America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 7 months ago by tailgater. 118 replies replies.
3 Pages123>
Trains kept a rollin...
DrafterX Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
Trains roll from Canada to Gulf to fill void left by failed Keystone Pipeline
By Perry Chiaramonte

Published March 20, 2012

The amount of oil Canadian Pacific Railways carries down through the heartland has surged 2,500 percent since 2009, to 8.5 million barrels per year from just 325,000. The company expects to move 45 million barrels per year within the decade.


A Canadian Pacific train moving crude oil out of the Bakken formation in North Dakota. Transporting of crude oil has dramatically increased since 2009.

“We are responding to a growing demand,” Ed Greenberg, a spokesman for Canadian Pacific told FoxNews.com. “There has been unprecedented growth in the energy industry.”

The Calgary-based railroad is one of two that carries oil down from Canada's tar sands, but Canadian Pacific also carries thousands of barrels per day to the Gulf from North Dakota's booming Bakken Formation oil fields.

Experts estimate shipping by rail instead of pipeline adds anywhere from $5 to $10 to the price of a barrel, not to mention the high-capacity, 24-7 flow a pipeline affords. Rep. Fred Upton, (R-Mich.), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, says the explosive growth of oil delivery by rail underscores the missed opportunity of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline that became bogged down by environmental concerns and was ultimately tabled by the Obama administration and the Democrat-controlled Senate.

"We need to be doing all we can to develop our resources, particularly now, with rising gasoline prices and the threat of supply disruptions overseas," Upton told FoxNews.com. "Most observers acknowledge that rail transport is the best option we currently have to get this oil down to the refineries -- but the Keystone XL pipeline presents us with a better alternative."

Supporters of the pipeline, which the Obama administration plans to consider again after the 2012 election, say it would not only lower the price of a barrel of oil, but that it would also provide jobs. TransCanada, the company seeking to build the pipeline, has estimated it would generate 130,000 jobs, a number endorsed by Republican supporters of the pipeline. But Democrats cite a study by Cornell University that places the number at just 5,000 jobs.

With the pipeline in limbo, trains are the next-best way to move the oil south to the thirsty refineries on the Texas and Louisiana coasts, Michael Ervin, a petroleum industry analyst based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, told FoxNews.com.

“The use of rail as a short-term solution to pipeline capacity limitations was a likely approach either with or without the additional production,” Ervin said. “It is more a matter of a lack of pipeline capacity, which in turn is depressing domestic crude oil prices of all types in the Midwest and Canada as well.”

Oil companies are investing their own money in the older mode of transport, said Tony Hatch, a New York-based transportation and railroad industry analyst, noting that Hess Oil is among the latest companies to buy its own rail tankers. He said even if the pipeline ultimately gets built, rail transport will be a piece of the puzzle.

“The markets are ready for the oil now," said Tony Hatch, a New York-based transportation and railroad industry analyst. "It’s clear that they are investing in rail even when and if a pipeline is built."



Film at 11.... Mellow
jetblasted Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,508
Well, we made a stop in Albuquerque
She musta thought
I was a real cool jerk
Got off the train, and put her hands up
Lookin' so good, I couldn't let her go
Cool
rfenst Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 27,655
DrafterX wrote:


Supporters of the pipeline, which the Obama administration plans to consider again after the 2012 election, say it would not only lower the price of a barrel of oil, but that it would also provide jobs. TransCanada, the company seeking to build the pipeline, has estimated it would generate 130,000 jobs, a number endorsed by Republican supporters of the pipeline. But Democrats cite a study by Cornell University that places the number at just 5,000 jobs.




How many times must I write that the pipeline WILL get approved by Obama? If not until after the election, you can sure darn bet he will strongly favor it during the election and more vehemently as the election cycle progresses.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
rfenst wrote:
How many times must I write that the pipeline WILL get approved by Obama? If not until after the election, you can sure darn bet he will strongly favor it during the election and more vehemently as the election cycle progresses.


You would support such a man? An administration that holds an entire economy hostage while he's somehow making back room deals with donors? This is your Hope and Change? You got robbed!

You can write it as many times as he and his Mensa club member Chu pat themselves on their backs! No movement and Buffett and his trains are makin' da chedda!

Remember folks...those trains pay more in taxes than Warren Buffett!


http://www.cigarbid.com/...ase-Chinas-Energy-Skids


Here's the Kenyan King's game.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/21/usa-keystone-obama-idUSL1E8QL0G320120321

He's all for it...it's those evil departments in DC...they don't like it...they hate America!
DrafterX Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
He's in Oklahoma right now and plans to take credit for a Pipeline being between Cushing and Texas somewhere.... We didn't need his approval to build this leg but it's an opportunity for him I guess... Mellow
DrMaddVibe Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
Isn't that nice.

It would be even better if he actually said..."I was wrong about America's energy situation and I've instructed the Energy and Interior Departments to vigorously look for ways to reverse the path I charted when I was running for this office. I was wrong on coal, and I was wrong on "Drill Baby Drill". America needs cheaper energy sources to maintain a strong and healthy economy and I'm recommitting myself and my administration to doing just that."

I'd also like to see a long list of people that he would be sending down the river on criminal charges but one can dream.
HockeyDad Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 37,847
I wonder if he'll talk up the wind farms in western Oklahoma.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
HockeyDad wrote:
I wonder if he'll talk up the wind farms in western Oklahoma.



You mean the bird and bat killing farms? The ones that have to be shut off because they're dumping too much energy onto the grid?

:-&
HockeyDad Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 37,847
The birds and bats were going to die eventually. We just make them deadier.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
HockeyDad wrote:
The birds and bats were going to die eventually. We just make them deadier.




Not talking

Tsk...tsk...tsk


If you're going to do it...do it right!

We don't make the birds and bats die...we make the birds and bats that die deadier.

The PSA has been brought to by...
























































The GLOBALISTS!
DrafterX Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
those windfarms are impressive from the air... I had no idea there were that many in operation... Mellow
HockeyDad Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 37,847
Little know fact: They are actually powered by the get exhaust of all the airplanes that fly over!

Flyover state wind farm outrage!
DrafterX Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
Speech from the pipeyard about to begin..... Think
DrafterX Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
yep, he took credit for the wind farms... Laugh
DrafterX Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
I don't know why I ever doubted him... he didn't stop the pipeline, it was the media and those bassards in Congress... d'oh!
DrMaddVibe Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
DrafterX wrote:
I don't know why I ever doubted him... he didn't stop the pipeline, it was the media and those bassards in Congress... d'oh!


Let's not confuse the issue with FACTS!

Obama lobbying against Keystone pipeline


President Barack Obama’s deputies are defending his lobbying against a GOP effort in the Senate to fast-track approval of the job-creating Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada.

GOP leaders in the Senate are pressing the chamber’s Democratic leadership for a vote on the fast-track bill Mar. 8, but Obama has called Democratic Senators to urge them to vote against the GOP measure.

“The president has communications with some members of Congress… he’s made some phone calls, I’ll confirm that,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said Mar. 8. Carney declined to say how many Senators were called by Obama, or if other Administration leaders called Senators to vote against the fast-track bill.

Carney slammed the GOP’s fast-track bill as an “irresponsible” effort “to curry favor with some political constituency or another.”

Polls show the pipeline is supported by most Americans, and by some Democratic-affiliated groups such as construction unions.

GOP leaders have been hammering away at Obama for blocking the pipeline, which advocates argue would employ thousands of construction workers, deliver more oil to U.S. refineries on the Gulf of Mexico, and reduce U.S. reliance on oil from Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries.

“It appears the president remains firmly committed to killing the Keystone pipeline, despite the fact that it enjoys strong support from the American people,” said a statement from House Speaker John Boehner.

“What’s worse, by lobbying against American jobs, President Obama is pushing North American energy closer to China,” added the statement.

If passed, the approval would be a political defeat for Obama, trump his regulatory rejection of the bill, and allow for more oil to be imported from Canada.

White House officials say they want the pipeline approval process to go through the Department of State, which has already delayed approval for the pipeline past the November election. The delay was imposed late 2011 after protests from environmental groups important to Obama’s reelection campaign.

“We will ensure any project receives the important assessment it deserves [at the State Department], and the Administration will base a decision to provide a permit on the completion of that review,” the White House said in a statement.

Obama’s opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline is entwined with his ambitious effort to regulate the nation’s energy sector and promote alternative energy sources such as wind, solar and biomass. Congressional approval of the pipeline would be seen a a partial repudiation of his agenda.

Obama’s lobbying was first disclosed by Politico.


http://news.yahoo.com/obama-lobbying-against-keystone-pipeline-201208007.html
DrafterX Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
But he just said he wanted it.... Huh
DrMaddVibe Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
DrafterX wrote:
But he just said he wanted it.... Huh



Did he call Carney a liar?

Not talking
DrafterX Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
there's not a fair here right now... he didn't take any questions either... Mellow
DrMaddVibe Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
DrafterX wrote:
there's not a fair here right now... he didn't take any questions either... Mellow



Energy was a particular obsession of the president-elect’s, and therefore a particular source of frustration. Week after week, [White House economic adviser Christina] Romer would march in with an estimate of the jobs all the investments in clean energy would produce; week after week, Obama would send her back to check the numbers. “I don’t get it,” he’d say. “We make these large-scale investments in infrastructure. What do you mean, there are no jobs?” But the numbers rarely budged.

http://blog.american.com/2012/03/the-entire-obama-presidency-in-one-anecdote/
DrafterX Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
I'm surprised he wants it.... Mellow
DrMaddVibe Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
Not on His Watch

Increase in oil production touted by Obama occurred almost entirely on non-federal land beyond his control, nonpartisan study finds

The recent increase in domestic oil production touted by President Obama took place almost entirely on non-federal lands beyond his administration’s control, a new study has found.

The study, prepared by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS), examined oil production on federal and non-federal land between 2007-2011. Approximately 96 percent of the total increase in domestic oil production occurred on non-federal land, CRS found.

Earlier this month, the Energy Information Administration reported that oil and natural gas production on federal land declined 40 percent over the past decade and 14 percent in 2011 alone.

Obama has been touting the increase in domestic oil production in an effort to assuage mounting concerns over record fuel prices throughout the country.

“Under my administration, America is producing more oil today than at any time in the last eight years,” he said in a speech last month.

But his critics are quick to note that, as suggested by the CRS study, the administration is not doing everything it can to increase production on federal land.

“He’s taking credit for something that is not under his control,” a Republican congressional aide tells the Washington Free Beacon.

“Ninety-six percent on non-federal land. I mean, that’s astonishing,” added the aide. “I didn’t expect the number to be that high.”

http://freebeacon.com/not-on-his-watch/
DrafterX Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
are the Glades federal land..?? Huh
DrMaddVibe Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
Obama’s Rush to Approve Keystone Segment Won’t Speed Construction


The White House announced on Wednesday that it would expedite the approval process for the southern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline, but the company building the pipeline says the move will do nothing to speed its construction.

President Obama looked to use the stunt as a way to counter critics who say he has stymied the development of fossil fuels even as gas prices are at record highs. But as Heritage’s Nick Loris noted Wednesday, you can’t expedite a project by rejecting it. If the president were concerned with the country’s oil supply, his State Department shouldn’t have rejected the larger pipeline project.

The president’s enthusiastic backing of the portion of the pipeline running from Oklahoma to the Gulf Coast won’t actually speed pipeline construction, according to TransCanada, the company building it.

President Barack Obama’s promise to expedite review of the southern leg of TransCanada Corp. (TRP)’s Keystone XL pipeline won’t speed up the timeline for the project, which already is slated to start construction as soon as June…

TransCanada’s president of energy and oil pipelines, Alex Pourbaix, said in an interview March 6 that construction on the Cushing phase of Keystone could begin as soon as June. The company doesn’t expect the new review process to change that schedule, Cunha said yesterday.
The Cushing phase would have continued apace without presidential action, but Obama looked to take credit for some portion of the project, which Americans support by a 2-1 margin, according to Gallup.

The tactic is similar to the president’s repeated claims that fossil fuel production has increased under his administration. While technically true, he neglects to mention that the majority of that increase has occurred on private lands, over which he has no authority. On federal land, fossil fuel production is at a nine-year low.


http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/22/obamas-rush-to-approve-keystone-segment-wont-speed-construction/



But have no fear...he's gonna green light it!
DrMaddVibe Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
And by green light it...look at the last sentence of THIS article!


Obama’s Speedy Keystone Review Won’t Accelerate Cushing Pipe


President Barack Obama’s promise to expedite the review of the southern leg of TransCanada Corp. (TRP)’s Keystone XL pipeline won’t speed up the project, which already is slated to start construction as soon as June.

TransCanada is awaiting permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the last it needs to begin construction on the pipeline segment that will carry crude from the oil-storage hub at Cushing, Oklahoma, to Gulf Coast refineries, Terry Cunha, a spokesman for the Calgary-based company, said in an e-mail message yesterday.

TransCanada’s president of energy and oil pipelines, Alex Pourbaix, said in an interview March 6 that construction on the Cushing phase of Keystone may begin as soon as June. The company doesn’t expect the new review process to change that schedule, Cunha said yesterday. The Army Corps typically approves permits for this type of project within 60 days, according to Meg Gaffney-Smith, chief of the Corps’s regulatory program.

Obama appeared in Cushing today as part of a four-state tour to promote his energy policies as Republicans blame him for surging gasoline prices. He announced that the administration is designating the southern Keystone section an infrastructure priority, which will make the project eligible for accelerated review of permit applications.

“We’re making this new pipeline from Cushing to the Gulf a priority,” Obama said today in prepared remarks. “We’re going to go ahead and get that done.”

Keystone XL Rejected
Obama in January denied a permit for the Keystone XL to bring oil-sands crude from Canada to the Texas coast, citing environmental concerns. TransCanada announced plans Feb. 27 to proceed with just the Cushing-to-Gulf segment of the pipeline. The project is expected to ease a supply bottleneck in Oklahoma by eventually bringing as much as 830,000 barrels of oil a day to Texas refineries.

Since the Cushing phase doesn’t cross an international border, it doesn’t require permission from the U.S. Department of State and president, as the full project did. The Obama administration released a statement in February saying the White House will “take every step possible to expedite the necessary federal permits.”

Obama’s new designation of the pipeline as an infrastructure priority was dismissed by Republicans as political window dressing on a project that’s already well under way to deflect criticism Obama has received for refusing to approve the northern segment of TransCanada’s line.

Obama was “trying to take credit for part of the pipeline that doesn’t even require his approval,” Boehner, on Ohio Republican, told reporters at his weekly news conference in Washington. “This idea that the president is going to expedite this will have no impact on the construction of this pipeline.”

Rising Pump Prices
While on his two-day trip, Obama will also be focusing on natural gas, solar and alternative-energy research. The cost of oil is a political flashpoint as he seeks re-election in November. Even as the broader economy improves, voters are reminded daily by signs at local gas stations that they are spending more to drive.

The average retail price of regular gasoline in the U.S. was $3.84 a gallon as of March 20, up about 17 percent since the start of the year, according to the American Automobile Association’s daily fuel price survey. Crude oil for May delivery rose $1.66, or 1.6 percent, to $107.27 a barrel yesterday on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

The federal permits now needed for the $2.3 billion Cushing segment of Keystone mainly concern the environmental impact of the pipeline where it crosses rivers and streams. The permits required under the U.S. Clean Water Act typically are approved in 45 to 60 days if the project is determined to have minimal environmental impact, according to the Association of Oil Pipelines, a Washington-based trade group.

Tunneling Under
TransCanada plans to tunnel 50 to 100 feet below any rivers it crosses as it builds the pipeline to minimize environmental impact, said Pourbaix, the company’s pipeline president.

“Most large rivers would be crossed using the horizontal directional drilling method, which would install the pipeline well below the active river bed,” according to an environmental impact study of the XL pipeline route completed last year by the U.S. State Department. “As a result, direct disturbance to the river bed, fish, aquatic animals and plants, and river banks would be avoided.”

TransCanada originally requested water-crossing permits for the XL project from the Corps of Engineers last year. Corps officials at district offices in Oklahoma and Texas “suspended all work” on the permits after the State Department raised questions in November about Keystone’s total environmental impact, Gaffney-Smith said in Feb. 3 testimony to a Congressional committee.

New Application
TransCanada is in discussions with the Corps about submitting new permit applications for the Cushing segment, Gaffney-Smith said in an interview yesterday. The company will be allowed to reuse the documentation from the original application if the route doesn’t change, she said. The Corps has a goal of issuing approvals within 60 days, she said.

“Provided there are no issues, I believe we can process this application fairly quickly, but I can’t put a specific timeline on it,” she said.

In a now-separate process, TransCanada plans to submit “within weeks” a new permit application to the State Department for the northern leg of the XL pipeline that would run from Hardisty, Alberta to Steele City, Nebraska, said Pourbaix. The company is developing a new route with regulators in Nebraska.

Northern Segment Decision
The State Department has told TransCanada that it may make a decision on the northern segment application as soon as March 2013, he said.

Michael Brune, executive director of the San Francisco- based Sierra Club (FFDEX), the largest grassroots environmental group in the country, said the president’s decision to issue an executive order to speed up permitting for the southern portion of the Keystone pipeline “may have been a political calculation for the administration.”

“It puts American families at risk and only serves to deepen our dependence on oil,” Brune said in an e-mailed statement.

Obama also is using his trip to emphasize clean energy. Speaking in front of a field of solar panels at the Copper Mountain Solar 1 Facility near Boulder City, Nevada, Obama said yesterday the U.S. must stay ahead of countries such as China and India in the development of alternative energy sources while increasing production of fossil fuels.

“As long as I’m president we will not walk away from the promise of clean energy,” he said.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
Obama Mocks Critics As Gas Prices Go Up


As you drive America’s ribbon of highway, from California to the New York island, there’s one reality that can’t be escaped — gas prices keep going up, with no end in sight. But instead of taking action to bring relief to the American people, the Obama Administration is patting itself on the back for a job well done while mocking those who are calling for a commonsense energy policy.

This week saw the highest average gas price ever recorded in March — a whopping $3.87 per gallon. That’s up 4 cents from over a week ago, and 30 cents more than last year. On the West Coast, it’s up to $4.23 a gallon, but no matter where you go in America, you’ll feel the burn.

Meanwhile, the President is still beating the drums for his energy strategy, which he highlighted yesterday in a visit to the Copper Mountain Solar 1 Facility in Boulder City, Nevada. Anticipating the obvious criticism — that his investment in the Solyndra solar plant went belly up, costing American taxpayers $535 million — the President mocked those who question his ideas, saying they “lack imagination,” and he turned to name calling in order to deflect legitimate concerns about the viability of his green pipe dream and the fact that it has not produced the jobs that he promised:

One member of Congress who shall remain unnamed called these jobs ‘phony’ — called them phony jobs. I mean, think about that mindset, that attitude that says because something is new, it must not be real. If these guys were around when Columbus set sail, they’d be charter members of the Flat Earth Society.
But as Heritage’s Nick Loris points out, those who criticize the President’s policies aren’t opposed to new ideas. The Administration’s record of burning billions in taxpayer dollars to somehow transition America to a new energy economy have not produced results that earn confidence. The American people’s money is being used to offset private-sector investments and artificially prop up industries until they go bankrupt, like Solyndra, Beacon, Ener1, Abound, and so on. Only when technologies such as solar, wind, and biofuels become affordable and reliable will consumers embrace them.

While the President is out West selling his spending and tax hikes, back home in Washington his Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu, is giving himself kudos for a job well done. In testimony before Congress this week, Chu was asked whether he would give himself an “A minus” on controlling the cost of gasoline. His response? “I would I say I would give myself a little higher in that since I became Secretary of Energy, I’ve been doing everything I can to get long-term solutions.” For the record, this is the same Steven Chu who said, “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe” (which are routinely above $8 per gallon). Perhaps in that context, he does deserve an “A.”

Heritage’s Rob Bluey reports that ”the Obama Administration is overseeing a sharp decline in fossil fuel production (coal, oil, and natural gas) on federal lands, which recently hit its lowest point in nine years.” Those actions include withdrawing areas offered for 77 oil and gas leases in Utah, canceling lease sales in the Western Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic coast, delaying exploration off the coast of Alaska, keeping other resource-rich areas off limits, finalizing rules that establish more hurdles to onshore oil and natural gas production on federal lands, and withdrawing 61 oil and natural gas leases in Montana as part of a lawsuit settlement over climate change.

And then there’s the issue of the Keystone XL pipeline, which would deliver 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta, Canada, to Gulf Coast refineries. When given the chance to approve the project, President Obama flat out said “no.”

Now, though, he is attempting to have it both ways, and is expected to announce plans to fast-track the southern portion of the pipeline. But this is all for show, as his announcement won’t change anything. TransCanada told Bloomberg News that the President’s announcement won’t affect their schedule at all, where construction on the southern portion is already slated to begin in June.

If the President were truly supportive of the project, he would not have personally lobbied Senate Democrats two weeks ago to vote against an amendment that would have authorized construction of the entire pipeline. He cannot now say he is expediting anything. President Obama is merely putting political rhetoric over smart policy in order to appease his environmental base and boost his sagging poll numbers simultaneously.

According to Gallup, those who are following the issue favor building the pipeline by a 78-22 margin. And even including those who are not following the issue closely, the pipeline still has the support of 57 percent of the nation.

President Obama uses the language of “all of the above,” but his actions speak greater volumes. Rather than give themselves an “A” for gas prices and mock their opponents, the Obama Administration should immediately speed up the permitting and leasing processes, remove litigation risks, reform punitive regulations, and stop throwing billions in taxpayer money at broken companies like Solyndra and calling it an answer.

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/22/morning-bell-obama-mocks-critics-as-gas-prices-go-up/
ZRX1200 Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 45,951
If you're gonna be dumb you better be tough....


What a shame.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
I don't know how many times you're gonna have to write that!
FuzzNJ Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 06-28-2006
Posts: 13,000
Interesting. Cuts and pastes are 25% of this thread.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
FuzzNJ wrote:
Interesting. Cuts and pastes are 25% of this thread.



Not interesting. Your posts, 100% of them are garbage.
ZRX1200 Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 45,951
But only 25% are cut n paste!


Well gee golly. No public allowed at his controlled press event/publicity stunt. So we can speculate or read.

Barry azz will be as big as chewbaccas when Gippetto pulls his hand out. Too bad he has is fungercuffed.
dpnewell Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2009
Posts: 7,491
Don't know which is sadder. The lies and BS that comes out of Obama's mouth, or those who accept it as truth.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
Harper: Thanks to Obama’s “no” on Keystone, the price of Canadian crude will go up for the U.S.


The damage is done. Even if President Barack Obama decides to approve the Keystone XL pipeline at some point in the future, he already sent a message to Canada that our northern neighbor can’t rely on us as its only energy customer — and Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper heeded it.

In an interview with former U.S. Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) in D.C. yesterday, Harper explained that Canada will now seek to expand its export market to Asia and will also cease to supply oil to the United States at a discounted rate.

“Look, the very fact that a ‘no’ could even be said underscores to our country that we must diversify our energy export markets,” Harper told Harman in front of a live audience of businesspeople, scholars, diplomats, and journalists. …

Harper also told Harman that Canada has been selling its oil to the United States at a discounted price.

So not only will America be able to buy less Canadian oil even if Keystone is eventually approved, the U.S. will also have to pay more for it because the market for oilsands crude will be more competitive.

“We have taken a significant price hit by virtue of the fact that we are a captive supplier and that just does not make sense in terms of the broader interests of the Canadian economy,” Harper said. “We’re still going to be a major supplier of the United States. It will be a long time, if ever, before the United States isn’t our number one export market, but for us the United States cannot be our only export market.

“That is not in our interest, either commercially or in terms of pricing.”

“We cannot be, as a country, in a situation where our one and, in many cases, only energy partner could say no to our energy products. We just cannot be in that position.”


Harper’s comments came the same day that Barack Obama’s Super PAC, Priorities USA, released an ad that sought to tie Mitt Romney to Big Oil. The ad was itself a response to an ad underwritten by the American Energy Alliance that attacked Obama on his energy record and warned that this administration would be content to see gas prices rise as high as $9 a gallon.

This fallout from the president’s decision on Keystone XL underscores the truth that Obama does not make policy decisions in a vacuum. He’ll do what he will — and other countries will respond accordingly. Our famously “cerebral” leader might have preferred to have had more time to “sufficiently review” the project, but he didn’t. In the time frame he was given, he made his priorities perfectly clear: He cares more to retain the support of certain constituencies than to approve a project that would have created thousands of jobs and signaled to Canada that we’re committed to ensure a supply of affordable energy for ourselves. The American Energy Alliance had it right: The president’s energy policies have done nothing to secure America’s energy future. We’ll be ever more at the mercy of the oil-producing countries the president likes to blame so much.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/04/03/harper-thanks-to-obamas-no-on-keystone-the-price-of-canadian-crude-will-go-up-for-the-u-s/




So...when is he going to approve this?Frying pan
Buckwheat Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 04-15-2004
Posts: 10,974
Why do you want to kill jobs in the train/shipping business? I don't really understand why they didn't build the pipeline except that it is an election year and that puts a political spin on everything. Hell, the Alaskan Pipeline has been in place forever without major problems. Oh well. BOHICA America.
DrafterX Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
Mad
DrMaddVibe Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
Did Warren Buffett Have a Hand in the Keystone Pipeline Being Shut Down?


President Obama seems to be all about oil lately. Whether it's increasing the size of government to "crack down on oil speculators", or you know, perhaps exhibiting crony capitalism at its finest.

As the Obama administration continues to do everything it can to kill the Keystone pipeline, another entity with a rather famous (and tax loving) founder salivates over the profits it will reap transporting the crude from Canada.

Oh, and your typical corrupt everyday Senator may play a role as well.

Glenn Beck makes a case (forgive the bouts of ADD) that Obama's favorite taxpayer may have just played a part in getting the pipeline shut down.


http://tinyurl.com/cfd9gl4



Same as it ever was...same as it ever was.

Go to the link...watch the vids...match it with the info I posted a LONG time ago. Connect the dots people. It's not rocket surgery!
DrafterX Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
Mad
DrMaddVibe Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
Quid Pro Quo in Action!

More than 24 hours later, the massive fire is still smoldering near Casselton, N.D. The flames began after a grain train derailed, striking a mile-long train hauling crude oil.

With toxic, dark plumes hovering, authorities took no chances and urged residents of the town of 2,400 to get out. The evacuation order was lifted late Tuesday afternoon and residents have started to return home.

There were no causalities, but this was the third explosion in the past six months involving trains carrying crude oil from North Dakota.

In November, a 90-car train derailed in Alabama and a derailment in Quebec last July killed 47 people.

Casselton’s mayor believes the string of accidents has raised many questions.

“With that traffic, in my mind, is not a matter of if, it’s when,” Mayor Ed McConnell said.

As recently as 2008, 9,500 rail cars moved crude oil across the U.S, Tyson Slocum, the director of the Public Citizen’s Energy Program, told ABC News. By 2012, it was 230,000 rail cars.

The Federal Railroad Administration is investigating whether this particular crude oil is more volatile.

Environmental activists also question the condition of the cars used to transport oil.

“When you are looking at this kind of massive increase in shipments of flammable substances like crude oil by rail cars on railroad systems that are outdated and unsafe, it is a recipe for disaster,” Slocum said. “We’re lucky that we’ve only seen three accidents in North America this year. There could have been a lot more.”

This derailment investigation could lead to changes in how North Dakota crude oil is handled and transported.

“Moving huge amounts of flammable crude oil on out of date, unsafe rail cars is a recipe for disaster,” Slocum said.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/01/n-d-train-derailment-could-change-how-crude-oil-transported/


For humorous comments on the matter...check the below link...

http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/thats-a-lot-of-.html


Now, I can only guess what most are thinking..."what if we built that pipeline?". Given the safety record of them...I'd say a lot less damage than THAT train wreck that Warren Buffet caused!

Wake up people. Quid Pro Quo is alive and well. See it in action. Where is your media now?
DrafterX Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
yep... been thinking about this too..... Mellow
jpotts Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 06-14-2006
Posts: 28,811
While this is all nice and fine, pipelines not leaking or exploding are environmental hazards. I say this because...because they are. So there!
DrafterX Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 78,651
jpotts wrote:
While this is all nice and fine, pipelines not leaking or exploding are environmental hazards. I say this because...because they are. So there!



I think they're more worried about the mooses bumping there heads on it or somethin..... Mellow
DrMaddVibe Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
jpotts wrote:
While this is all nice and fine, pipelines not leaking or exploding are environmental hazards. I say this because...because they are. So there!



So with the "environmentalists" you're damned if you play their style of ball and damned if you don't? Is that what I'm hearing?

What we have is a billionaire that can't pay his own taxes playing railroad tycoon because he has hedged his bets on pipelines with buying railroads and politician's votes. Boiled down we see the poor decision making for all it's worth. Playing willy-nilly with a crumbling private infrastructure that can barely keep up with payloads is now overburdened with heavier trains...ever see a potholed highway in Michigan? Sure you have. All of those cars being transported out beating the snot out of a paved road. Corporations taking advantage of taxpayers. They get their sweetheart taxbreaks and incentives while John Q. Sixpack has to dig deeper in his wallet to pay more. I realize I'm bounding around all over the place but they had their discussions...they made their deals...they're makin' da cheddah...and the accidents are piling up. There will be more too. Go to the ABC link and watch the video...go to the other and see the pic of the damage...read the comments as well. People aren't getting the fair shake. Corporations are taking and taking and taking. CEO pay? Yeah...it's going up too. People see it. If they don't let's make it obvious for them.
Brewha Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 8,049
All this arguing over oil pipelines is destroying the pre owned Volvo market.

Just say'n
DrMaddVibe Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
Brewha wrote:
All this arguing over oil pipelines is destroying the pre owned Volvo market.

Just say'n


I drive a vulva.Angel
jetblasted Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,508
Well, we made a stop in Albequerque
She musta thought
I was a real cool jerk
Got off the train, and put her hands up
Lookin' so good, I couldn't let her go
But I just couldn't tell her so

Brewha Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 8,049
DrMaddVibe wrote:
I drive a vulva.Angel

Used?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
Brewha wrote:
Used?


I've driven new...I've driven used. I prefer used.

That "trick" your girl does...that makes your toes curl...I taught her that!

You're welcome.
wheelrite Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 11-01-2006
Posts: 50,119
Brewha wrote:
All this arguing over oil pipelines is destroying the pre owned Volvo market.

Just say'n


Volvos suck,,
Brewha Offline
#49 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 8,049
DrMaddVibe wrote:
I've driven new...I've driven used. I prefer used.

That "trick" your girl does...that makes your toes curl...I taught her that!

You're welcome.

"And in your dreams, you can see your self as a prophet, saving the world . . . . "
DrMaddVibe Offline
#50 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 46,782
...and pointing out the obvious!


NTSB head: Oil tanker rail 'safety has been compromised'

The recent spate of accidents in the U.S. and Canada involving trains carrying crude oil demonstrates that “far too often, safety has been compromised,” the head of the top U.S. transportation safety agency said today.

The amount of crude oil transported on railroads — shipments that frequently pass through the Chicago area — has more than quadrupled since 2005, and some of it is especially volatile, said National Transportation Safety Board Chairman Deborah Hersman.

That extra volatility increases the likelihood of a violent fire in a derailment, Hersman said. The transport of ethanol, the most frequently shipped hazardous material in the railway system, has also boomed, she said.

“With so much flammable liquid carried by rail, it is incumbent upon the rail industry, shippers, and regulators to ensure that these hazardous materials are being moved safely,” Hersman said. She spoke in Washington D.C. at the opening of a two-day forum on improving the safety of crude oil and ethanol shipments.

The NTSB believes that older models of the type of tank car used to transport crude oil and ethanol, known as the DOT-111, are not safe to carry hazardous liquids.

Trains carrying cars like these can be seen nearly every day passing through Chicago and suburbs. Two Chicago aldermen proposed banning the railroad tank cars from the city, but that effort has stalled.

Hersman cited the loss of lives and the destruction that occurred after fiery derailments like the one on July 6, 2013 in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, and on June 19, 2009 in Cherry Valley, Ill., near Rockford.

In the Cherry Valley incident, 15 DOT-111s carrying ethanol derailed. The leaking fuel ignited, causing a massive fireball. One woman was fatally burned and 600 homes within a half-mile radius were evacuated.

The NTSB concluded in a report on that derailment that the design of the older DOT-111 cars made them “susceptible to damage and catastrophic loss of hazardous material.”

Testifying Tuesday at the NTSB forum were representatives from the petroleum and rail industries, who discussed tank car design, crash worthiness, and railroad operations. Also testifying were researchers who reviewed safety systems and ways to reduce risks.

The NTSB recommended in 2009 that all new and existing tank cars in crude oil and ethanol service be equipped with additional safety design features, including enhanced puncture resistance systems, top fittings protection and bottom outlet valves that remain closed during accidents.

Two federal agencies, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and the Federal Railroad Administration, are developing a proposed rule to update the federal design standards for DOT-111 tank cars.

Although the petroleum and rail industry and federal regulators agree that new standards are needed, they are divided over whether the requirements should be more stringent than a voluntary industry standard adopted in 2011.

Karen Darch, the village president of Barrington and co-chair of a coalition of suburbs calling for tighter standards on the DOT-111s, said Tuesday she is pleased the NTSB is focusing attention on the problem.

Darch and Aurora Mayor Tom Weisner have expressed alarm as ever-increasing crude oil shipments move through their communities.

But the government’s ongoing testing, quest for consensus among industry and regulators and failure to issue a new tank car rule is “hampering progress toward greater safety,” Darch said.

“Industry does not want to invest in new tank cars until (the U.S. Department of Transportation) has the standard out,” Darch said. “It cannot come quickly enough for us.”


http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-04-22/news/chi-ntsb-oil-tanker-rail-safety-20140422_1_ntsb-hersman-railroad-tank-cars
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages123>