Slashdot Mirror


Obama Vetoes Keystone XL Pipeline Bill

An anonymous reader writes: As expected, President Obama has vetoed a bill that would have given the green light for construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline. "By saying no to the legislation, Mr. Obama retains the authority to make a final judgment on the pipeline on his own timeline. The White House has said the president would decide whether to allow the pipeline when all of the environmental and regulatory reviews are complete. ... Since 2011, the proposed Keystone pipeline, which would deliver up to 800,000 barrels daily of heavy petroleum from the oil sands of Alberta to ports and refineries on the Gulf Coast, has emerged as a broader symbol of the partisan political clash over energy, climate change and the economy."

8 of 437 comments (clear)

  1. Is this his first veto? by WhiteDragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, after looking it up, I see that it is only his 3rd. For comparison, George W. Bush did 11, Bill Clinton did 36, George H.W. Bush did 29, and Ronald Reagan did 39. Is that because he's signing lots of things, or because the congress is sending him so few bills?

    --
    Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
  2. Re:Should be damaging by SSSnakys · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As a Canadian, I find the Keystone pipeline offensive. We should be investing our tax dollars into the future and in clean energy than in dirty tar sand oil. Can't wait till Harper is turfed to put the final nail in the coffin of this giant waste of taxpayer money.

  3. Re:The Keystone Pipeline already exists by hondo77 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Um, Buffett already makes money hand-over-fist on all kinds of other things already (including railroad regardless of whether the pipeline is approved or not). If you think Obama vetoed Keystone XL just so Buffett can make even more money hand-over-fist, you're seriously deluded.

    --
    I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
  4. Re:Best money Tom Steyer ever spent by sycodon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I heard an Oil Train just derailed and blew up the other day.

    At least the Oil Clean Up crews and probably funeral homes will have increased business.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  5. BS aside, is the K-XL a good thing or not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    With all the smoke coming from the left and right, is the Keystone XL pipeline a good or bad idea?

    Right now, gas prices are relatively low, but they are rising, and oil will be back in the triple digits soon enough, almost definitely by Memorial Day. So, having the ability to use oil sands is a good thing since oil prices have replaced standard inflation for the reason for price hikes on virtually any type of good/service out there, and once oil starts going to $150-250 a barrel, the economy here in the US will grind to a halt, just like it did in 1972 and 2008. Plus, an oil sands pipeline is a lot cheaper than another theater of conflict in the Middle East.

    Of course, there are the downsides of the pipeline:

    It paralyzes growth in alternative energies, because medium term to long term, oil needs to be relegated for making plastic, not causing more climate change.

    It makes people rich who are not exactly good global citizens. ISIS just destroyed a major part of mankind's history today by torching museums and libraries in Mosul today, and demand for oil just supports nations and groups like that. Oil used now just means wars later.

    The record of oil pipelines isn't exactly sterling, with regards to leaks. Assuming it follows most construction done by the absolute lowest bidder, it won't exactly be leak-proof, and it will be a crap-shoot of what the pipeline fouls up.

    tl;dr... is this pipeline a net good, or a net bad overall?

    1. Re:BS aside, is the K-XL a good thing or not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The oil sands are already being refined.. much in the upper midwest.
      The pipeline will bypass the midwest refinery's and send the oil down to a duty free port on the gulf of mexico where it can be exported.
      This will cause gas prices to RISE in the midwest, as well as cause more oil products to leave north america causing energy to rise overall.

      The pipeline is ONLY being built to get to the pre-existing duty free port so that they can manipulate a higher price for the oil.

  6. Re:Obama vetoes jobs by Brad+Eleven · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The XL pipeline would provide only temporary jobs for the construction of the pipeline. It might require a few dozen permanent jobs for maintenance and other costs associated with any ongoing concern. Then again, the US firms (if any) charged with maintaining the pipeline once it's built may not hire anyone new for these roles.

    I get the impression that you're joking, but it's more important than at any time in the past to correct false assertions: Most everyone has lost his sense of humor, and facts are routinely confused with personal or group truths. It will be more important to correct false assertions tomorrow -- why not procrastinate in order to ramp up the significance of your unfounded exaggerations?

    Better suggestion for you -- from Len Grossman. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    --
    "Press to test."
    (click)
    "Release to detonate."
  7. Stupid idea anyway by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unless you want to live in a 140 F (40 C) world, you need to leave 2/3 of all the coal and tar sands in the ground and not export them like morons.

    Earth will get along fine after we kill ourselves off due to our shortsighted nature.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --