ninetogo

I found an article that updates the proposed Keystone XL pipeline and the outrageous lies told as the reason for vetoing approval of this critical pipeline network expansion. READ this article and see the light......

Coming Clean: The President and ‘Dirty’ Keystone XL Oil
keystone xl pipeline canadian oil sands crude oil greenhouse gas emissions president obama environment
Mark Green
Mark Green
Posted Mar 09, 2015
comments share Share
Apparently not content with the four Pinocchios he recently earned from the Washington Post for statements on the Keystone XL pipeline, President Obama last week put in a bid for five with remarks aimed at the project’s environmental impact.

At an appearance in South Carolina, the president termed “extraordinarily dirty” the methods used to develop Canadian oil sands:

“The reason that a lot of environmentalists are concerned about it is the way that you get the oil out in Canada is an extraordinarily dirty way of extracting oil, and obviously there are always risks in piping a lot of oil through Nebraska farmland and other parts of the country.”

First, after more than six years of review by his administration, the president really should take the time to read the U.S. State Department’s environmental review of Keystone XL – the latest of five that all have cleared the pipeline on environmental grounds. As well, energy consulting firm IHS found that Keystone XL and the oil sands it would deliver would have “no material impact” on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

One other point before we tackle the “dirty oil” claim. President Obama is still talking as though he doesn’t realize that up to 100,000 barrels of oil per day delivered by Keystone XL would come from the U.S. Bakken region in the Upper Midwest, mischaracterizing the pipeline as benefiting only Canada. This is simply not so.

Now the president’s “dirty oil” smear. Take a look at this graphic from the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers:

crudes

As you can see, in terms of full-cycle – wells to wheels – greenhouse gas emissions Canadian oil sands is comparable to other heavy crudes (which are the crudes that would be displaced by Canadian imports) and a number of California crudes. This also is reflected in data compiled by the California Air Resources Board.

According to the Environment Canada 2014 report, between 1990 and 2012, greenhouse gas emissions associated with every produced barrel of oil sands crude were reduced 28 percent. Same report: Oil sands account for 8.7 percent of Canada’s emissions and about 0.13 percent of global emissions.

Like his other errant claims on Keystone XL, the president misses the mark on this one as well. Now, let’s see if the Post’s FactChecker takes notice. He’s gonna need more Pinocchios.

NOTE: This article verifies exactly what I have stating in my previous post on the Keystone Pipeline infrastructure and its benefit to the US. I am not gloating; just wish that the political class would remove themselves from the auction block and quit being for sale to the highest bidder (environmental groups).

http://www.oilsandstoday.ca/PublishingImages/GHG%20Emissions/Global%20GHG%20Emissions.JPG

asphaltman

Obammy is getting paid from opec to not let that pipeline cross the US. Hes making his money in other ways,. not in our interest. If it helps the USA then he wont do it anyway,. He wants us to go under. Dont yal understand that?

badbobby Loc: texas

he oil is coming south
regardless of the means
piping the oil is a lot safer than shipping it
and cheaper