Again Why The Keystone XL Pipeline is a BAD IDEA.
NOTE: This is a guest post from Alex Ralston, Online Organizer at the Center for Biological Diversity.
Less than two weeks after President Barack Obama rightly rejected the Keystone XL pipeline, a bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate that would allow Congress to approve the pipeline.
There are plenty of good reasons to reject the pipeline; here are five of them:
1. It will spill. The State Department’s review of the project clearly says Keystone XL will spill oil. Not may, but will. The existing Keystone pipeline has already leaked 14 times since it began operating in June 2010, including one leak that dumped 21,000 gallons of tar-sands crude. Keystone XL would carry up to 35 million gallons of oil every day — so any leak has the potential to be massive.
2. It won’t be a major job producer. The State Department estimates that Keystone XL will result in only 20 permanent, operational jobs in the U.S and 2,500 to 4,650 temporary jobs. What’s more, after Keystone XL oil makes it to Texas, much of it will be exported beyond U.S. borders without paying U.S. taxes – never benefitting our economy or slacking our thirst for oil.
3. It will threaten vast pristine landscapes, rivers and wildlife. Running between Alberta, Canada and the Gulf Coast of Texas, Keystone XL will cross nearly 1,750 water bodies, like rivers and steams, and risk contaminating the Ogallala Aquifer (the drinking water source for millions of people). It would also cut through the heart of prime wildlife habitat, including homes for at least 20 imperiled species.
4. It will expand the destruction of Canada’s boreal forests. Tar sands oil is the dirtiest oil on Earth. Producing oil from sand has terrible impacts on the environment, including the destruction of tens of thousands of acres of boreal forest, pollution of hundreds of millions of gallons of water — each barrel of oil from tar sands requires three barrels of water to produce.
5. It will dramatically deepen our addiction to climate-killing fossil fuels. Greenhouse gas emissions from tar-sands development are two to three times higher than those from conventional oil and gas operations. That’s exactly the wrong direction for reversing global warming. Scientists tell us we must reduce atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide to 350 parts per million or less. Today, it’s 391 ppm, and Keystone XL would certainly drive that up and worsen the devastating effects of global warming — from rising oceans to melting glaciers to extreme and dangerous weather events – that we’re already seeing around the world.
Simply put, it’s not in our interest to court oil spills, worsen climate change and jeopardize rivers, streams, drinking water, people and wildlife. It’s time to tell Congress to stand up to Big Oil and Gas and reject Keystone XL, permanently.
Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/5-reasons-keystone-xl-pipeline-is...
Top Opinion
-
2468 2012/02/25 21:21:45
http://thinkprogress.org/romm...
Which numbers are ommitted to make their argument stick?
Sorry, but I refuse to deal with punditry when I research, I've learned that the original sources are not so visually stimulating or full of zeal and rhetoric but the numbers are not skewed.
Haven't you seen the graph of the pipelines already operating in our nation. The aquafir mentioned by your progressive news has dozens extending across it already.
oops forgot the comparison
•TransCanada’s 2008 Permit Application states “Existing markets for Canadian heavy crude, principally PADD II [U.S. Midwest], are currently oversupplied, resulting in price discounting for Canadian heavy crude oil. Access to the USGC [U.S. Gulf Coast] via the Keystone XL Pipeline is expected to strengthen Canadian crude oil pricing in [the Midwest] by removing this oversupply. This is expected to increase the price of heavy crude to the equivalent cost of imported crude. The resultant increase in the price of heavy crude is estimated to provide an increase in annual revenue to the Canadian producing industry in 2013 of US $2 billion to US $3.9 billion.”
•Independent analysis of these figures found this would increase per-gallon prices by 20 cents/gallon in the Midwest.
•According to an independent analysis U.S. farmers, who spent $12.4 billion on fuel in 2009 could see expenses rise to $15 billion or higher in 2012 or 2013 if the pipeline goes through. At least $500 million of the added expense would come from the Canadian market manipulation.
http://www.tarsandsaction.org...
We already have a pipeline and it seems to be doing just fine. Why not another one?
It will create many temp jobs that could last for up to 10 years. What full time job can give you that promise?
We are watching other countries drilling very close to us and getting oil and then selling it to us, but bama won't let us off shore drill. Does that make sense to you?
The arguments you show are spun so much, I'm surprised you don't get dizzy reading them.
Try again. This time, try some truth.
Cost to operate a Chevy Volt
Eric Bolling (Fox Business Channel's Follow the Money) test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors.
For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.
Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9 gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles. It will take you 4 1/2 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time) would be20 mph.
According to General Motors, the Volt battery hold 16 kwh of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery.
The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned so I looked up what I pay for electricity.
I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh.
16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery.
$18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery.
Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine only that gets 32 mpg.
$3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg =...
Cost to operate a Chevy Volt
Eric Bolling (Fox Business Channel's Follow the Money) test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors.
For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.
Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9 gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles. It will take you 4 1/2 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time) would be20 mph.
According to General Motors, the Volt battery hold 16 kwh of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery.
The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned so I looked up what I pay for electricity.
I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh.
16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery.
$18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery.
Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine only that gets 32 mpg.
$3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.
The gasoline powered car cost about $15,000 while the Volt costs $46,000.
So the government wants us to pay 3 times as much for a car that costs more that 7 time as much to run and takes 3 times as long to drive across country.
REALLY?
Throughout the first first term of President George Walker Bush, Democrats said he was the first president since Herbert Hoover to post a net loss in jobs, as the nation struggled with the recession he “inherited” as liberals say, and 9/11′s aftermath.
We had a net increase in jobs during his 8 years as president.
Now Barack Obama is president. How is that working out. From the Hill:
House Ways and Means ranking member Dave Camp (R-Mich.) on Friday released data complied by his office that shows 48 out of 50 states have lost jobs since the February 2009 enactment of the economic stimulus bill.
“While Democrats promised their 2009 stimulus would create 3.7 million jobs, the reality is far different,” stated a release from Camp’s office. “To date, 2.6 million jobs, including 2.5 million private sector jobs, have been lost.”
According to the report, only Alaska and North Dakota have experienced positive job growth since early 2009. The District of Columbia also saw an increase in hiring during that period.
Ouch.
Keep smoking that weed...
You know the saying: we did not inherit the earth from our forefathers we are guarding it for our children. Well the conservatives don't have the same opinion
The steel pipe is resistant to gunshots and has resisted them on several occasions, but on October 4, 2001, a drunken gunman named Daniel Carson Lewis shot a hole into a weld near Livengood, causing the second-largest mainline oil spill in pipeline history.[159] Approximately 6,144 barrels (976.8 m3) leaked from the pipeline; 4,238 barrels (673.8 m3) were recovered and reinjected into the pipeline.[160] Nearly 2 acres (8,100 m2) of tundra were soiled and were removed in the cleanup.[161] The pipeline was repaired and was restarted more than 60 hours later.[162] Lewis was found guilty in December 2002 of criminal mischief, assault, drunken driving, oil pollution, and misconduct. He was sentenced to 16 years in jail and ordered to repay the $17 million cleanup costs.[163]
The pipeline was built to withstand earthquakes, forest fires, and other natural disasters. The 2002 Denali earthquake damaged some of the pipeline sliders designed to absorb similar quakes,[164] and it caused the pipeline to shut down for more than 66 hours as a precaution.[162] In 2004, wildfires overran portions of the pipeline, but it was not damaged and did not shut down.[165][166]
In March 2006, corroded feeder pipelines on the North Slope gave way, ...
The steel pipe is resistant to gunshots and has resisted them on several occasions, but on October 4, 2001, a drunken gunman named Daniel Carson Lewis shot a hole into a weld near Livengood, causing the second-largest mainline oil spill in pipeline history.[159] Approximately 6,144 barrels (976.8 m3) leaked from the pipeline; 4,238 barrels (673.8 m3) were recovered and reinjected into the pipeline.[160] Nearly 2 acres (8,100 m2) of tundra were soiled and were removed in the cleanup.[161] The pipeline was repaired and was restarted more than 60 hours later.[162] Lewis was found guilty in December 2002 of criminal mischief, assault, drunken driving, oil pollution, and misconduct. He was sentenced to 16 years in jail and ordered to repay the $17 million cleanup costs.[163]
The pipeline was built to withstand earthquakes, forest fires, and other natural disasters. The 2002 Denali earthquake damaged some of the pipeline sliders designed to absorb similar quakes,[164] and it caused the pipeline to shut down for more than 66 hours as a precaution.[162] In 2004, wildfires overran portions of the pipeline, but it was not damaged and did not shut down.[165][166]
In March 2006, corroded feeder pipelines on the North Slope gave way, spilling at least 6,310 barrels (1,003 m3) of oil.[167] In August 2006, during an inspection mandated by the United States Department of Transportation after the leak, severe corrosion was discovered.[168] The transit pipelines were shut down for several days that month, and replacement of 16 miles (26 km) of transit pipeline began. The project was completed before Christmas Day 2008 at a cost of $500 million to BP.[169]
In May 2010, as much as several thousands of barrels were spilled from a pump station near Fort Greely during a scheduled shutdown. A relief valve control circuit failed during a test of the fire control system, and oil poured into a tank and overflowed onto a secondary containment area. [170]
A leak was discovered on Jan 8, 2011, in the basement of the booster pump at Pump Station 1. For more than 80 hours, pipeline flow was reduced to 5 percent of normal. An oil collection system was put in place, and full flow resumed until the pipeline was again shut down while a bypass was installed to avoid the leaking section.[171][172][173]