Um, Keystone XL is still canceled
I'm seeing a number of posts lamenting the fact that Keystone XL was uncanceled as part of the vote-a-rama last night.
To be fair, I'm not surprised that that's the quick takeaway after glancing at some of the headlines on this. Take Newsweek's for example:
Senate Backs Keystone XL Pipeline As Two Democrats Split with Joe Biden
That sounds bad! But if you read the article, here's what it says:
As senators were forced to vote on hundreds of amendments to the budget resolution that would launch the reconciliation process, Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) put forward an amendment backing the Keystone XL pipeline.
The Republican's amendment called for a fund to be established to improve U.S.-Canada relations over the Keystone XL pipeline, weeks after President Biden revoked the project's federal permit and put thousands of jobs at risk.
So, that's what the amendment does. Establishes a fund to improve U.S.-Canada relations. That's it.
The next paragraph starts:
Someone in the linked thread above also pointed out that this amendment didn't even make it into the final package.
So it sounds like much ado about nothing. Am I right?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Much appreciated explanation.
I was really upset reading what appeared to be a reversal of Joe's recent action to stop this horrid project!
I read somewhere it was Manchin and Tester.
Correction appreciated and welcomed!
The 2018 article that you reference made an attempt to give perspective to what was a "brief" (1-week) phenomena at the time.
A year after your article was published, your same source - Forbes - published an updated one - https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2019/11/26/making-history-us-exports-more-petroleum-than-it-imports-in-september-and-october/?sh=49bf8a095f3b
Making History: U.S. Exports More Petroleum Than It Imports In September and October
Ariel Cohen Contributor
Energy
I cover energy, security, Europe, Russia/Eurasia & the Middle East
Reports of the death of U.S. shale have been greatly exaggerated.
In its latest Short Term Energy Outlook, the US Energy Information Agency (EIA) published preliminary data that, once confirmed, would represent a turning point in American energy history.
Not only did the United States reach a record-breaking 12.8 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil production in November – a new high watermark for the industry – the country achieved something yet more impressive: in the month of September, the United States exported more petroleum products than it imported. If verified in survey-collected monthly data, it would be the first time (in a month-long period) that the United States sold more petroleum than it purchased abroad since EIA records began in 1949.
For the world’s leading oil buyer this is a big deal. America consumes just over 20% of the globe’s 99 million bpd of daily crude production, with China holding the number 2 spot at 13% and India in a distant 3rd at 5%. America’s voracious appetite for oil has always been a strategic Achilles’ heel, with that vulnerability put on display for the world to see during the 1973 Oil Crisis. A chronic hypersensitivity to oil supply crunches and price volatility helped shape US foreign policy – it is the driving force behind our partnership with the historic oil market maker Saudi Arabia, the reason the US Navy’s 5th Fleet patrols the critical choke points of the Gulf (the Strait of Hormuz), the Suez Canal and the Strait of Bab al Mandeb – the southern entrance to the Red Sea.
The below then updates the end of 2019 and beginning of 2020 -
monthly total petroleum net trade
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Petroleum Supply Monthly
Updated February 6, 2020 at 5:00 p.m. to correct Rocky Mountain petroleum net trade in the first figure.
In November 2019, the United States exported 772,000 barrels per day (b/d) more petroleum (crude oil and petroleum products) than it imported, marking the third consecutive month in which the United States was a net petroleum exporter. Although the United States is a net petroleum exporter as a whole, most regions other than the U.S. Gulf Coast region remain net petroleum importers.
Net petroleum trade is calculated as the total imports of crude oil and petroleum products minus the total exports of crude oil and petroleum products. In September 2019, the United States became a net petroleum exporter for the first time since monthly records began in 1973.
The United States is a net importer of crude oil. In November 2019, the latest monthly data, it imported 5.8 million b/d of crude oil and exported 3.0 million b/d of crude oil. The United States is a net exporter of petroleum products (such as distillate fuel, motor gasoline, and jet fuel). In November 2019, the United States exported 5.8 million b/d of petroleum products and imported 2.2 million b/d of petroleum products.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=42735
Fast-forwarding to the end of 2020 - the below summarized much of the past year as of a December 2020 report, there was a sustained 7-month period of net export, a 2 month period net import, and then back to net export -
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=46076
The past year's pandemic, along with the brief but devastating (for the oil industry) oil price war that resulted in an oil glut, has caused the entire industry (including the U.S.) to attempt to adjust to the glut by capping some wells and shutting down some operations. So it remains to be seen how this all plays out in the coming months.
"Progressives" continue to encourage the world's move away from fossil fuels because climate change is REAL and there is no "progressive goal" that promotes the use and transport of more of it.
2020 was declared statistically tied for the hottest year on record. The Arctic sea ice reached a level that was the 2nd lowest on record (and included a mind-boggling 100F temp in a Siberian town located within the Arctic circle).
Instead of insulting people who are replying, why not take a step back and do some more research. Canada is apparently loathe to run their pipeline west across their provinces and out to the Pacific for shipping, why? (answer - against THEIR laws)
there is an oil glut to the point where they have no place to store it. This was due not only to the pandemic cutting travel by upwards of 80% the past year, but also by 2 idiotic countries (Saudi Arabia and Russia) who decided to get into an "oil price/trade war" by pumping out as much as they could, as fast as they could, last spring, much to the chagrin of OPEC and others.
And what Canada (and North Dakota and a handful of other states) are doing is not just "pumping oil" out of the ground. They are actually "extracting" it from rock, which involves the use of massive amounts of solvents to bring it to the surface and then process it. That solvent has been found to seep into the ground water/water tables and ultimately into any nearby wells on the property of those who use well water. And in a number of places, notably Oklahoma and Ohio, there have been swarms of earthquakes confirmed to have been due to fracking activity. Between the shale oil and shale gas, you have all kinds of stability issues happening both underground and above ground -
Meanwhile parts of that pipeline would be running through sacred land of Native Americans. It might seem "far away" to the average person and is not "in their backyards" but it would be going through theirs.
It's past time to start the weening off process.
This deserves its own OP, BumRush
I agree with others upthread who said that this is why they visit DU.
