Why is Obama Delaying the Keystone Oil Pipeline Until After the 2012 Elections?

Why is Obama Delaying the Keystone Oil Pipeline Until After the 2012 Elections?

 

Because its too big an issue to rush..

http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...ing-shales-economic-environmental-impact.html

 

Thats alot of water your carrying for Obama if your going to defame yourself by making such a statement on the most studied pipeline in history.

 

Who told you this is the most studied pipeline in history?

 

You dont have google? Serch for "most studied pipeline in history" and you will get millions of results, no doubt thousands of relevent ones. But the State Department and the Department of Interior do not dispute this fact.

I guess Obama didnt get the result he wanted in the study so he just trashed it and orderd another. http://www.echopress.com/event/article/id/90209/group/News/ The decesion? After the 2012 elections which, of course, means hes allready made up his mind and knows of the political fallout. I thought "we cant wait" for jobs. Evidently we can on this one huh?




.

 

I read your link... I don't see anything about how long it has been planned or how long they studied it ... and I can't find anything any where else.

I am more familiar with TAPLINE and the East West Pipeline.. and they took on average 4 years of study and planning.

 

He is putting the pipeline above the payroll tax cut extension


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/07/obama-pledges-rigorous-review-keystone-pipeline/

 

Good! Let the American people see him veto it! It has bipartisan support among congress and among labor unions and the chamber of commerce. The Enviromental lobby, however, thats another story.

 

I think the words "most studied and analyzed pipline in history" is enough for me. A simple google search proves this to be true from numerous sources. No one denies this. The fact that you cant accept a fact that everyone claims and no one disputes shows that your bias is beyond reason and your not worth my time in this forum. Contradiction is not Arguement.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y"]Argument Clinic - YouTube[/ame]

 

"Most studied pipeline in history" is meaningless tripe.. Its marketing talk.

Says who? TransCanada Corp?

If the Keystone XL is the right thing to do.. it will still be the right thing next year.

 

Meanwhile millions are out of work. I guess jobs are only legit if they dont annoy your green buddies that your funneling millions of taxpayers dollars to and granting a zero tax status in return for campaign donations. Meanwhile his Department of the interior was held in contempt of court for ignoring a judicial order on the oil meritorium as oil riggs relocated to Brazil where George Soros invested in Petrobus. But I'm sure hes just got a concern for the enviroment.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpque...&refer=&r_n=hr140p1.112&item=&&&sel=TOC_9552&
Thirty-three months, two State Department studies and 208,000 public comments later, TransCanada is still waiting. On current trend, the company will be lucky to get its permit by January, or after 40 months.


I'm willing to bet that if they could magically warp oil from one area to another without posibility of any enviromental impact you would still be against it so as long as its being burned in a car.


.

 

Boom and bust would be worse.. Remember Texas in the 1980s?

Do you know why BP had that blow out? They were cutting corners on safety.. They had farmed out all their safety audit obligations to many many companies all over the country with NO reporting protocols.. They designed it that way so NOBODY could hold them accountable.

The clots blamed Obama for Deepwater Horizon.. Keystone can be a huge opportunity that will generate hundreds of billions or it can be a disaster.. but when some clowns say.. "most studied pipeline in history".. without any documentation.. you are being shined.

You can't jam this...

 

Jam? 33 months isnt jamming. The only people resisting this pipeline is the White House and Enviromentalists.

 

We need jobs now. Obama shows he does not care about the people or jobs. He thinks this will help his election. He is making a big mistake. I hope the GOP make this a campaign issue.

 

Then get behind the jobs bill..The Keystone development is more than quick jobs....

 

You mean the government inspectors were not doing their job.

 

How does the jobs bill create jobs?

 

What jobs bill? You mean Obama giving jobs as pay back to unions. That is more politics and will not help the average person.

 

he will have to approve of the oil pipeline to damage the environment and further perpetuate americas depedence on oil but it will cost him his base

so he must wait until 2012

we cannot blame the president the republicans have systemically made americans addicted to oil as they have with fast food and other bad things

 

Oh Jesus.. Don't you know anything at all about the oil business or offshore drilling?

Do you know anything at all about the history of BP?

Oil rigs are inspected routinely, by engineering firms, government agencies, equipment manufacturers and classification societies. All are a snapshot in time – like an annual car inspection. Components can earn a passing grade only to break down days later.

 

Yes, for years republicans have made the horrible descision to let people do what they want to themselves in the name of individual liberty and freedom. The all knowing democrats knows whats best for the people and thus they must conform to the state for their own protection. Tell em comrade! How dare the republicans claim that we have the individual right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Every good comrade knows that they only have the right to life (only if the democrats deem it good for the state), liberty (only if the democrats deem it good for the state), and the pursuit of happiness (unless you fail to which you are entitled to other peoples happiness).

 

Proponents of the dangerous Keystone XL project claim that construction of the 1,700-mile tar-sands pipeline from Canada to Texas will create tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of much-needed jobs across the country. "Jobs for the 99%!" proclaims a website funded by the American Petroleum Institute (API). The Wall Street Journal promises "13,000 union jobs." On the House floor today, Rep. Alan Nunnelee (R-Miss.) claimed the pipeline will create "20,000 high-wage construction jobs." Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) says the pipeline will "create 14,600 jobs in Illinois." The U.S. Chamber of Commerce claims the project will create "more than 250,000 permanent jobs." "U.S. jobs supported by Canadian oil sands development could grow from 21,000 jobs today to 465,000 jobs by 2035," said API Executive Vice President Marty Durbin.

Accepting these figures, reporters like CNN's Steve Hargreaves, NPR's Ari Shapiro, and The New York Times' Kirk Johnson have portrayed the battle over the tar-sands pipeline as one of economic benefits versus environmental fears.

However, these tremendous-seeming jobs claims are based entirely on a report by the Perryman Group [PDF], commissioned by the pipeline's owner TransCanada, whose results have been described as "dead wrong" and "meaningless" by Council on Foreign Relations fellow Michael Levi and environmental economist Andrew Leach, neither of whom oppose the construction of the pipeline.

The only independent analysis conducted of the American job-creation potential of the Keystone XL pipeline finds that between 500 and 1,400 temporary construction jobs [PDF] will be created, with a negative long-term economic impact as gas prices rise in the Midwest and environmental costs are borne:



Why this tremendous discrepancy? Examining TransCanada's business operations, the Cornell Global Labor Institute report finds that TransCanada has already purchased most of the steel it intends to use for the pipeline from India; that most of the work will be conducted by people already employed by TransCanada; and that the Perryman Group included already-completed pipeline projects in its job-creation estimates.



"The operating costs for KXL are very minimal," the Cornell Global Labor Institute report [PDF] explains, "and based on the figures provided by TransCanada for the Canadian section of the pipeline, the new permanent U.S. pipeline jobs in the U.S. number as few as 50."

Unlike the Perryman Group's "opaque" methodology, the Cornell report explains its calculations with full transparency [PDF].

http://www.grist.org/oil/2011-11-06-fact-check-keystone-xl-tar-sands-pipeline-will-not-create-jobs

 

Think Progress???? http://thinkprogress.org/green/2011...one-xl-tar-sands-pipeline-isnt-a-job-creator/ http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/about/ Oh, man you got me now. The irrefutable think tank of think progress has spoken. All conservatives trimble before their scientific analysis. Perhaps the Unions and the chamber of commerce are correct on this one? Its not often that they agree but in this case they certainly do.




.

 

Yep... Sometimes is pays NOT to get carried away.. Isn't it odd that TransCanada isn't keen tolay thier pipeline West across Canada and create jobs for Canadians?

Proponents of the dangerous Keystone XL project claim that construction of the 1,700-mile tar-sands pipeline from Canada to Texas will create tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of much-needed jobs across the country. "Jobs for the 99%!" proclaims a website funded by the American Petroleum Institute (API).

The Wall Street Journal promises "13,000 union jobs." On the House floor today, Rep. Alan Nunnelee (R-Miss.) claimed the pipeline will create "20,000 high-wage construction jobs." Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) says the pipeline will "create 14,600 jobs in Illinois."

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce claims the project will create "more than 250,000 permanent jobs." "U.S. jobs supported by Canadian oil sands development could grow from 21,000 jobs today to 465,000 jobs by 2035," said API Executive Vice President Marty Durbin.

Accepting these figures, reporters like CNN's Steve Hargreaves, NPR's Ari Shapiro, and The New York Times' Kirk Johnson have portrayed the battle over the tar-sands pipeline as one of economic benefits versus environmental fears.

However, these tremendous-seeming jobs claims are based entirely on a report by the Perryman Group [PDF], commissioned by the pipeline's owner TransCanada, whose results have been described as "dead wrong" and "meaningless" by Council on Foreign Relations fellow Michael Levi and environmental economist Andrew Leach, neither of whom oppose the construction of the pipeline.

The only independent analysis conducted of the American job-creation potential of the Keystone XL pipeline finds that between 500 and 1,400 temporary construction jobs [PDF] will be created, with a negative long-term economic impact as gas prices rise in the Midwest and environmental costs are borne:

 

Who wrote the independant analysis void of your above post?

AAAAAHHHHH. I SEEEEEEE. http://thinkprogress.org/green/2011...one-xl-tar-sands-pipeline-isnt-a-job-creator/ I guess it doesent count if the study is commissioned by the pipeline and reviewed by the DOE DOS and DOI. It only counts when its commissioned by think progress and completed by whatever college department that would find results in their favor. Which isnt surprising once you look up who they chose. http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/