VOTE: Should President Obama veto the Keystone XL pipeline bil?

[Panich52]

Poll from LeftAction2014

YES >> http://leftaction.com/content/thank-you-voting

NO >> http://leftaction.com/content/thank-you-voting

[Recursion]

1. Why are "yes" and "no" the same link? (nt)

[Panich52]

3. I didn't click on 'no' so I don't know to what it leads

I suspect they lead to different areas. 'Yes' led to 'thanks' and more petitions. 'No' might lead to info on why you chose 'wrong.'

[Recursion]

6. I didn't click on either but they're the same URL (nt)

[JonLP24]

2. I don't think that will influence him much

plus I'm more on the undecided but leaning no not because I buy the RW arguments. It will create temporary construction jobs and layoffs at the major refinery hub will offset jobs at the Keystone refinery hub.

If there was a serious push for green energy then it is an easy no. Keystone strikes me as the lesser of two evils factoring in the bomb trains that drive through towns, along coastlines which the Keystone proposal makes efforts to avoid as much water as possible. Plus response to pipeline spills are well established while one of those bombs going off is a less so, especially in a small town with a small town fire department. Also, I'd like to see Saudi oil imports at 0%.

There is also the Dakotas question. If it doesn't help transportation (and I haven't seen any that does) of North Dakota oil then the bomb trains are still there & we just have the big pipeline. An easy yes from me there.

Environmentally long-term, then a Yes would probably be a good thing. Though the oil is still being transported & an oil train could derail into the Puget sound at anytime and all of a sudden you have an environmental catastrophe.

[Panich52]

4. If you think pipe spills have rapid response & cleanup, check w/ folks in MI

Those toxic tar sands oilsspilled in Kalamazoo River several years ago and they still don't have it cleaned up.

ND wants its Bakken Shale tar sands oil to flow thru the KXL - but they want to be allowed to export it - oil company profits nd to hell w/ 'energy independence' they claim the pipeline will provide.

Infrastructure repairs, incld rail, added to new tanker car regs, will make that method of transport more safe. And all those repairs would employ thousands more than anything connected to the pipe.

Folks in Nebraska don't much care about above issues as much as they detest the idea of allowing a foreign company to seize control if their land under eminent domaign. They don't even like the idea of any US, state, local govt doing that.

[JonLP24]

5. The protocols are already well established

Plus it avoids a lot of the potential hazards oil by rail doesn't. They have already ignored regulations, foregone new rail cars which don't eliminate the potential for disaster, and much of what & where they are doing has been done in secret. Agreements to use depots for oil by rail transport has been done in secret. You can ask Lac-Mégantic, Quebec as far oil by rail is concerned.

This is the oil & gas industry we're talking about.

As far as what ND wants. Most of oil produced in the US is exported, they export oil more than they import.

[Panich52]

7. When it comes to tar sand oil, protocols mostly meaningless

One difference between Keystone XL and the vast majority of other pipelines that have spilled is that it will be carrying tar sands oil, which has proven very difficult, if not impossible, to clean up. A 2010 spill of tar sands oil in the Kalamazoo River in Michigan, for example, has yet to be cleaned up despite four years of effort. Another tar sands spill in 2013 fouled an entire neighborhood in Arkansas. Federal regulators have acknowledged that Keystone XL, too, will spill.

From "America’s Disastrous History of Pipeline Accidents Shows Why the Keystone XL Vote Matters"

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/frackcheckwv/~3/tQr4C63E3ao/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email

We simply have o stop subsidizing the oil industry and put those funds into alternate energy. Then we won't have to worry so much about spills.

From same article as above:

A new analysis of federal records reveals that in just the past year and four months, there have been 372 oil and gas pipeline leaks, spills and other incidents, leading to 20 deaths, 117 injuries and more than $256 million in damages.

The new data adds to a June 1, 2013 independent analysis of federal records revealing that since 1986, oil and gas pipeline incidents have resulted in 532 deaths, more than 2,400 injuries and more than $7.5 billion in damages.

[Recursion]

8. Even if you are for the pipeline extension, Congress should NOT bypass the process

The administrative process exists for a reason, and no matter where you stand on the pipeline itself, I don't think Congress should start micromanaging State and the EPA over this.