Seeking Alpha

Canadian messengers are promoting the Keystone pipeline as in the U.S. national interest and an...

Canadian messengers are promoting the Keystone pipeline as in the U.S. national interest and an essential part of moving toward energy independence, but the argument is undercut if most of the oil flowing through the line would end up being exported, as seems likely. Adding to the controversy is Pres. Obama's reported remarks that the number of jobs supporters claim the pipeline will generate is exaggerated.
Comments (21)
  • Nowhere near as exaggerated as the numbers green jobs Obama his ilk promised.
    14 Mar 2013, 06:43 PM Reply Like
  • Also nowhere the exaggeration of the jobs to be created by Obama's stimulus plan.
    14 Mar 2013, 06:45 PM Reply Like
  • let's not add quality jobs...let's just continue to add low paying jobs and say things are better
    14 Mar 2013, 06:48 PM Reply Like
  • energy independence is nonsense. what keystone does is give the US flexibility. the heavy crude substitutes for Venezuelan


    more supply = more options.
    at the margin it will reduce price


    very very unlikely the US exports oil - but it is true that with keystone more product would be exported from gulf coast refineries = jobs


    more flow to the gulf and more product means lower gasoline prices especialy on the East coast.


    with keystone the US no longer needs SPR - what would be the point - this oil could be progressively sold down


    this thing has many benefits


    Obama is too much of an ideolog to see this. Expect more delay.


    14 Mar 2013, 06:56 PM Reply Like
  • US was a net exporter of oil in 2011
    15 Mar 2013, 02:26 AM Reply Like
  • To riff off of Ms. Pelosi: "We have to build the pipeline before we can find out how many jobs are in it..."
    14 Mar 2013, 07:01 PM Reply Like
  • Pretty much true for anything. Everything else is just an estimate.
    15 Mar 2013, 02:26 AM Reply Like
  • one big issue however with the keystone is that the canadian companies that mine these tar sands have such low margins and if oil prices go down from the glut produced by the cheaper american shales how much would actually be pumped down these pipelines? the canadians arent going to pump oil if they arent making money.
    14 Mar 2013, 07:05 PM Reply Like
  • A lot of the costs from the newer oil sand technology are not only competitive with shale oil prices but also produce a lot less green house gasses. Have a look at CVE's web site - they use a steam injection technology to extract oil from the oil sands rather than the traditional mining and have a production cost comparable to shale oil producers.
    14 Mar 2013, 07:39 PM Reply Like
  • that would definitely be nice for some of the canadian producers, technology solves everything eventually. Margin price for alot of them need to go up to be comparable to their US peers
    14 Mar 2013, 07:44 PM Reply Like
  • Canada has a big advantage as a supplier to the world in that it is politically stable. That's a big advantage. The oil industry is in a major upheaval because of the discovery of shale oil production. Heavy oil may see less demand. Shale oil is not just in the US, the Bakken, for instance extends well into Canada. The Keystone and it's expansion, the XL can carry any kind of crude. Heavy crude has a disadvantage because of the carbon footprint, the Canadian producers are actually asking for a carbon tax so the stuff won't be discriminated against in the world market. Global warming and carbon are not just domestic concerns, many countries have concerns. Build the XL. It may end up being a white elephant or used for shale oil. The next bottleneck is going to be the refining capacity in the gulf.
    14 Mar 2013, 07:35 PM Reply Like
  • Or a really long half pipe/toboggan ride. In a thousand years, when the world long lost the taste of oil, people will point to this and's the Great Tube of Canmerica
    15 Mar 2013, 02:25 AM Reply Like
  • Having the refined product from a secure source of oil on US soil is what creates energy independence. The fact that a lot of product is exported means nothing while the fact that it is oil and refined product that Americas enemies can not turn off means everything. As for Obama's comments - I am not quite sure what would qualify him to make anything more than a guess as those posting the numbers do back up their claims.
    14 Mar 2013, 07:35 PM Reply Like
  • Canadian companies pay a lower corporate taxes what makes you think king obama will let more oil come from the good old USA soil It's not happening !
    14 Mar 2013, 07:39 PM Reply Like
  • You can side with your friends in Canada or continue to side with your enemies in Venezuela and the middle east! Obama needs to make up his mind so that Canada can find other customers for this oil if he does not want it.
    14 Mar 2013, 07:46 PM Reply Like
  • The truth probably lies some where between the claims of both sides. But, I would bet a dollar to a hole in a doughnut that actual benefits and jobs created by the pipeline are considerably less than what is claimed by those in favor the pipeline. Seems like I read an article a few months back that Texans along the route of the southern half of the pipeline are not very happy with the pipeline people. AS I remember there were very few jobs for the locals.
    14 Mar 2013, 07:48 PM Reply Like
  • AT this point does anyone really care what Obama thinks creates jobs?


    Just build the damn thing already!
    14 Mar 2013, 08:04 PM Reply Like
  • I'm not sure I trust large oil companies, but I definitely don't trust Obama. Soo, I say build it...., just don't give all the jobs to our (soon to be) new illegal "citizens". Just save a few for the legal ones.
    15 Mar 2013, 11:35 AM Reply Like
  • The lead article does not reveal who is saying that all the oil would be exported. Best to check out that idiotic idea. The US must approve oil exports, so it is in its power to use Cdn oil to substitute for oil from less politically stable countries. North American energy independence is a security issue.
    15 Mar 2013, 01:52 AM Reply Like
  • Despite the fact that I think the proponents positive impact claims are exaggerated, I say by pass the aquifer and build it. While I was in the Oil state of Texas I noticed a sign that read "entering the Edwards aquifer recharge zone"; and you know what? There aren't any gas stations in that zone! No housing with septic systems all city sewer! By pass the aquifer and build it.
    15 Mar 2013, 08:39 AM Reply Like
  • Build it the more supply the lower the price even one person who gets a job is better than unemployment or no job at all !
    17 Mar 2013, 04:31 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)