Posted on 10/07/2011 4:36:20 PM PDT by jazusamo
Administration decision due on $7 billion project
A final public hearing on the proposed $7 billion Canada-to-Texas Keystone XL oil pipeline on Friday turned into a heated and often testy battle, filled with boos and cheers for speakers who traveled from across the country to testify.
Protesters gathered outside the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center early in the morning, and then flooded into the hearing room, where a number of them pleaded with the State Department to reconsider its support for the pipeline. Supporters, which include both business and labor groups, say the project will provide needed energy from a reliable ally, reduce the nation’s reliance of overseas suppliers, and create thousands of new construction and maintenance jobs. Critics say the economic benefits are overstated and that the project bisecting the nation’s midsection will wreak environmental havoc on sensitive lands along its path.
The State Department, which must approve the proposal as the pipeline originates across the border in Canada, appears to be leaning toward approval despite a series of increasingly passionate public hearings in recent weeks, both in Washington and in the field, on the Keystone pipeline. Opponents say lobbying by TransCanada and U.S. energy interests has tilted the debate in favor of approval, a charge the State Department has rejected.
State Department officials will now review the public comments, and wrap up a 90-day review period in mid-November. Then, it will issue it’s final decision to the White House in December. President Obama has faced pressure from environmental groups, including a series of protests outside the White House, as the decision day has neared.
At Friday’s packed hearing, Robin Mann, director of Sierra Club, an environmental group, said she had come all the way from Pennsylvannia to make her voice heard...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
White House will never let this happen.
It’s my undestanding it’s being piped to the refineries in Texas for our use.
Yeah, let’s waste more billions on solar panels and windmills that don’t work and damage the landscape way more than this pipeline ever will.
what do you mean taxpayer’s expense? evidence please.
Why? There's already refineries in the south. How does refining and shipping separated product help, or how is it cost-effective?
Exactly! The enviro nuts consider any energy not renewable energy taboo but renewable energy is horribly inefficient and costs way more.
Once again, you reveal your ignorance.
The refined products will be consumed in the US of A. We no longer export finished product, except under special circumstances (i.e., under contract, in exchange for crude from Mexico, bunker fuel for ships returning to foreign ports).
All the distributive pipelines in the US market originate on the Gulf Coast, where the refineries are. In order to distribute from northern refineries, a whole new set of distributive pipelines would need to be built.
You can generally count on businesses to make the most efficient economic decisions. Whether you agree with them or not.
Link?
If you do not know what depreciation/and depletion is, it is to late for me to explain it to you.
ditto.
I've noticed that the squirrels two streets North are predominantly black this year, but on this side of the bisection they are gray. In other years they've been red here, gray there, or white there and black here.
Oh the humanity.
Who are these econuts who imagine a pipeline bisects anything. For the most part it's going to be 30 feet deep in the ground!
There's already a substantial pipeline into the area. This is an ADDITIONAL PIPELINE.
The great advantage is this will pipe the oil to EXISTING year round refineries.
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.
You realize that there is some profit derived by the refiner--why shouldn't it be in the U. S.? And, there's a pretty good transportation infrastructure centered around Oklahoma. Isn't that more centrally located than the Canadian field for distribution around the U. S.? And why build refineries up there if they exist here?
Now, if my assumptions are wrong, and the pipeline will cause some problems, tell me about it, and I'll reconsider my take on the situation.
We don't need more Chicom interests in our country, or Canada! Americans who want to give stuff to the Chicoms should be investigated closely and punished appropriately.
There is nothing wrong with building new refriners, just south of the border is there. At least they would not be shutting down and running up price everytime a storm hits the gulf.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.