Keystone Pipeline

[Brian4Liberty]

If this pipeline increases the supply of gasoline over what it would be without this pipeline, then that will have the exact same effect on the price of gasoline everywhere. It's not like it will make it go down in one country and up in another.

Nice hypothesis. Doesn't work that way in reality.

 

[erowe1]

..

 

[eduardo89]

i would like to think that american people get something out of this , like cheaper gasoline , instead of paying 50 cents more .

can someone tell me how this is good for the american people.

Why would Americans pay more for gasoline?

 

[ILUVRP]

Why would Americans pay more for gasoline?

the refiners will be refining the tar sands and exporting the product, while still exporting 117 million gallons a day .

less supply , same demand .

 

[eduardo89]

the refiners will be refining the tar sands and exporting the product, while still exporting 117 million gallons a day .

less supply , same demand .

Why would there be less supply? That makes absolutely no sense. How would expanding an existing pipeline, therefore making delivering oil to the refineries quicker, cheaper, and safer somehow reduce supply of gasoline?

 

[torchbearer]

Why would there be less supply? That makes absolutely no sense. How would expanding an existing pipeline, therefore making delivering oil to the refineries quicker, cheaper, and safer somehow reduce supply of gasoline?

maybe the quality of crude would be less, thus less products could be made from it?
the facility can only make so many burn throughs at a time. lesser crude would produce fewer products per cycle.
Gulf of mexico oil is very high quality.

 

[Southron]

If this pipeline uses eminent domain, I can't think of any reason to support it. The claims of all the jobs that will be created seems dubious to me at best. Perhaps jobs will be created constructing the pipeline, but jobs will be lost trucking the stuff.

Combine that with threats that Canada will have it refined in China if "we don't act and act now" leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[eduardo89]

maybe the quality of crude would be less, thus less products could be made from it?
the facility can only make so many burn throughs at a time. lesser crude would produce fewer products per cycle.
Gulf of mexico oil is very high quality.

That is true, but Gulf oil is still going to be processed there. It's not like theres anywhere else for Gulf oil to be processed into gasoline. Mexico has no refineries, Colombia has no refineries, Venezuela has no refineries...

 

[torchbearer]

That is true, but Gulf oil is still going to be processed there. It's not like theres anywhere else for Gulf oil to be processed into gasoline. Mexico has no refineries, Colombia has no refineries, Venezuela has no refineries...

which brings me to a previous question- i don't see how they can refine anymore. they've been at max production.

 

[helmuth_hubener]

Just randomly picking a position, yes or no, gives you a 50% chance of it being the correct stand.

Trenchant.

But in this case, both positions are incorrect. By picking one, you have a 100% chance of being incorrect.

But I don't want to settle for that. And I don't see why we should.

Yes, set your sights higher than guaranteed failure.

What would you want politicians to say when they're asked about this?

I care so little about this (what politicians may say when asked about the Keystone Pipeline), it would likely boggle your mind.

"I have no position on the Keystone Pipeline." Well, when it comes up for a vote to force Obama to approve it, will you vote yes or no? "I have no position on how I will vote." I don't get that.

Are you a member of Congress, E.? If not, why are you agonizing about how you will vote on this bill?

 

[Danke]

Mexico has no refineries, Colombia has no refineries, Venezuela has no refineries...

What is the reason more oil producing countries don't have refineries?

 

[eduardo89]

What is the reason more oil producing countries don't have refineries?

$$$$

PS: Colombia has refineries, but they don't refine oil.

 

[osan]

The Keystone Pipeline never seems to come up here. But other Republicans always want to talk about it. Do people here have any thoughts about it or care either way?

I know it's mainly just a talking point. But it seems like we ought to have something to contribute to the discussion.

Two words.

Eminent.

Domain.

 

[fr33]

I've been run over by the eminent domain monster several times. None of them were quite as big as the Keystone project though. All you can do is hire a lawyer and fight for more money but you won't get nearly what you want. There's no stopping it. They'll screw up your property and ruin the topsoil for years to come. It's not your property though. You're just renting it. It's theirs.

 

[fr33]

I heard a story the other day about Keystone. Down by Houston it's already in place. Hell, down there they've got all kinds of pipelines to the refineries. Anyways, a property owner was offered about 100k at first. He fought for more and instead his property was condemned and he got about 1/4 of the original offer. I can't prove it happened. Just what I was told. My experience is that you can get a little more than what they initially offer if you fight it in the courts.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Sometimes I wish more people would go the "sovereign citizen" route and do to the statist armed robbers what they would do to any other robber who tried to steal their land...

 

[ILUVRP]

Why would there be less supply? That makes absolutely no sense. How would expanding an existing pipeline, therefore making delivering oil to the refineries quicker, cheaper, and safer somehow reduce supply of gasoline?

the refiners can only refine so much oil/tar sands , the refined tar sands will be shipped out of the country , the refiners are exporting 117 million gallons of gasoline now and that will go on . less refined gasoline for america , up goes the price / gal

any excess US oil will be stored in okla.

let canada ( which i like very much ) build a refiner in ND or even canada .

how can this be so hard to understand .

 

[eduardo89]

the refiners can only refine so much oil/tar sands , the refined tar sands will be shipped out of the country , the refiners are exporting 117 million gallons of gasoline now and that will go on . less refined gasoline for america , up goes the price / gal

any excess US oil will be stored in okla.

let canada ( which i like very much ) build a refiner in ND or even canada .

how can this be so hard to understand .

What makes you so certain that the refined tar sands will be shipped out of the country instead of replacing other refined imports?

 

[ILUVRP]

i hate to put up links but this one is right on . if everyone would read it it may help .


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...z0T3oknfbPAit1BTQ&sig2=j_2LqkzDugWynueEwBRIvQ

 

[eduardo89]

i hate to put up links but this one is right on . if everyone would read it it may help .


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...z0T3oknfbPAit1BTQ&sig2=j_2LqkzDugWynueEwBRIvQ

Midwest refineries won't necessarily see reductions in deliver of tar sand oils. The proposed expansion of the existing Keystone pipeline is to add additional capacity because of the increased production of Albertan tar sand oils, not to divert existing production.