely to show that the pipeline was a bad idea. We have all seen the Republicans go to the CBO and say - assume X, Y and Z (none of which are true) and tell us the cost of ACA. The results of which are trumpeted on RW radio.

As others have said, if built, this is the cheapest delivery method. We also know that in producing any oil, it gets more expensive as you get the harder to extract stuff. There is always a cost where it becomes too expensive to extract. Change to a more expensive delivery cost, that points come earlier - meaning LESS DIRTY OIL. This is standard economics - and the study assumes it away.

The problem we face now is that for political reasons Obama allowed the Southern part to be built and Clinton and Obama both signaled approval.

[DonCoquixote]

28. and if he over-rides it

Watch big oil shovel money to hillary in 2016.

[limpyhobbler]

34. We need someone who will stand up to the oil companies. Not another oil crony.

[Joe Shlabotnik]

5. kicking once again.

Anyone else get a rotten suspicion that Keystone XL approval is part of a grand bargain. Lets hope that "even when we win; we lose" is not a factor again. Anyone who has children that breathe air, and drink water should be concerned.

[demosocialist]

6. K&R nt

[Autumn]

7. That pipelines coming. Kerry and Obama will sign off on it

and boom, 35 full time jobs.

[Jumpin Jack Fletch]

11. Oops! Posted in wrong part of thread.

"If Canada proceeds, and we do nothing, it will be game over for the climate." James Hansen, NASA.

[spanone]

12. america, the land for sale to the highest bidder

[Joe Shlabotnik]

14. America?

Canada is being sold by the tar pound literally, by our Koch-friendly Conservative govt. USA is just the real estate that the blood funnel runs over on route to China, (land expropriation included).

[DonCoquixote]

29. pardon me for asking, but

How many Canadians hate this, how many want it?

[Joe Shlabotnik]

16. Kick

Kicking bullshit is ugly, but unfortunately left to us commoners

[FreeJoe]

17. As someone who works in the oil industry...

I can professionally say that this is bullshit. Assets do or don't get developed based on their expected return. If you lower the cost of getting the oil to the market, which is the purpose of the pipeline, you will improve the economics of development, so you will get more of it. It is true that people will do some drilling without it, but they will do far, far less.

[Purveyor]

26. Mentioning rail transport: U.S. Railcar Oil Deliveries Hit Record in 2012

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022451571

[JaneyVee]

33. REJOICE, AMERICA!

[Canuckistanian]

36. I agree

Without XL, they can't get the bitumen out.

They tried negotiating a pipeline though B.C., but native communities put a stop to that, in no uncertain terms.

Besides, Canadians are pissed because of the extremely low prices the bitumen will bring. There's low demand right now for Tar Sands oil. And with the North Dakota fracking, demand is growing lower still.

Besides all that oil is destined for offshore markets, NOT for America.

This whole project is insane on so many levels.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

41. No... the Native Communities did not put a stop to it

Those hoping for another Oka crisis are going to sorely disappointed.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

40. Whatever the rhetoric, the construction of Northern Gateway really isn't in doubt

There are lots of people screaming themselves hoarse, but that is about it.