Canada looks to sell oil and gas to Asia due to Obamas delay on Keystone Pipleine

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

dieseltech09

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
4,047
Reaction score
211
Location
Yukon, Oklahoma, United States
Guess Obama thinks America doesnt need to jobs or money the Keystone project would have created

http://www.canada.com/Canada+will+push+join+trade+group+sell+Asia/5706126/story.html

Prime Minister Stephen Harper signalled a shift in his government's economic and trade policies Sunday, announcing Canada will apply to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership and will further look to sell its oil and gas to Asian countries following American delays in approving the Keystone XL pipeline.

Speaking to reporters Sunday at the APEC summit, Harper said he's disappointed with the Obama administration's decision to delay a ruling on the Keystone XL pipeline and consider rerouting it, but believes the project will proceed because it's critical for both the Canadian and American economies.

The Obama administration announced Thursday it's delaying a final ruling on the Keystone XL oilsands pipeline until after the November 2012 presidential election while the government looks to reroute it.

The $7-billion Keystone XL would carry up to 830,000 barrels of oil per day from northern Alberta to refineries on the Gulf Coast of Texas.
 

HMFIC

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
11,193
Reaction score
11
Location
Tulsa
This sounds very bad for us especially considering the Prime Minister's decision.

As usual, it doesn't appear that politicians are looking out for the best interests of the United States. They're only concerned with getting themselves re-elected...
 

angsniper

Sharpshooter
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
1,849
Reaction score
0
Location
Yukon
This sounds very bad for us especially considering the Prime Minister's decision.

As usual, it doesn't appear that politicians are looking out for the best interests of the United States. They're only concerned with getting themselves re-elected...

No surprise there!
 

Werewolf

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
3,471
Reaction score
7
Location
OKC

tRidiot

Perpetually dissatisfied
Special Hen
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
19,523
Reaction score
12,712
Location
Bartlesville
Does anyone think there are legitimate environmental concerns associated with this project? I'm playing devil's advocate here, thinking of the Alaskan pipeline. The oil companies love to show the picture of the polar bear walking on the pipe, but how many of you guys have ever actually been to Alaska and seen if/where there are real issues with damage to the environment. And I'm not talking just about potential leaks or whatever, I'm talking about the damage from heavy equipment and ingress/egress for proper maintenance of such a huge project, not just during construction, but for decades after?

Seriously, anyone? I'm curious here, asking to learn, not trying to stir the pot. I believe we have a responsibility to protect the environment from wanton and careless damage in the name of economic prosperity or simple comfort and convenience, but if that impact can be minimized, then I'm much more inclined to accept the small risk.
 

Weatherby

Sharpshooter
Joined
May 6, 2010
Messages
1,370
Reaction score
11
Location
Mustang
The only thing the obamanation wants is for us all to freeze to death in the dark so him and his socialist buddies can turn around and make the survivors even more dependent on government.

Oh, I thought it was because they were worried about contaminating a source of drinking water that supplies 3 states. Thanks for clearing up the real motivation behind this. How do you reckon he got Nebraska's republican governor in on this?
 

LightningCrash

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
11,886
Reaction score
105
Location
OKC
Does anyone think there are legitimate environmental concerns associated with this project? I'm playing devil's advocate here, thinking of the Alaskan pipeline. The oil companies love to show the picture of the polar bear walking on the pipe, but how many of you guys have ever actually been to Alaska and seen if/where there are real issues with damage to the environment. And I'm not talking just about potential leaks or whatever, I'm talking about the damage from heavy equipment and ingress/egress for proper maintenance of such a huge project, not just during construction, but for decades after?

Seriously, anyone? I'm curious here, asking to learn, not trying to stir the pot. I believe we have a responsibility to protect the environment from wanton and careless damage in the name of economic prosperity or simple comfort and convenience, but if that impact can be minimized, then I'm much more inclined to accept the small risk.

From what I have read, the diluted bitumen is shipped through the pipe with naptha. It appears that cleaning up naptha is troublesome.
 

dennishoddy

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
84,554
Reaction score
61,831
Location
Ponca City Ok
From what I have read, the diluted bitumen is shipped through the pipe with naptha. It appears that cleaning up naptha is troublesome.
The main concern is contents of the pipeline polluting the ogallala aquifer that supplies water for massive irrigation systems all over the central part of the US. The pipeline is currently routed right through the area.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom