State Dept. Looking For An Alternative Route For Keystone

[Me.]

What is it about no, not now, not ever they don't understand?

“WASHINGTON (Reuters/November 10) - The State Department is expected to announce as early as Thursday that it will explore a new route for the politically sensitive Keystone XL oil Canada-to-Texas pipeline, sources briefed on the matter said.

The sources, who spoke on condition they not be identified, said that looking into a new route for TransCanada Corp's $7 billion pipeline would delay the U.S. government's final decision on whether to approve the project, which is opposed by many environmentalists and backed by industry.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/10/keystone-xl-pipeline-state-department_n_1086319.html

[truebrit71]

1. Waiting until say, January 2013 in the hope that a repuke is in the Oval Office?

...what do you think?

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. I believe that Obama wants to delay this in order to keep it from hurting

his re-election chances.

At least, this is what I've read...

:shrug:

[Me.]

3. Good, More Time Gives The Opposition

Over a year to make their case and wear the admin down with indisputable facts/

[hedgehog]

4. The longer this is delayed, the more people become aware of the

issues and the more opposition develops. Try to kill it outright now, and the stage is set for it to become an election issue and possibly assist a Republican into the White House.

[Autumn]

5. Delay and put it off. Then Obama will approve it and

he won't care if a large part of the base gets pissed. Not like he will ever need them again.

[KansDem]

6. I don't understand why this crap needs to be pumped to south Texas?

If the tar sands originate in Canada, then build the refineries there.

Now, having said that, I don't support tar sands oil extraction. I'm just baffled at the logic--or lack of it--for the need of this pipeline...:shrug:

[XemaSab]

7. The oil is for export

that's why they can't build a refinery in Alberta or North Dakota.

[KansDem]

8. They can't run it west across British Columbia to the Pacific?

Much shorter distance.

That would be unacceptable as well, but I wonder what are the real reasons?