Ryan Lizza: Opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline tests the...
After meeting with Obama, one activist felt challenged to make the case "why this pipeline is not in our country's best interest."
Join the discussion below, or Read more at New Yorker.
#1 Sep 9, 2013
It is true. The two countries to benefit from the pipeline would be China (stable supply of fuel means lower prices) and Canada (selling more oil sands DilBit, thus pushing prices up. Currently running at a discount because of too much supply compared to distribution capacity).
The one country to be hit by this is the USA which would both take on the risks (with a pipeline company that is famous for it's spill record) and the costs associated with higher prices for oil sands Dilbit.
These purely economic statements are secondary to the big pockets of the backers who consider their profits first.
And the environment will be badly damaged as well with higher emissions per unit of energy for oil sands output than for conventional crude.
But it WILL do something to ensure energy independence for the US. And the way they are messing up the Middle East, they really NEED that independence..
Pro or Con, you decide. It isn't about 'environmentalism' though. That is just a label used to discredit (why? You'd think that is a positive label) the opposition.
Add your comments below
|Has Donald Trump Already Failed Us? (Nov '16)||20 min||Katrina||8,579|
|NPR Boosts Latina Teens' Pro-Illegal Immigratio...||28 min||Fart directory||6|
|Even More Immigration Judges are Reassigned in ...||55 min||Rico from East Lo...||17|
|Black Trump Supporter Goes Nuclear on Maxine Wa...||1 hr||General Kabaka Oba||35|
|Dear Trump Voters: The 1950's Aren't Coming Back||1 hr||Silent Echo||496|
|Artist designs 'border wall' in midtown Atlanta||2 hr||tomin cali||1|
|Rose's Pub (Mar '10)||4 hr||Valerie||146,684|
Find what you want!
Search Immigration Reform Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC