Make or Break Time for the Middle Class says Obama

[Gaspar]

That map shows a very small subset of all the pipelines running through the area.  There are many more.

These are just the big ones. 

[nathanm]

Looks like the bill will pass without the permanent tax hike, and the president will sign it, except the Republicans intend to add a section removing the ban on the construction of the Keystone Pipeline.  In which case the president will not sign the bill.  

Oh, jesus, the Keystone Pipeline isn't "banned." It's being rerouted. Stop lying.

[Gaspar]

We now have the president's response:

""However many jobs might be generated by a Keystone pipeline," he said, "they're going to be a lot fewer than the jobs that are created by extending the payroll tax cut and extending unemployment insurance."  http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/12/08/obama_more_jobs_created_by_unemployment_insurance_than_by_keystone.html

Way to go Mr. President!  Unemployment creates more jobs than. . .jobs.  You and Nanna should get a room.

[nathanm]

And Gaspar once again proves he either can't do basic arithmetic or doesn't know when one should apply it.

[Gaspar]

Oh, jesus, the Keystone Pipeline isn't "banned." It's being rerouted. Stop lying.

Wrong and wrong. The only place they have agreed to re-route is in Nebraska and that's old news.

By the end of this year the EPA and other agencies were supposed to rule on if the pipeline was in the "national interest" to construct.  All indications were that the pipeline was to be approved without challenge. This would allow them to proceed on the licensing and engineering. In November President Obama suspended the agencies rulings until 2013.  

The pipeline will be approved, we've already sunk a ton of money and research into it.  The delay is political, which makes it even more stinky.  

On November 10, four days after twelve thousand people encircled the White House, culminating the months of protests, President Obama announced "the decision on the pipeline permit would be delayed until at least 2013, pending further environmental review".

[Townsend]

 The delay is political, which makes it even more stinky.  

On November 10, four days after twelve thousand people encircled the White House, culminating the months of protests, President Obama announced "the decision on the pipeline permit would be delayed until at least 2013, pending further environmental review".

By "political" do you mean that enough people said they're against it that the "government for the people" might've taken a moment to listen?

[Conan71]

How many Americans did George Bush put out of work?

Many more than got work during his term.

Still in blame Bush mode.  FAIL!

Blaming Bush doesn't create jobs.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Still in blame Bush mode.  FAIL!

Blaming Bush doesn't create jobs.

Blah, blah, blah...just like Bush blaming Clinton for 8 years didn't mean anything either.

[nathanm]

Wrong and wrong. The only place they have agreed to re-route is in Nebraska and that's old news.

By the end of this year the EPA and other agencies were supposed to rule on if the pipeline was in the "national interest" to construct.  All indications were that the pipeline was to be approved without challenge. This would allow them to proceed on the licensing and engineering. In November President Obama suspended the agencies rulings until 2013.

Nice how you so quickly contradict yourself. You tell me I'm wrong in saying that you lied when you said the pipeline was banned, yet you yourself then state that it's delayed, not banned. That's freakin' hilarious.

[Gaspar]

Nice how you so quickly contradict yourself. You tell me I'm wrong in saying that you lied when you said the pipeline was banned, yet you yourself then state that it's delayed, not banned. That's freakin' hilarious.

You're right, I fell for the media hype.  They are calling it the "Keystone Ban" but it's actually just a campaign delay.

But it is also facing other obstacles that are a bit more insidious than what we see in the media. The oil produced in the oil sands region is what is known as "Synthetic Oil."  That doesn't mean it's actually synthetic, that just means it is recovered from sedimentary structures and has almost no sulfur and an API of about 30.  This makes it extremely clean and free from many of the polluting components.

This type of oil is very desirable for fuel and does not produce much of the byproducts in refining as heaver oil such as that recovered from deep sea wells and most mid-eastern terrestrial production.  This makes it cheap to refine and very valuable.

Currently, Canada is shipping much of this crude to Venezuela for refining, and Chavez is then selling the fuel to us.

In fact, The Keystone poses such a threat to Venezuela, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia that they are spending unknown amounts on lobby efforts to stop it from multiple angles. Several months ago, a number of shipments of heavy mining equipment was stopped at the US/Canadian border because complaints were lodged that the transport of the equipment was blocking roads and making travel difficult for motorists. This delay was devastating on the project.  When the complaints were finally investigated it was found that the majority of letters, emails and calls to Montana and Idaho's highway department originated in Nigeria, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and other countries.

I assume the money pumped in to much of the effort to slow or stop the pipeline emanates from these same sources.

[nathanm]

You're right, I fell for the media hype. 

But it is also facing other obstacles that are a bit more insidious than what we see in the media. The oil produced in the oil sands region is what is known as "Synthetic Oil."  That doesn't mean it's actually synthetic, that just means it is recovered from sedimentary structures and has almost no sulfur and an API of about 30.  This makes it extremely clean and free from many of the polluting components.

You knew perfectly well what was going on. I'm not going to speculate further about your motives.

The "oil" produced from the tar sands has an extremely low eROI. It takes more energy to get the tar out and turn it into useful oil than it does to make oil from turkey offal. Using it for fuel is beyond stupid. It's much more useful as raw materials to be turned into fertilizer and plastic. Moreover, despite the enormous volume of recoverable oil, it can't be recovered quickly enough to make up for the declines in existing oil fields. It's like trying to get oil in Oklahoma these days. Sure, there's still plenty there, but it takes a lot of effort to get a small trickle. You nothing-but-oil guys are like a Quaalude addict not believing that all the Quaalude factories are being shut down and refusing to move the hell on.

Such refusal to consider the future is going to cause Tulsa to shrivel up and die in the next hundred years along with the oil and gas industries.

[Gaspar]

You knew perfectly well what was going on. I'm not going to speculate further about your motives.

The "oil" produced from the tar sands has an extremely low eROI. It takes more energy to get the tar out and turn it into useful oil than it does to make oil from turkey offal. Using it for fuel is beyond stupid. It's much more useful as raw materials to be turned into fertilizer and plastic. Moreover, despite the enormous volume of recoverable oil, it can't be recovered quickly enough to make up for the declines in existing oil fields. It's like trying to get oil in Oklahoma these days. Sure, there's still plenty there, but it takes a lot of effort to get a small trickle. You nothing-but-oil guys are like a Quaalude addict not believing that all the Quaalude factories are being shut down and refusing to move the hell on.

Such refusal to consider the future is going to cause Tulsa to shrivel up and die in the next hundred years along with the oil and gas industries.

I don't know that I need to respond to this, but what the heck. . .

Are you trying to imply that Synthetic and light sweet crude are worse than heavy crude?

Never mind.   

[nathanm]

No, I'm stating outright that it takes nearly as much energy to extract the oil from the tar sands as we get from the oil when we burn it. This has zero to do with the amount of sulfur in the oil. Surely you're familiar with the concept of eROI?

[Gaspar]

No, I'm stating outright that it takes nearly as much energy to extract the oil from the tar sands as we get from the oil when we burn it. This has zero to do with the amount of sulfur in the oil. Surely you're familiar with the concept of eROI?

It does not.  It's now about 43% of Canada's total oil production and they use the hot water separation method. The market dictates the return.  When the return no longer exists, nether will the market.  The oil is essentially strip mined from soil that will not sustain life.  After the mining process the bitumen and petroleum is removed and the clean soil is returned to the land.

I don't know how you could make an energy endeavor any more environmentally friendly, unless we find some endangered snail that lives on toxic bitumen who's habitat we are destroying (I assure you someone is looking for such a creature) than processing oil sand is a good thing don't you think?

There are several other areas off the coast of California, and along the north coast of alaska where billions of gallons of oil naturally seeps into sand, sediment and water.  Why is is a bad thing to use this resource and in the process create a less toxic environment?  Seems like a better option than drilling a bunch of wells just because it's cheaper, plus there are an estimated 400 years of low sulfur, low paraffin oil there.  It's almost like God said "Hey, here's some oil, and while you're at it, clean the place up!"

[Conan71]

You knew perfectly well what was going on. I'm not going to speculate further about your motives.

The "oil" produced from the tar sands has an extremely low eROI. It takes more energy to get the tar out and turn it into useful oil than it does to make oil from turkey offal. Using it for fuel is beyond stupid. It's much more useful as raw materials to be turned into fertilizer and plastic. Moreover, despite the enormous volume of recoverable oil, it can't be recovered quickly enough to make up for the declines in existing oil fields. It's like trying to get oil in Oklahoma these days. Sure, there's still plenty there, but it takes a lot of effort to get a small trickle. You nothing-but-oil guys are like a Quaalude addict not believing that all the Quaalude factories are being shut down and refusing to move the hell on.

Such refusal to consider the future is going to cause Tulsa to shrivel up and die in the next hundred years along with the oil and gas industries.

Glad to see you know more about the oil industry than people in the oil industry know about it.  Maybe I should start listening to you instead of the oil company execs I had lunch with today.  You seem far better versed on the topic than they do.

Never a dull moment in Nate's household, I suspect.