Obama vetoes Keystone XL pipeline bill
Defying the Republican-run Congress, President Barack Obama rejected a bill Tuesday to approve construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, wielding his veto power for only the third time in his presidency.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/U...TE=DEFAULT
With oil prices being so low right now, it's hard to see a real need for this pipeline.
Quote:With oil prices being so low right now, it's hard to see a real need for this pipeline.
The only argument for it is that the oil is getting through anyways, vetoing it doesn't stop it. The pipeline
might be safer. That aside, the price of oil, I don't think, as any bearing on the issue.
Right now it might not have made a difference but you don't build infrastructure for right now. In 20 years it'll factor in if this was good or bad.
Quote:Right now it might not have made a difference but you don't build infrastructure for right now. In 20 years it'll factor in if this was good or bad.
I think this applies more to the roads, water/power distribution type of public works infrastructure than to primarily private use infrastructure. Private industry can crank out a project like this in record fashion if it will make a buck. None of this applies though since the pipeline is already built correct?
Quote:I think this applies more to the roads, water/power distribution type of public works infrastructure than to primarily private use infrastructure. Private industry can crank out a project like this in record fashion if it will make a buck. None of this applies though since the pipeline is already built correct?
I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I'm saying right now oil prices are low, demand is low, a pipeline that will take a while to build (I'm not sure how long) wouldn't make a difference in the global market in the next few years. However, if demand goes back up and oil prices skyrocket not having that pipeline could possibly make a difference in the future, it's at that point in the future we will be able to gauge if the pipeline is worth it or not.
Quote:Obama vetoes Keystone XL pipeline bill
Defying the Republican-run Congress, President Barack Obama rejected a bill Tuesday to approve construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, wielding his veto power for only the third time in his presidency.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/U...TE=DEFAULT
And yet Obama says that Congress is not being bipartisan...
Like Eric said, it might not mean a lot right now; but we'll know for sure in about 20 years whether or not this was a boneheaded decision that will come to haunt us in the future. One of the reasons why oil prices are so low right now is because it has to do with OPEC and the US engaging in economic warfare with Russia, China, Iran, and the situation with ISIS and its illegal oil exports. By hurting their energy exports, they can really hurt these entities. What I'm really trying to say is: the drop in oil prices has nothing to do with Obama's policies.
Quote:I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I'm saying right now oil prices are low, demand is low, a pipeline that will take a while to build (I'm not sure how long) wouldn't make a difference in the global market in the next few years. However, if demand goes back up and oil prices skyrocket not having that pipeline could possibly make a difference in the future, it's at that point in the future we will be able to gauge if the pipeline is worth it or not.
I think we are talking about the same thing. I question what the actual financial impact is considering the oil is already coming through but on trains. Also it's not US oil, and will be sold to the highest bidder. How exactly does it impact the oil futures at all? I think that is majorly in question
As I said an argument can be made about pipelines being safer but to be frank this issue is dumb. It effects potentially nobody except for the people profiting off the oil and the 40 some permanent jobs it might create. It's insane that citizens are actually talking about a pipeline. It's been politicized to the inth degree.
Quote:I think we are talking about the same thing. I question what the actual financial impact is considering the oil is already coming through but on trains. Also it's not US oil, and will be sold to the highest bidder. How exactly does it impact the oil futures at all? I think that is majorly in question
As I said an argument can be made about pipelines being safer but to be frank this issue is dumb. It effects potentially nobody except for the people profiting off the oil and the 40 some permanent jobs it might create. It's insane that citizens are actually talking about a pipeline. It's been politicized to the inth degree.
Well the jobs you here championed would be construction jobs, and no construction job is permanent so the whole only 40 permanent jobs thing is a little misleading.
Second the pipeline would allow for more oil to come to market faster then pumping it and loading it on trains down to Texas, and the cost would be significantly less once the pipeline is built. Those are the two biggest factors in oil futures the supply (how much is on the market at a give time, faster production would mean greater supply) and the cost ( again reducing the cost would lower oil future averages across the board)
Right now it cost about $80 to extract oil from Canada and get it to market the pipeline is supposed to make that closer to $50 IIRC.
And yes is has been politicized that's the only reason Obama vetoed the bill today.
Quote:Well the jobs you here championed would be construction jobs, and no construction job is permanent so the whole only 40 permanent jobs thing is a little misleading.
Second the pipeline would allow for more oil to come to market faster then pumping it and loading it on trains down to Texas, and the cost would be significantly less once the pipeline is built. Those are the two biggest factors in oil futures the supply (how much is on the market at a give time, faster production would mean greater supply) and the cost ( again reducing the cost would lower oil future averages across the board)
Right now it cost about $80 to extract oil from Canada and get it to market the pipeline is supposed to make that closer to $50 IIRC.
And yes is has been politicized that's the only reason Obama vetoed the bill today.
That is all well and good but it still doesn't explain how this makes us less dependent on foreign oil? It's not for the US it's to be sold on the open market. In addition, spending on actual infrastructure nationwide would create many more construction jobs for a longer period of time why the focus from the GOP on these 2000?
It's also the only reason this has been one of the main pushes by the GOP congress rather than focusing on things that will actually effect the country as a whole. Big oil, not jobs or future prices is the reason for the politicization.
The extent to which I am for or against this is mostly due to the seizing of land required to do it. I think it's dumb the parties have made this THE issue for months rather than an actual spending bill or tax reductions or w/e else the GOP is supposed to be doing.
Quote:That is all well and good but it still doesn't explain how this makes us less dependent on foreign oil? It's not for the US it's to be sold on the open market. In addition, spending on actual infrastructure nationwide would create many more construction jobs for a longer period of time why the focus from the GOP on these 2000?
It's also the only reason this has been one of the main pushes by the GOP congress rather than focusing on things that will actually effect the country as a whole. Big oil, not jobs or future prices is the reason for the politicization.
The extent to which I am for or against this is mostly due to the seizing of land required to do it. I think it's dumb the parties have made this THE issue for months rather than an actual spending bill or tax reductions or w/e else the GOP is supposed to be doing.
Agreed it is a stupid thing to be hung up on.