Seeking Alpha

Eleven Senate Democrats push Obama to approve Keystone XL

  • A group of 11 Senate Democrats, including five up for re-election this year, are pressing Pres. Obama to approve the Keystone XL (TRP) pipeline by the end of next month.
  • "The process has been exhaustive in its time, breadth, and scope,” the Democrats wrote in a letter; that process has been winding its way through a regulatory review within the administration for more than five years, and Obama has not said when he will make a final decision.
  • The letter asks for a decision by May 31 because it’s a few weeks after the 90-day clock ends on the administration’s interagency review of the State Department’s environmental report on the pipeline, which was released Jan. 31.
From other sites
Comments (20)
  • Topcat
    , contributor
    Comments (435) | Send Message
     
    Not going to happen I don't think. The is a critical decision to address climate change. Forcing the Canadians to sell gas to Europe by piping it to their own coasts makes it not very cost effective, and Canadians don't want pipelines thru their sensitive areas either. Tar sands are nasty nasty nasty. If Obama does approve it, he better put a very heavy tax on it so the USA gets something out of it; as it stands now we just get a few temporary jobs and no share of the profits, nor does it help USA energy independence since none of it stays here.
    10 Apr, 12:35 PM Reply Like
  • inmckinnon
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Keystone should and will happen.
    Oil is like food or drugs. Use will happen. Overuse is the users issue.
    Many foreign sources of oil still flare much nat gas and do not extract the sulphur.
    All coal use causes more CO2 than any oil use (including oil sand oil). Shale oil, which covers enormous surface acreage per barrel, releases outrageous amounts of uncollected/unused Nat Gas into the atmosphere.
    Canadians know that pipelines are everywhere, mostly underground and are safe. It would be good economics for Canadians to ship oil sands oil east and eventually export it both east and west
    10 Apr, 01:51 PM Reply Like
  • frosty
    , contributor
    Comments (702) | Send Message
     
    When it comes to oil, price will rise to meet cost as has been well proven with oil from deep water rigs. Tar sands oil will make it to market either through the US or Canada. It would be better, however, if the US, rather than Canada, could control its final (refined) destination whether domestic or foreign. As a strategic economic measure, Keystone should be approved.
    10 Apr, 02:20 PM Reply Like
  • marpy
    , contributor
    Comments (791) | Send Message
     
    The oil will be produced regardless and so not approving this pipeline will have zero impact as far as positively affecting climate change is concerned. Not having this pipeline would actually be negative to climate change as the alternatives for transporting the oil are more carbon intensive and less safe and as well, the foriegn refineries that would be processing it are in some cases totally non regulated making it even worse.
    10 Apr, 03:20 PM Reply Like
  • bobby44
    , contributor
    Comments (239) | Send Message
     
    More koolaid anybody!
    10 Apr, 03:32 PM Reply Like
  • ninfan
    , contributor
    Comments (3) | Send Message
     
    Well said Topcat...
    10 Apr, 12:48 PM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1583) | Send Message
     
    We capture the processing value as the crude is refined and the products exported.
    10 Apr, 01:31 PM Reply Like
  • totalincome46
    , contributor
    Comments (139) | Send Message
     
    Keystone XL will feed our Gulf Coast refineries that are well-equipped to handle this type of crude. If exported as refined products or used inside the Lower 48 , that's value added and additional tax revenue, in my opinion. Every dollar that stays here is better than sending dollars to countries run by dictators. I'd rather see our money go to our trusted neighbors up north.
    10 Apr, 01:37 PM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1583) | Send Message
     
    We will still import Venezuelan crude because the Venezuelan government owns Citgo, one of our largerst refineries, and Saudi heavy because the Saudis own half of another of our largest refineries.
    10 Apr, 02:00 PM Reply Like
  • bobby44
    , contributor
    Comments (239) | Send Message
     
    I did not know about the Saudi refiner ownership.

     

    Venezuelan leadership is again talking crazy stuff (unless Obama really has a plan to destroy them). Expect some shaky things to happen to the oil supply from them and relatively soon as their production is dipping. All energy is an asset that can be used to influence others. Better to have that sitting in Texas then in Venezuela or Canada!

     

    Putin is already shown how the new game is played. Get ready NOW or be #2 forever!
    10 Apr, 03:41 PM Reply Like
  • DrP79
    , contributor
    Comments (1384) | Send Message
     
    It would be nice if the administration would do things in the NATIONAL interest instead of his PERSONAL interest.

     

    He is driving a wedge between our close allies, Canada in this case, and supporting our enemies interests. More cheaper energy is good for us, strengthens our relationship with Canada, and hurts Russia and the oil barons of the middle east.

     

    That 5 Democrats up for election understand the nature of the vote means that their interests are slowly changing from his also.
    10 Apr, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • Ruffdog
    , contributor
    Comments (1612) | Send Message
     
    I bet these 5 democrats would not have signed the letter if it were not that they were up for re-election. Now they can tell the voters that they tried to do the right think but it was Obama's fault.
    10 Apr, 04:07 PM Reply Like
  • john murdoch
    , contributor
    Comments (9) | Send Message
     
    So the other 6 democrats that AREN'T facing reelection??? What about them?
    Quit ignoring the facts that are contrary to your opinion.
    10 Apr, 09:46 PM Reply Like
  • Arnold Layne
    , contributor
    Comments (45) | Send Message
     
    You almost hope for rejection to watch the congressional demonrats run for the hills.
    10 Apr, 03:24 PM Reply Like
  • monmon
    , contributor
    Comments (13) | Send Message
     
    the Canadian oil will be sold to you or somebody else it does not matter!!!!!!!!
    10 Apr, 03:55 PM Reply Like
  • Ruffdog
    , contributor
    Comments (1612) | Send Message
     
    I am long KMP. I hope that Obama does not approve keystone. The tar sand oil can get piped to the west coast on projects like the TransMountain pipeline owned by KMP.

     

    If this part of the Keystone pipeline is not approved then more oil going to the gulf will come from North Dakota which is a good thing.
    10 Apr, 04:05 PM Reply Like
  • bobby44
    , contributor
    Comments (239) | Send Message
     
    I believe the plan is an on ramp to pipe Bakken oil to the Gulf Coast via the KXL. No Keystone XL = no North Dakota oil!

     

    Maybe some one will build a pipeline to move North Dakota (and other Bakken production). Just leave some capacity to add in Canadian production too.
    13 Apr, 11:19 AM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1583) | Send Message
     
    A pipeline across the Rockies is an extremely ambitious plan borne of desperation. Better to go east.
    10 Apr, 04:33 PM Reply Like
  • john murdoch
    , contributor
    Comments (9) | Send Message
     
    We are already sending it to the US on rail, which you probably notice has been blowing up all over the place. Seems to me a new state of the art pipeline would be much safer.
    10 Apr, 09:47 PM Reply Like
  • Topcat
    , contributor
    Comments (435) | Send Message
     
    I agree..please build a nice safe one to one of your coasts :)..
    14 Apr, 12:32 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector