Obama backs half of Keystone

applecorped

Banned
applecorped
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
20,145
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/21/usa-keystone-obama-idUSL1E8QL0G320120321

"President Barack Obama will issue a memo on Thursday directing federal agencies to prioritize permitting of TransCanada's southern leg of the Keystone oil pipeline, a senior White House official said on Wednesday.
With his Republican opponents hammering away at the president over high gasoline prices, Obama will visit Cushing, Oklahoma on Thursday to promote his energy policies, which include support for the southern leg of the pipeline.
The pipeline would drain a glut of crude in Cushing, the storage hub for U.S. crude oil traded on the futures market, easing deliveries to refineries along the Gulf Coast.
"More oil is flowing into Cushing than can flow out, creating a bottleneck that takes away the incentive for additional production, while also preventing oil from reaching refineries along the Gulf coast," the senior official told reporters in a conference call."


Is half better than none?:confused:
 
Funny a week ago there were claims he was trying to stop the whole project. Wish the pundits would make up their mind about what they dont like about the guy
 
MG1962 said:
Funny a week ago there were claims he was trying to stop the whole project. Wish the pundits would make up their mind about what they dont like about the guy
Click to expand...

I'm sure the pundits will not like this half-measure either.
 
Obama seemed to have issues with the specific route and how the environmental process had gone.

Personally I just wish they'd leave the tar sands buried under Alberta mud. Tar sands are terrible when it comes to carbon effluence.
 
Corsair 115 said:
Not quite correct. The U.S. does export some crude oil. In 2011, for example, it exported 17,158,000 barrels of crude oil in 2011.
Click to expand...
Which is, relatively speaking, almost none. It's less than the US consumes in a single day.
 
WildCat said:
That segment of the pipeline was never an issue.
Click to expand...
Well, DUH!

The part that some drooling moron from Tennessee thinks has to go through an aquifer is an issue. Only an idiot would put it there if there were an alternative.
 
WildCat said:
Which is, relatively speaking, almost none. It's less than the US consumes in a single day.
Click to expand...


Sure. But it does not obviate the point that the U.S. does indeed export some crude oil.


fishbob said:
Statistics from the Department of Reduncancy Department?
Click to expand...


More like the Department of Failing to Check One's Writing after Composing and Editing a Passage. I'm one of the heads of that department.
 
Travis said:
Obama seemed to have issues with the specific route and how the environmental process had gone.
Click to expand...

Specifically he sided with the Republican Governor of Nebraska and said the pipeline could not go through the Sand Hills area of Nebraska. The southern half of the pipeline was approved and the norhtern half was sent back to Transcanada to modify the route so it didn't go though this area.

Republicans in Congress then passed a law saying the pipeline must be rejected if a decision wasn't reached by February, but Transcanda wasn't even close to having a new route by then, and of course didn't give any time at all for that route to be analyzed.

In order to comply with the law Congressional Republican's made the Northern half of the pipeline had to be rejected outright, when Obama's initial response was that it would likley be approved once the new route was analyzed.

He did encourage TRP to reapply once they had the new route, but now the entire approval processes needs to start from scratch. The northern part of the pipeline will still be built, but will likely end up delayed a year or two due to Congressional Republicans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom