Post by Ryan Maue
Friday evening news dump — in this case, the United States State Department drops a big one and essentially green-lights a “controversial” pipeline project. The Keystone XL project Final Environmental Impact Statement is not a “decision” on the final construction of the project, but a key hurdle in the process.
“The $13 billion Keystone XL Pipeline cleared a key bureaucratic hurdle on Friday even as environmental groups vowed to continue fighting the project.” Most of the news is covered everywhere on the web, i.e. MarketWatch
With that state of emergency declared with Hurricane Irene, the organized criminal disobedience syndicate has decided to put their “sit-ins” on hold, and return for an even bigger response next week, or something.
I thought the Obama administration was going to follow science when making its decisions, something the previous administration did not do as we have been told by the liberal media for several years now. In their August 3 Letter from Scientific Experts to President Obama, the “Who’s Who” of the left-wing climate science establishment argues:
“The tar sands are a huge pool of carbon, but one that does not make sense to exploit. It takes a lot of energy to extract and refine this resource into useable fuel, and the mining is environmentally destructive. Adding this on top of conventional fossil fuels will leave our children and grandchildren a climate system with consequences that are out of their control. It makes no sense to build a pipeline system that would practically guarantee extensive exploitation of this resource.”
The Green movement is apoplectic, including the journalists that peddle their wares. That’s where I want to focus a later post, on how journalists are “reporting” the news.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Amazing…
There seem to be people who think the “evil oil companies” just smack pipelines down willy nilly with no concern about environmental issues or anything.
$13 BILLION to lay some pipe. If you think that’s all just pipe and labor, then you don’t understand the industry at all.
And, as always, if it annoys the dedicated, deluded Greens, then I’m all for it.
Yup Ryan, as you predicted in our chat, Friday at 5PM on a day where a hurricane is leading the news and clearing out DC and NYC. Perfect timing.
“Whether to approve this pipeline is the most important environmental decision President Obama will make before the election. If he sides with greedy oil companies instead of people and the climate, he will essentially be urging a huge part of his base to sit out the election.”
===============
If, after I depart this vale, you ever remember me and have thought to please my ghost, forgive some sinner and wink your eye at some homely girl.
H. L. Mencken
I believe that it is better to tell the truth than to lie. I believe that it is better to be free than to be a slave. And I believe that it is better to know than be ignorant.
H. L. Mencken
Hillary Rodham Clinton is in charge of the above mentioned Dept. of State, IIRC? Pipe baby pipe!
Cheers,
Big Dave
You’d think they would wise up by now. Everybody knows to watch the news wires on Friday night for news the Administration wants to bury. When there is a controversial bill up for a vote you know that it will come on a weekend night. Especially if it’s a holiday or there is a natural disaster in progress.
Green apoplexy! Much more to come. Often fatal.
Given the scale of the available resources and similar deposits worldwide what should we now say about the concept of peak oil ?
Well we all know that the econuts will be trying to sabotage the construction as soon as it starts. Hopefully their EV’s will run down before they close enough to do any damage.
I just heard some green heads pop!
Why is the country with the largest fossil fuel supplies buying “conflict oil” from Arabs?
Did you know that UT just a few years ago did a study for Canada and built a pilot refinery showing how gasoline and diesel could be produced from coal by a modified “Fischer-Tropsch” process at under $30 a barrel in production.
And the USA oil sands can be produced with lower emissions than standard oil production.
And thanks to Bush the Tampa Electric demonstration project for clean coal has shown the way to higher efficiency, cleaner burn coal power plants. The plant is online right now.
So I ask again, why does the USA buy “conflict oil”???
Stephen Wilde:
As I tried pointing out on the other Oilsands thread: Originally development of the Sands was prohibitively expensive. However, after a lengthy stretch with oil prices high, technology has been developed to make Oilsands development cost effective. By inflating the price of oil the OPEC nations have effectively killed their own monopoly and market, and exposed more resources than have even been used yet.
Peak oil was always a myth, and the believers just keep redefining it. There is more Oil in the Oilsands in Alberta than there ever was in the middle east. It’s now cost effective to bring to market. Technology developed for the Oilsands will be used to exploit Shale resources later.
True believers just use words like “resorting to” and “open pit mining” and “environmental destruction”, because they have no actual knowledge.
More information about the Keystone Pipeline project here…
“The U.S. $13 billion Keystone pipeline system will play an important role in linking a secure and growing supply of Canadian crude oil with the largest refining markets in the United States, significantly improving North American security supply.”
Sounds good to me :^)
One would think that after the McChrystal saga, that even Hansen would use more tact when speaking about the President, of course Obama did grease the wheels for BP at the EPA so that the Macondo blowout could happen so for once Hansen is right. Funny how the :”greenest” people always seem to do the most real damage to the environment.
Actually I thought the Time article was quite balanced. I just wish that the people opposing the line would realize the truth of the matter. The oil is shipped to the coast refineries, because they have the technology to refine the heavy oil. That is why the Venzuelian oil is shipped to these refineries. And yes, China has already committed more then 10 billion dollars to the oil sands, so no matter what, this resource will be used.
But really, let’s get to the truth of the matter. oil is going to be a major source of energy for still quite some time. It has an energy density that makes it to good not to use. Also, to get all of the new renewable resources up and running in a pratical, cost efficient manner will take upwards of 20 years. It really is a catch 22, as we need energy now to build the energy and transmission infrastructure of tomorrow. It will not magically appear, no matter how many stars we wish upon.
The ecocentrics post starts with: “For the past week, hundreds of activists—from celebrities and scientists to ordinary citizens—have come to Washington to protest the proposed Keystone XL pipeline.”
Hundreds? Mind boggling.
I will also mention there are plans to get more Alberta crude moving East and West as well as South.
West….
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/enbridge-touts-support-others-call-it-hollow/article2140101/
http://www.northerngateway.ca/
And East…..
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/critics-target-enbridge-plan-to-reverse-pipeline-flow/article2142484/
http://www.pmpl.com/about.php
I think another thing that is being missed, is that the money you guys in the states would pour into us here in Canada for our oil would create vast economic opportunities for most of your economy, Don’t forget, with 80% of Canadians living within 200 miles of our common border, and our Loony higher then your Buck, us Canucks just love cross border shopping, gambling, holidays, etc.
tarpon @ur momisugly 6:06 wonders why Americans are buying oil from Arab countries. I guess it’s because most people don’t know the source of their oil or anything about either the Arab countries or Nigeria or Venezuela or other countries from which it comes. There is a excellent discussion about the oil industry and ethics in Ezra Levant’s book, Ethical Oil. It won a business book award in Canada.
I’ve just found what I think is a new website EthicalOil.org.
I’ve left my comment on the Time blogsite. Thanks for the heads-up.
IanM
I just read the article in MarketWatch ahhh the irony is just too much. When one of the protesters was interviewed she said “I’m worried about climate change,” Romer said in an interview with MarketWatch, after being asked why she took part in demonstrations. By routing fuel from the massive Canadian oil sands projects, the project will ultimately create a “huge amount of carbon and it’s non-sustainable,” she said.
I’m sure the reporter must have been crying in his coffee as he went on to write – Romer wrote a detailed blog about her 53 hours in jail after her arrest on Aug. 20. She said she endured chilling temperatures in a lock-up with 20 other women with no beds or chairs. They used the wrappers from sandwiches in an attempt to keep warm.
Toooooooo funny. Keep those heaters on eh. Cheers from Canada.
Do not miss the oppertunity to rub it in, that the oilsands are a Natural oil spill. The reverse eco-speak of “What kind of planet hating blankity blank would not want this spill cleaned up” Seems to make econazis heads explode.
News: if oil is sold anywhere, it doesn’t matter either who sold it or who bought it. It’s fungible.
That means if you don’t buy from one source, you must buy from another. Now other customers (guided by price signals, etc) switch from your new supplier to your old. Net change is indistinguishable from none.
Personally, I’d prefer the oil to be refined in Alberta as the gulf oil refineries are too much at the mercy of hurricanes. Still, if it makes Obama supporters stay home in 2012, I’m all for it. What I can’t understand is the discrepancy in costs between the Time article and that given above – was the Time $7 billion the Canadian dollar cost?
This is getting hideous.
“There is an estimated 400 gigatons of carbon sequestered in the Albertan oil sands, and burning all of it could raise the atmospheric concentration of carbon by 200 ppm—enough to push the climate well into the danger zone. Essentially, as the NASA climatologist and activist James Hansen argues, tapping the oil sands would mean “game over” for the climate.”
Hansen is remarkable. A man with the chutzpah to say on his official NASA web site that the hard part of climate science is cherrypicking the data to get the results you want will do anything.
Regards,
Ric