The Tar Sands Pipeline is actually for overseas export markets. It's not for US energy security!

[Cali_Democrat]

We are being lied to. The pipeline will do nothing to enhance US energy security. It's a blatant attempt by big oil to rake in the profits (at the expense of the environment) by exporting the oil flowing through the pipeline.

Obama needs to reject this pipeline!

Report: Exporting Energy Security: Keystone XL Exposed

The Keystone XL Pipeline: Oil for Export, Not for U.S. Energy Security

Industry Documents Reveal Scheme to Reach Lucrative Markets Abroad

Steve Kretzmann

A new report from Oil Change International lays out the case, based on data and documents from the U.S. Energy Information Administration and the Canadian National Energy Board, corporate disclosures to regulators and investors, and analysis of the rapidly shifting oil market.

The facts:

* Keystone XL is an export pipeline. The Port Arthur, Texas, refiners at the end of its route are focused on expanding exports to Europe, and Latin America. Much of the fuel refined from the pipeline’s heavy crude oil will never reach U.S. drivers’ tanks.

* Valero, the key customer for crude oil from Keystone XL, has explicitly detailed an export strategy to its investors. Because Valero’s Port Arthur refinery is in a Foreign Trade Zone, the company can carry out its strategy tax-free.

<snip>

“To issue a presidential permit for the Keystone XL, the Administration must find that the pipeline serves the national interest,” said Stephen Kretzmann, executive director of Oil Change International. “An honest assessment shows that rather than serving U.S. interests, Keystone XL serves only the interests of tar sands producers and shippers, and a few Gulf Coast refiners aiming to export the oil.”

Read more...http://priceofoil.org/2011/08/31/report-exporting-energy-security-keystone-xl-exposed/

The whole purpose of the project is to get the oil from Canada to Texas and into tankers where it can be shipped overseas. There's no justification for this pipeline.

[AdHocSolver]

1. This is the logic for extracting tar sands oil.

With a contracting U.S. economy (the "recession" is nowhere near over) and with the new electric vehicles increasing fuel economy significantly, there will be a significant drop in the demand for oil in America. Because demand for oil in the U.S. will automatically decrease imports, there is no reason to produce more oil in the U.S. to make us less dependent on imports.

However, this translates into a drop in oil prices and profits for oil companies.

Wall Street needs a new plan. There are still a lot of energy resources in North America in the form of coal, tar sands oil, and natural gas. However, the North American markets are dwindling. So the plan is to transfer this oil to a shipping point and sell it outside the U.S.

However, the cheapest way to extract these resources are extremely polluting. Americans will never accept it, unless Wall Street can convince the public that allowing dirty extraction will increase supply (for them) and lower gas prices at the pump. The American public is in a panic, and not savvy about economics anyway, so they will likely go for it.

Once the oil from tar sands is extracted, it can be transported to locations where a growing demand will raise the prices to new higher levels. The oil companies can "honestly" explain this action as necessary as a collapsed economy in the U.S. provides no market, while demand from the "global economy" requires "free trade".

By reducing supply to match demand, oil companies will still keep prices high at the gas pump for Americans.

[luv_mykatz]

2. K & R

Absolutely right. The whole deal is about profits for the greed whores. It has nothing to do with easing the strain on the budgets of ordinary Americans.

Please, speak up and oppose this horrid pork barrel boondoggle!

[KansDem]

3. This is the BIG LIE

I cringe whenever Palin or some other GOP extremist claims that drilling in the US means more oil for Americans and less dependence on "foreign oil."

They are lying when they say that...oil drilled in the US goes on the world market. :grr:

[Aerows]

10. Exactly

It gets sold to the highest bidder just like oil drilled anywhere else in the world.

[Supersedeas]

12. And the money made from world market sales, where does that go?

It trickles down of course....it trickles down....into a tax free off-shore tax shelter.

And that money will sit there until a tax-free repatriation bill is signed.

There are no patriots in the oil biz. They are prepared to ship the entire middle class to the Middle East to fight their wars for world market profits.

[MADem]

4. Let me begin by saying I don't like this pipeline either and hope it doesn't happen, BUT....

...if you have nations, like say, just as an example, CHINA, who are (not unlike us) sucking oil like a crackhead with a crack pipe of late, and they have a need for MORE oil, if you give it to them, they won't do something unfortunate like take oil from another resource by force, or expand their influence in other ways that will result in their taking away a supplier we've come to know and love. There's your "Energy security" argument--yes, it is convoluted, but the supply of oil on the market on any given day is a finite amount.

This seems like a "quick fix" to plug up a near term gap in the market.

I'd rather see more solar/wind substitutions to manage that gap. If we need less, others can have our share, and still more can buy the technology we're using so that they will actually need less as well.

[Honeycombe8]

6. Like you, I hope this doesn't happen...BUT...if it increases US exports, then...

by definition, it benefits the U.S. Who says the U.S. national interest is served ONLY if the U.S. itself directly uses a product?

There is a trade deficit, so if we're able to increase oil exports, thereby decreasing trade deficit, then by definition, that is a national interest. It helps keep and create jobs in various areas, as well. Also a national interest.

Now, don't read that to think that I approve of this pipeline. I don't. But trying to force an argument like this one, that simply isn't true, doesn't do anyone any good.

[NYC_SKP]

9. It's a Canadian Resource coming through our country... Not sure it's an export...

And it's not the same as drill baby drill, as another poster wrote (not you).

I'd be far more upset if the extraction was taking place on our soil, but it's not.

:patriot:

[HysteryDiagnosis]

5. Someone should make a graphic with the pipeline continuing on from the gulf/Texas to

all points it will end up at, right across the ocean and so forth. That might make it sink in but it probably won't for some... perhaps a bumper sticker would do.

[Supersedeas]

13. that's probably what it is gonna take

[MrMickeysMom]

7. Heard that! This is no different than, "drill, baby, drill"

You think any of this would REDUCE dependency on foreign oil? Then, you're the roundest heeled American!

I preach to the choir, I realize.

Oh, but just in case, any administrative staffers do report in on what DUers know, know this, mother-fucker. We'll all bound to protest one way or another, and you can quit assuming we're as stupid as Fox viewers.

[killbotfactory]

8. Will stopping the pipeline prevent foreign countries from exploiting the tar sands? nt

[Supersedeas]

11. But think of all the money that will trickle down from the billionaires in charge of exports

We will be like Saudi citizens indebted to Saudi princes.