Keystone XL Pipeline – Do We Need It? At What Cost? Who Benefits? Who Knows!

Keystone XL In A Nutshell

The Keystone XL Pipeline (“XL”) is the 4th phase of the original Keystone project. What the press rarely seems to mention, is that phases 1-3 are already complete and transporting Alberta tar sands bitumen oil to Illinois and Texas refineries. The XL portion is essentially a 2nd wider pipe from Hardisty, Alberta to Steele City, Nebraska, only this new pipe will take a more direct route across Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska. The XL route to Steele City will be shorter than Phase-1, provide for larger volumes, and enable Montana and South Dakota to literally add to the mix.

TransCanada-Keystone-Pipeline-System-Map-2015-06-08

The Governor of Nebraska has approved the latest proposed XL route.  However, the Nebraska Supreme Court is reviewing a challenge that claims the legislation that transferred pipeline-route approval—from a State Agency to the Governor—was unconstitutional.  President Obama has delayed his decision on XL until the Nebraska Supreme Court issues their ruling.

Sadly, the mass media fails to present a clear set of substantive issues that the Public needs to understand XL and form opinions. All we hear are talking points, soundbites, and widely disparate claims of the XL impact. A clear, correct, and concise set of answers to the following questions would greatly assist the Public. The question is, will anyone answer them simply, clearly and concisely? Unfortunately there are many in the U.S. that prefer to hide the facts and manipulate the electorate through propaganda and misinformation.

Why do we accept that we must continually make decisions with unsubstantiated and inaccurate information? Will the mass media ever again truly present unbiased, objective, and accurate reporting? For the record, here are the XL questions that really matter.

GravitySailor Keystone XL Questions:

  • Do we need the capacity provided by XL?
  • Will XL reduce gas prices within the U.S.?
  • What is the impact of not building XL?
  • Will XL diminish demand for Middle East oil, or as some claim, simply provide a cheaper alternative to Venezuelan crude for distribution throughout Latin America, China, and Europe?
  • Many buyers of Tar Sands oil have become frustrated with XL delays, so more oil is now being shipped to the U.S. refineries over rail. Is rail safe? If rail can handle the flow, do we need XL at all? Perhaps, but we need to see some concise comparisons between XL and rail.
  • How many  jobs will XL create, and for how long? There are grossly inconsistent claims on this issue, but there is only one correct answer! Are there no independent objective organizations that can provide a realistic and accurate estimate?
  • Is the Great Plains ground-water supply at risk of contamination from a pipeline spill? What is the likelihood of such a leak and an honest projection of the impact?
  • What is the projected long-term carbon impact on the environment, including the energy to extract in addition to use?

I hope that someone can develop or identify a simple, clear, and concise evaluation of the benefits and risks of XL, as We The People are desperate for accurate information! In the mean time, the following videos explain much.

Sincerely,

Mark G  Capolupo


Sources for this article:

Leave a Reply

avatar
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
GravitySailor
Guest

Citing Climate Change, Obama Rejects Construction of Keystone XL Oil Pipelinehttp://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/07/us/obama-expected-to-reject-construction-of-keystone-xl-oil-pipeline.html?_r=0
By CORAL DAVENPORT, NOV. 6, 2015
WASHINGTON — http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/index.html?inline=nyt-per announced on Friday that he had rejected the request from a Canadian company to build the http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/k/keystone_pipeline/index.html, ending a seven-year review that had become a symbol of the debate over his climate policies.

Mr. Obama’s denial of the proposed 1,179-mile pipeline, which would have carried 800,000 barrels a day of carbon-heavy petroleum from the Canadian http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/o/oil_petroleum_and_gasoline/oil_sands/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier to the Gulf Coast, comes as he seeks to build an ambitious legacy on http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/globalwarming/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier.

GravitySailor
Guest

Keystone XL oil pipeline in doubt as U.S. asked to pause review
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/03/us-transcanada-keystone-idUSKCN0SR2J320151103

GravitySailor
Guest

BNSF has started taking additional safety measures for crude oil shipments because of four recent high-profile derailments in the U.S. and Canada, the railroad said Monday.
Under the changes, BNSF is slowing down crude oil trains to 35 mph in cities with more than 100,000 people and increasing track inspections near waterways. The Fort Worth, Texas, based railroad also is stepping up efforts to find and repair defective wheels before they can cause derailments.
http://www.salon.com/2015/03/30/bnsf_railroad_adds_new_safety_rules_for_crude_oil_trains/

GravitySailor
Guest

I agree David, now if only the GOP weren’t owned by the Koch Brothers who happen to own a dirty oil refinery in Texas.

David Nelson
Guest

Don’t need it. Dirtiest oil to recover & refine. If we must use it build a refinery where the oil is.

GravitySailor
Guest

the Nebraska Supreme Court cleared the way for XL construction through the state. This was Obama’s primary reasons to delay making a decision .
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/10/us/keystone-pipeline-nebraska-supreme-court-transcanada.html?_r=0

wpDiscuz
Show Buttons
Hide Buttons