Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Keystone and the U.S. -- Why does President Obama want our country to be energy poor?

Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 21, 2012, 7:34 a.m. EST by muddFlapp (-108)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 12 years ago

Not FLAKESnews again?????

I listened to an interview on the radio, with one of the pipelines backers, and he said it's main purpose was to reduce US inventory and allow for a 20 to 30 cent rise in pricing.

The oil from the line was to go to Asia and South America. in an effort to reduce US supply!!!!

Just another market manipulation. Plus we the citizens take ALL the risk of the inevitable leakage.

[+] -6 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 12 years ago

Only a repelican would attempt to convince the public that any of that oil was ever destined for the U.S. market.

Only a repelican would suggest that tar sands will not sandblast the inside of the pipeline.

the repelican party is DONE



[-] 0 points by Kirby (25) 0 minutes ago

You have deluded yourself.

↥like ↧dislike reply permalink



That is not very likely. I've been engaged in revolt of the social construct for quite some time - and only articulated a case for revolt in 2009.

Here we are. On the cusp of revolution.

The repelican party has lied - repeatedly - reganonomics is a failure, blue dress stains do not trump issues of national security like terrorism, and Global Warming is here.

Holding up the budget debate with brinkmanship, creating market uncertainty that drove jobs and market numbers down six weeks into that debate, and all for the purpose of political gain - these are all issues of very serious national concern. We cannot keep kicking the can down the road when it comes to our national debt - and we cannot balance the budget on the backs of middle class America.

Repelican policy of economic deregulation has brought us to the brink of economic collapse.

It is inevitable, given both the sum of the lies and the sweeping policy failures - the people will vote these repelican fools out of office.

It's just a matter of time.

It's also a matter of national security.

  • the repelican party is DONE.

You will see this become quite apparent over the course of the next six years.

What is uncertain is whether there will be ice caps left at either pole by that time.

we will see.

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 12 years ago

Why does President Obama want our country to be energy poor?

a loaded question that assumes the US is energy poor

how about lacking in asking real question?

[-] 1 points by Nordic (390) 12 years ago


Try some facts next time.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 12 years ago

we drive 2 ton vehicles to transport 200 lb people

and I hear we are energy poor

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 12 years ago

A lot are more than 200 pounds. Just think about all the energy they have stored in their bodies. We could break it down and power the country.

[-] 1 points by wellhungjury (296) 12 years ago

He does not want the U.S. to be poor, he wants to get elected. This was a tricky one for him. He had to please the environmentalist and the unions. Both entities are on opposite sides of the fence on this one. His solution, tell the Repubs that the 60 day evaluation is not enough and then err on the side of caution (siding with the environmentalist), thus making the Repubs look like it is their fault. Classic politics at its best. How will this story unfold?


[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

Obama does NOT want our country to be energy poor. You are reading or watching Fox News which carries many corporate propaganda. Read widely and think for YOURSELF! There are compensating news sources that are less inflammatory. In general, I advise that you read sources which are rich in data that can be checked independently. It may be asking too much for the average Joe and Jane to do this but it is in the end NO LESS than guarding their own best interests. Those who will not free their own minds will NEVER be free! There are plenty of evil people willing to turn you into their bots.

There are better ways of dealing with the energy problem than building the Keystone-XL pipeline as currently proposed. Read up on how Canada produces the unconventional oil from its Alberta tar sand. Think about the environmental consequences. Determine why the Keystone-XL pipeline was proposed and what masters it will serve. Then fit all of that to YOUR and the U.S. interest and you may see the light. Good Luck! There are some who will eat of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and have their eyes opened and be cursed but there are also those who will be blessed by their ignorance until the consequences are impossible to ignore. It is your choice. I promise to help but you must make an effort yourself.


[-] -2 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

Read up on how the oil is going to market one way or another. That oil either comes south to us or west to board ships for China. Smarten up.


[-] 1 points by Durandus (181) 12 years ago

That oil from Canada is destined for the Open Market...America can buy it, but will not pay any less for it having travelled across America to refineries in Texas or elsewhere...and this oil will not lower energy costs to Americans...no benefit, great risk to environment...a lose/lose proposition.

[-] -2 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

I understand your point, but yes it will. It's lower cost transporting oil via pipeline than other means. It's also more reliable and less open to interference from conflict. You should know that not all oil is bought on the spot market, long term contracts exist. Canadian oil reduces our likelihood of becoming embroiled in foreign conflicts.

Great benefit/minuscule risk. Look around the internet for how many pipelines already exist. It's hardly the virgin territory the leftists claim.

[-] 2 points by Durandus (181) 12 years ago

Have we come to so narrow a conception of arguable political positions as to characterize concern for our drinking water as a "leftist" agenda? I merely happen to believe, based on observation, that Corporations cannot be trusted to put safety above sheer and immediate profit, which jeapardizes safety on many fronts, environmental degredation being one that effects our long-term interests.

[-] 0 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

That's not what I wrote. The leftists hate oil. They especially hate oil derived from oil sands. The rest is just propaganda to achieve the objective of killing the pipeline in hopes of killing the production. Concern for drinking water is terrific, honest concern, that is. But that's not what's taking place here.

Pipelines are all over the place operating safely every day.

[-] 1 points by Durandus (181) 12 years ago

I don't know what you mean by saying that 'leftists' hate oil...any more than I would know what you meant if you said that 'rightists' hate clean water or clean air...either would be a leap of extrapolation not worthy of a rational arguement.

It could be argued that Environmentalists, whom I suppose some would label 'leftists', value clean air and water over Profit for the Energy Industry, even at the expense of higher fuel prices to the Consumer. That's a value judgement on their part that sais "this is a priority of interest;" whereas Corporations have clearly demonstrated across the globe that the Environmental concerns of indigineous People isn't even on their list of priorities...the same Energy Companies that want public largesse in America to further their Profit interests.

Corporatism has rightly lost the trust of The People, given the evidence of its polluting ways across the globe and the vast environmental degredation that Energy Exploration and Extraction has inflicted. There is really no question about that fact. We can no more trust them to police themselves than we can trust Wall Street to police itself, or law enforcement to police itself, nor politicians to be honest. The historical record is just too compelling...The People's interests are NOT a priority in Western Civilization any longer. The class war has been won, and The People have lost.

[-] 0 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

And leftists have lost the trust of people that need jobs by killing things like this pipeline. Ae need energy. We need jobs. I guess people should just get their applications into Disney for a job cleaning rooms. Obama is showing us all the way.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

I hope that you are aware that many many many of those pipelines are OLD and desperately needing replacement but the money grubbers holding the purse strings would rather have the next quarter's corporate performance improved than to fix the pipelines. Every now and then we get a preventable and not so preventable oil spill. Remember BP oil spill in the Gulf. Is it nature or is it human-caused? If only nature did NOT spew its oil out with such ferocity. If only humans checked the pressure readings properly. If humans did not count on the FAIL-SAFE blowout preventer. If humans did not inject el-cheapo sea water instead. And so on. Just because other places have pipelines do not justify certain places to have pipelines. Every case must be weighed by its own merits so yes it will take some time and careful study is preferable to a rash politically or economically expedient decision.

Looking for job creations by the companies that made huge amount of money from the recent high prices of oil, tell them to replace those aging pipelines. You can have easily thousands and thousands of construction jobs overnight because the corporate coffers are bulging with CASH. To sell them the idea of pipeline replacement, suggest that they can perhaps consider increasing the diameter of the pipeline to carry more oil to the Gulf coast from Alberta's tar sand and North Dakota's Bakken Shale. If the coal lobby and the wind-power advocates have the same need to transport electricity to market, they can also work to make some deal to make the electricity transmission lines happen.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 12 years ago

How long does a "pipeline" last before it needs to be replaced and what causes it to "deteriorate"? Just curious.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

It depends on the balance of stresses relative to prevention, maintenance, and rejuvenation activities so every "pipeline" is different. One thing that was not mentioned was the usage of sacrificial metals to prevent corrosion. Inspecting often and changing those can prolong the life of a pipeline. We have STEEL ships in salty waters that did NOT sprout major leaks for decades. We have hot-water heaters in our homes that can last a decade even though they cycle through hot-warm cycles numerous times dipped in hot water. The protective technology can help quite a bit. There is also the inspection of the inside of the pipelines using a "pig." Pressure gauges can detect leaks quickly but all the world's "blowout preventers" will do us no good if no one is changing the "batteries" as was seen in the BP Macondo well blowout in the Gulf of Mexico. Who was checking the methane-gas-detection to shutting-off-engine connection there? Complacency can be extremely dangerous especially if everyone is sure that we have so many safeguards that failure is inconceivable. That is usually when the really big CATASTROPHES can take place. Offshore oil drilling was VERY safe so Obama was encouraging it shortly before the BP Macondo blowout happened.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 12 years ago

Lets look at this from a different perspective.

First off unless the system being used is copper then yes there could be a problem with "corrosion".

However, the piping generally used for process piping, oil lines and the like are "carbon steel". The hangers or rollers that support the piping are also carbon steel.

Unless there are dissimilar metals there is no need for "sacrificial metals". Now if you have copper connected to steel you would use a "dialectric kit" which would isolate the steel bolts from coming in contact with the copper or brass flange.

Now with regard to "stress prevention". When piping systems are designed, expansion and contraction is taken into account. For example if you have a straight run of piping for a mile or so, you would install a "expansion joint" or expansion loop.

An expansion joint is similar to a "slip joint" that allows the pipe, when it expands, to slide within the adjacent pipe.

An expansion loop is where 4 90 Ells are installed to form a U thus allowing for expansion and contraction.

Steel does not expand as much as copper unless you are using the steel piping for steam.

With regard to pervention, maintenance it is done on a "regulary scheduled" basis. As you mentioned the "pig" as they are called, are used for for inspections in determining the internal conditions of the piping, and are used for several different purposes. .

Visual inspections are for conducting "external inspections on piping systems and are done on a regular basis.

As far as "rejuvenation activities" there are none for you can't rejuvinate piping systems although you can be "proactive" in preventing problems. . If something is found to be wrong it is "immediately repaired"

Now when you get involved in salt water then yes, precautions have to be taken to minimize "electrolisys" for over a period of time electrolisys will destroy piping or anything else submersed in salt water.

Deep well oil rigs have procedures and processes they use to determine what's going on 3/4 miles under the sea. Pressure is one determining factor that they use to determine if there is a leak in the system.

As far as "safeguards" for oil rigs, it is the "governments" responsibility to lay out "polocies and procedures" for any company drilling within the boundaries of the United States.

So, if a problem occurs as did with the BP Oil spill then they are taken to task and again, it's the governments responsibility to determine what happened, how it happened, If neglence was involved, and make recommendations so that it doesn't happen again.

From what I understand BP didn't follow procedures or they were "vaguly written" in addition to their failure to maintain the "blowout preventer'.

Hope this shed some light on what's involved in "piping systems" and I do hope you understand that they are not being allowed to "deteriorate" as most people would think.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

There are companies that will do prompt replacements of piping systems but there are also some that will ignore the government regulations and even their OWN company regulations. In some companies, the managers are rewarded for gains from taking risks likely achieved by cutting corners. It is the company culture that contributes to how "accident"-prone its operations are. If it is a highly hierarchical, command-driven culture, we are usually into high-risk situations that will have as a symptom frequent changes at the top due to "blowouts." In other bottoms-up cultures where the people on the line have their say and the higher-ups are believers in real data rather than being ideologues, the companies' operations tend to be safer and in fact generate better long-term returns to the shareholders. Without a culture of vigilant maintenance and repair, EVERYTHING deteriorates and the symptoms can be oil spills etc. BP for example had oil spill on the Alaskan pipeline before its Macondo well blowout. That was a sign that the company was cutting corners in its operations so the government should have been breathing hard down BP's neck but of course the regulatory agency was ----ing its brains out with the corporations and oxytocin was highly conductive to cooperation. The rest is history that we cannot easily forget.

As for the replacement of the pipelines, I am not talking about the complete replacement of them with new parts. We need to instill the spirit of vigilant maintenance into pipeline companies so we do not get spills. With thousands and thousands of miles of pipelines, there can easily be many new jobs if we step up the maintenance and repairing efforts. There are also many really old water pipes and steam pipes in cities, electric power plants etc. that need maintenance or replacement. Our infrastructure in the U.S. is in sad shape because much of it dates to more than half a century ago.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 12 years ago

And they will "pay the price" for their actions should a catastrophy occur just as "BP" had to pay.

However, the problem is not with them, it's with our government not "monitoring' them as they should.

Like anything else if someone is left to maintain their own standard, what can you expect.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

Do you really want government to be ubiquitous? It WILL fail at doing that so the best that the government can do is to instill a big dose of SELF-governing culture in the companies. That will NOT happen unless there is real FEAR FACTOR. The reason that the BP Macondo blowout took so long to be plugged is because only the oil companies really have the technical know-how to plug it. For all Obama's "putting the foot on BP's neck," he was incompetent of plugging it because technologies outstrip the government's capability to regulate in detail. There need to be self-imposed safety cultures or adversarial cultures where the companies' competitors can have "Deep Throat" access to unsound safety operational details.

The ONLY federal regulator that can have any claim to have the FEAR FACTOR aura is the EPA. That is why the corporate interests are so keen on targeting environmental enforcements. Obama needs to cater to the corporate interests to be re-electable so he snubs the EPA. Of course, the EPA cannot do much about fracking because our previous Congress explicitly STRIPPED that from the EPA in 2005. Who was in charge of Congress and our Executive branch at that time? We are now on the verge of seeing Obama demonstrate in his State-of-Union Address how much he craves the next step to become electable after having "bent over and getting lubricated."

[-] 1 points by 1169 (204) 12 years ago

Don't quote me because I got this watching the History Channel, the Alaska pipe line was designed to last 20 years.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 12 years ago

What causes it's "deterioration"?

[-] 1 points by 1169 (204) 12 years ago

That I don't know probably poor welds, the Alaskan climate and terrain is pretty harsh.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 12 years ago

It is my undersatnding that "all welds" were "x-rayed" to ensure 100% weldment.

[-] 1 points by 1169 (204) 12 years ago

Could be, the show I saw didn't say, or if they did I missed it.

[+] -6 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

Environment causes deterioration.

Heat expands Cold contracts = expansion contraction stress on joins

Rain/moisture promotes corrosion = weakening of joins and pipe material.

Heat and cold work with moisture to penetrate.

There is more to the process of deterioration, but there's a start.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 12 years ago

Well, from what I understand the temperature of the oil going through the pipeline is constant. In addition to that the piping is coated and then tape wrapped to prevent moisture from getting to the metal. In addition to that I do believe it is "insulated" and sealed to prevent "rain, snow or any other element from getting underneath it.

[+] -6 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

You are saying it is impervious to deterioration? You wish, Hell we all wish. But it just aint so. By the way ever here of pipes freezing in the winter? Do you think that sunlight might raise the temperature and somewhat unevenly at that? Coatings can oxidize bubble and peel. You just keep tellin yourself that it can't happen.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 12 years ago

Well, if the "pipes are allowed to freeze with oil running through them with a outside temp of -25 to -50 degrees they will never get oil to flow.

I don't know if you have ever been involved in installing "underground piping" or have worked around a "processing plant" or "oil refinery" for if you have you would understand what I am talking about.

[+] -6 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

You think that the Keystone pipeline would be buried? Perhaps in places to allow for surface traffic, but I seriously doubt that much of it would be buried. What I don't understand is why everyone is so concerned to see it happen. It will not create many long-term full time jobs. The jobs it would create would be a spit in the ocean as to what is needed. It will be an environmental hazard waiting to happen traveling across seismically active country. We don't need to continue the oil addiction we need to begin shifting to a new fuel base. And that fabulous coating? Does it come in many attractive colors? As I think the makers could make a bundle selling it to auto manufacturers to paint their vehicles with so that they don't deteriorate out in the weather/environment.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 12 years ago

Well then, if you want to become "oil independent" then I suggest the following:

Stop using plastic products including you cell phone, Ipod, Iphone, computer, or anything else made from plastic including cars.

Use a "bicycle" instead of a "gasoline driven motor vehicle" or use an "all electric vehicle{" that doesn't have any "plastic components".

That would be a start.

As for your comment about that"fabulous coating". It appears to me that you have "never" been around a pipeline other then maybe some minor plumbing in your house. And that too may be "questionable".

So, until you understand what you are talking about may I suggest instead of watching the "History Channel" I suggest you do your own research. Then and only then will you become "knowledgeable" in understanding what I was talking about with regard to "piping systems and how they are installed".

[+] -6 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

You want a piping project?

Fine start with piping water to places that need it, including areas that have been poisoned by drilling and fracking.

[+] -6 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

There will always be a market for oil. This I have never denied. It just does not need to be for fuel.

[-] 0 points by timir (183) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

opportunity to borrow more and more and exploration of the middle east with even more intensity

[-] -1 points by headlesscross (67) 12 years ago

Obama is a POS who hates America and all it stands for. He is a lying two faced Muslim sympathizer. He is doubling down on spending to bankrupt the U.S.. There's mostly Leftist wankers on this site that can't get enough of dat hope 'n change Obama style ie: High unemployment,high gas prices,(going green is so much fucking fun),high commodity prices,high electricity costs and the list goes on.

Newt in 2012!!!

[-] -1 points by FreeDiscussion1 (109) 12 years ago

ZenDouche says the republicans in Congress gave the obama inadequate time to perform a review of the project. GIVE ME A BREAK. So the republicans knew,, LONGGGG before the president and his DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY that there was a plan to build a pipeline? Republicans knew and the most powerful guy in the world had NO CLUE??????? Figures. Even the major unions knew more about it that he did and want the jobs.


[-] -2 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

Obama chooses oil imports from dictator Chavez and maniac muslims that hate us over our friends in Canada. Keystone could divert billions from lunatics and dictators to a friendly nation if it wasn't for President Obama. Instead, that Canadian oil will go to another enemy, China after Canada merely builds its own pipeline to its west coast. Either way, the oil will be produced. The loons don't seem to get that part.

Obama is also killing jobs. He'll borrow money from China to throw at dopey not-for-profits and government unions for "stimulus", but then denies Americans honest jobs with his pen. He goes to Disney to tout tourism jobs washing dishes and making beds, but then kills high paying energy engineering and construction jobs.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

It is somewhat unlikely that Canada will build its own pipeline to its west coast because there is the Rocky Mountains and oil does NOT flow uphill by itself. If there is no customer, the oil will NOT be produced. China investing in Canadian tar sand operations is good for spending its hard currency reserve and creating jobs in Canada. Let China put up the money to burrow through the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific. Yes, China will learn its limits and become less juvenile in the process.

We should perhaps build natural gas pipelines to Canada and let Canada build its OWN refineries to process their very corrosive oil that can eat through the pipeline casings. Leaking natural gas pipelines do NOT pollute aquifers. Given the choice of clean water or oil-produced gasoline for mobility, I will choose clean water because when did you hear about massive cleaning of water to make them potable without using humongous amount of energy? When the environmental endgame comes, the U.S. WILL have one of the last excess food supplies to redeem what we owe to China but the water that goes into the food production had better be CLEAN. China will take years if not decades to clean up its environment.

[-] -1 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

But there is a customer. CHINA. Take a look at the pipeline across Alaska. They can certainly pipe it to their west coast for export. We can shift our oil sources away from lunatic muslims and dictators and to a friendly nation that shares our values or we can let that oil go to China while continue to be entangled with those that hate us. Libtards often say "no blood for oil". Canadian supplies can help make that happen.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

It is NEVER smart to make a decision that needs to be lived with for generations under political duress and expediency. If you take the propaganda for the Keystone-XL pipeline seriously, now that it has been "rejected," it would NEVER be built! That was of course just a business ploy by its proponents to apply political and economic pressure on the U.S. to get the pipeline approved. Let Canada pipe their oil to their west coast for export as they have every right to do so as a sovereign country.

You can quote me on this. Someday the Keystone-XL pipeline's reincarnation WILL be approved because either Obama or a Republican President will serve the corporate and union interest when the election of 2012 has been over. Remember the NDAA that Obama signed. That will be the model again.

There is this new information at: http://occupywallst.org/forum/labor-union-quits-alliance-with-greens-over-keysto/ The Republicans have been successful at dividing the labor/environmentalist alliance by using a political ploy. Now you see the REAL reason for the Congressional push for approving the Keystone-XL pipeline. Divide-and-Conquer works very well indeed.

Another thing I notice is that Fox News article calls the tar sand oil sand now. That may be another verbal upgrade or euphemism to mask the nature of what was there. Do you see how the trick used at the Tower of Babel is being used for turning people into trolls? The native Americans did NOT use oil to seal their canoes if you look into history. They used tar from the tar sand but that is obviously too dirty sounding for the populace, ergo the verbal upgrade. There are many more instances of these corruptions of our language around.

[-] 0 points by Galt01 (55) 12 years ago

"It is NEVER smart to make a decision that needs to be lived with for generations" Funny - the Canadians had no problem making alternate plans. The pipeline is going to be built - it's just a matter of who benefits - Us or China. We lose again.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

It is detrimental to think Us or China. It is better to think Us AND China. From the Alberta tar sands and its aftermath, China will learn some extremely valuable lessons for its eventual growth into a global power. When the strait of Hormuz is closed, China will know VERY quickly why the U.S. projected a global military presence to protect the freedom of the seas. China may hopefully turn less antagonistic against U.S. efforts to secure the global commons. China will exceed the U.S. in GDP due to its population but the "U.S." as an idea will nonetheless live on and prosper in the Chinese PEOPLE.

[-] -3 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

The jobs president continues to kill jobs. He borrows from China and touts low-level tourism jobs in Orlando and then bashes the energy sector. He threw thousands from their jobs after the BP spill with his idiotic moratorium at a time of 10% unemployment. And he was shown wrong again as the Gulf quickly recovered and there was nothing gained from the Obama oil layoff.

It's oil. It's going to be produced. it's going to get to market. We can buy it and have a near-by friendly supplier that isn't a dictatorship and that isn't a muslim culture or the Chinese can buy it.

We can have the jobs or we can export the jobs and see if someone can get a job cleaning rooms in Orlando as Obama suggests.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

We are NOT exporting the jobs. There will actually be more jobs saved by having to transport that oil by other means such as by railcars. Keystone-XL pipeline construction will boost construction jobs for a while. After that, the railcar engineers can look forward to very permanent layoffs. Of course, most common people look at what is put in front of their eyes and not think about the overall impacts. In my experience, there are many who will drink the swill straight and be happy but will not slosh it around in a wine glass, warm it up, sniff at it, take a sip, and spit it out if it is lousy or swallow it gladly if it is great.

[-] -1 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

Transporting oil by RAILCARS? Huh? That doesn't happen.

If Obama succeeds in killing the pipeline jobs, our supplies will be met via tankers over the seas from places dictators and muslims. It will harm other jobs too as the longer supply line foreign oil costs more due to shipping.

Get your resume down to Orlando. Obama's killing pipelines and energy jobs, but he's pushing tourism. Maybe you can work in a restaurant.

[-] 2 points by 4TheHumanSocietyProject (504) 12 years ago

We do not need oil.


[-] -2 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

Take a look at your computer. Now, see that cord that comes out of the back? You should be curious about what's the for and where what comes over it comes from. Take a look at your computer too. You should wonder what much of it is made from. Then, visit a gas station with your mom and dad and have them tell you all about it.

[-] 2 points by 4TheHumanSocietyProject (504) 12 years ago

Sure... I am fully aware. I am also fully aware of the technology that is out there. Like the technology that uses wind,solar and all that other efficient clean stuff.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 12 years ago

Obama invested over 1 billion in "green energy" and all that "green energy" went bankrupt. Why do you think that happened?

Solar and windmills don't create long term jobs. They don't even create short term jobs. Compare building windlmlls and Solar panels to building Hydroelectric plants or nuclear plants. Which do you think would create the most jobs?

Better do some research before you answer.

[-] 2 points by 4TheHumanSocietyProject (504) 12 years ago

Cool. Well then the problem seems to be with the way we live. I have done plenty of research. Clean air and Green energy is the intelligent way to go.When will this earth and its people come before money? Or do you suggest we just keep polluting the air and destroying the habitat? I am for a resource based economy... It seems to make a lot more sense for the earth and its people in the long run. I do not want money... I want food,water, shelter,education,communication and clean air. I want that for 7 billion people.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 12 years ago

Hydroelectric plants do not pollute. Nuclear plants will provide the energy we need to charge up the "batteries" on those electic vehicles.

If nothing is done about preparing for the future demands of "electrical power supply" this country is going to be in a "world of hurt" within the next 10 years.

No one is thinking about that until it becomes a "crisis". Then what - brown outs across the country.

Two plants have just been shut down in Georgia because of "government regulations". The load for those plants have to go to other plants already in use.

There is no way "solar power nor "wind power" will ever be able to keep up with demand - it's just not possible regardless of how big a "solar field" or "wind field" is built.

[-] 1 points by 4TheHumanSocietyProject (504) 12 years ago

There is way more then just those two I spoke of. hydrocarbon fuel, Geothermal power, tidal power and etc. I understand no one is thinking about it...However, we should just stop with the shit and build what we need. As long as those good ole boys are up there ordering people to do there greed dance we wont accomplish anything worth shaking a stick at. 10-40 years from now we will be laughed at for our incompetence.


[-] -1 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

The subsidy alone for wind is 4-5x the cost of coal.

[-] 2 points by 4TheHumanSocietyProject (504) 12 years ago

Cool. When will this earth and its people come before money? Or do you suggest we just keep polluting the air and destroying the habitat? I am for a resource based economy... It seems to make a lot more sense for the earth and its people in the long run. I do not want money... I want food,water, shelter,education,communication and clean air. I want that for 7 billion people.

[-] 0 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

Kumbaya, second verse.

[-] 2 points by Durandus (181) 12 years ago

it's very odd that a person would scorn as being fantastical the notion that Humanity deserves these or values these...I mean, what then is the alternative if these are contemptible?...starvation, poisoning, homelessness, ignorance, bigotry? To scorn one set of values is to embrace their opposite. That's violently discusting...demonic even.


[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

Think about WHY the Keystone-XL pipeline wants to reach the Gulf coast. It is trying to ship the hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil to a place where they can reach the WORLD oil market. Let me tell you that it is NOT necessarily destined for U.S. consumption. Oil is the most widely traded commodity in the world so a little bit more of it at the Gulf coast will NOT lower the U.S. domestic oil-product prices much. In fact, I can almost guarantee you that the prices will go up instead knowing the spread between the recent prices of North Sea Brent grade oil and the West Texas Intermediate grade oil. The net effect on our domestic U.S. oil-product prices will be negligible. Yes, in a real pinch, the U.S. can commandeer the oil but how long will it take before Canada shuts its production in Alberta? The pipeline will basically send oil down the Mississippi Valley to the Gulf coast having it extracted from the ancient Mississippi riverbed whose river at one time flowed through North Dakota (another oil-boom state) and Alberta province to the Arctic Ocean. Pipelines in general need to be constructed in rather level places such as along river valleys to be cost-efficient. Next choice would be rail transport because transporting oil in barges down the Mississippi is an environmental disaster waiting to happen as it is obvious to all. Pipeline transport is the most cost-efficient form of long-distance transport for oil on land but it also means the least jobs in the long run. If you are looking for job creation, build electricity transmission lines from North Dakota to Chicago but the coal lobby is blocking that. Ask any oversea person who is really in the know where the U.S. should be in its transportation method, it is electricity-propelled transport, not oil-based! We had been MEOWing for energy independence for so long because we got the oil crutches. Anyway, you should find out how much of the oil that is sent to the Gulf coast by reversing the direction of an existing pipeline is actually consumed in the U.S. There are also ways to speed up the flow of oil in existing pipelines by decreasing the oil's viscosity, removing kinks, or increasing the pressure.

Creating tourism jobs can be done very quickly without vast capital infusion. That may be why Obama is touting them as quick jobs. Do not denigrate tourism jobs because eventually almost ALL jobs will be of that nature (i.e., I-scratch-your-back- and you-scratch-my-back-type jobs). There will be nearly no heavy-lifting production jobs anywhere because robots can and will take over.

[-] -1 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

Yes, that's in part right. We'll create refining jobs too as export more product. Our supplies will be cheaper, not radically, but cheaper and clearly more secure.

Coal lobby blocking it? The environmentalists block it. They also block new plant development, well, unless it's utterly uneconomic wind power. Obama killed a South Dakota coal plant as one of the first things in office.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

Wind power is highly economical in the proper places such as the Great Plains. Coal is the most polluting form of fossil fuel but it is the cheapest. With coal, we will again suffer from the pollution of the communally owned air, land, and rivers in what economists call the "Tragedy of the Commons." Getting the wind power from the Great Plains to Chicago for example can allow dynamic load balancing to ameliorate the intermittency of wind power. As you say, there is the competition between coal and wind power. Should the U.S. be a country which likes crawling into holes in the ground or one that has wind mills churning producing one of the cheapest and cleanest forms of renewable energy? I think the choice is rather clear to most but there has to be the national will which the U.S. is sorely lacking due to the corporate strangling of our governments.

[-] 0 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

Wind is one of the cleanest and MOST expensive fuels.

[-] 1 points by Durandus (181) 12 years ago

Perhaps not, once you calculate the many externalities of Fossil Fuels. The problem with the concept of 'expense' when defined only by monitizing imputs and outputs is that externalities are disguised, and often not accounted for at all...how many toxic waste sites slated for clean-up are there in America and the World? Profits extracted by Industry that created these many and profound examples of pollution would be sharply reduced once the true cost...the 'expense' of doing business was accurately accounted for...and so it is with all of the Energy Industry.

[-] 0 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

But the record of energy use is that it's steadily becoming cleaner. As we purposely drive up the cost of energy in the United States, we push industry offshore which kills jobs and increases the cost of living to Americans.



[+] -5 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 12 years ago

And here is another fine reason to hate repelicans . . . the environmental review of the pipeline project was inadequate, performed by a company with ties to the end user of the pipeline; repelicans in Congress provided no time for a proper review, demanding instead a simple yes or no by the President. He gave them what they demanded. Now they complain.

That oil was never going to be used by U.S. citizens. That is simply one more lie.


Another of the many fine examples why I hate repelicans

[-] 0 points by muddFlapp (-88) 0 minutes ago

Yes Mr shoe shine is over qualified, that is why he has the economy in the ditch eh???

↥like ↧dislike reply permalink

Turning to racial stereotype as opposed to any evidence whatsoever.


and yet another fine example of why

  • the repelican party is DONE


[+] -6 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

You want a piping project?

Fine start with piping water to places that need it, including areas that have been poisoned by drilling and fracking.

[+] -6 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

For those of you just checking in - Keep digging that hole muddFlapp (-113)

Forward Occupy & 99%. Forward the People.

Lobby the government. Your voice is a vote. Petitioning is lobbying. The Peoples Lobby. Take part, take action.

Forward environmental change. Your participation can make a difference.


190,590 signatures so far for Bernie Sanders petition as of 9:16am central time 01/21/2012


The petition to save abandoned houses has 16 signatures as of 01/20/2012. Were just rolling right along.


Here is a place where you can directly address change. Take part, it does not hurt and may very well heal/help. Forward the cause of reform and rebirth.


Sierra Club has some good things to take part in as well. Set-up and ready for you to take part in. http://sierraclub.org/

[-] -2 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

Maybe people can get a job in Orlando cleaning rooms instead. Obama hates high paying energy jobs, but he loves tourism.

The Sierra Club hates energy too (yet, no doubt, their members all drive cars and use electricity). They'd have us move off the planet if it was possible.

[+] -4 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

Keep digging your hole. How low can you go Ninetyninenot (-71) 1 minute ago? Stay tuned folks well find out.

[-] -2 points by Ninetyninenot (-57) 12 years ago

I'm in the OWS loon-roost. -71 is badge of honor; I wear it proudly.

If you can make a bed and clean a toilet, Obama has a job for you. If you're in a government union, Obama has a job for you. If you work at some worthless not-for-profit, Obama has a job for you. And his he doesn't have a job for you, he'll happily borrow money from China for your food stamps.

If you want to work engineering and building a new pipeline that would shift our oil supplier mix towards Canada and away from Huge Chavez's dictatorship and the muslims, you're out of luck.

[+] -5 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

Keep digging your hole. How low can you go Ninetyninenot (-71) 1 minute ago? Stay tuned folks well find out.

[-] -2 points by headlesscross (67) 12 years ago

Spam Alert!!!

[+] -6 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 12 years ago

Keep digging that hole muddFlapp (-113)