Keystone Pipeline review process 5X longer than average

[dwarthog]

Keystone XL review taking 5 times longer than average

http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/energy/keystone-xl-review-taking-times-longer-than-average/article_37e3b88e-ea35-5674-ae18-1d8dc7f35bdf.html

[okie52]

http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/energy/keystone-xl-review-taking-times-longer-than-average/article_37e3b88e-ea35-5674-ae18-1d8dc7f35bdf.html

And the good president was just here at Cushing in 2012 heralding his commitment to getting the southern leg done even though he had nothing to do with it.

[champions77]

And the good president was just here at Cushing in 2012 heralding his commitment to getting the southern leg done even though he had nothing to do with it.

Add that as another dose of "deception" of the American people. He also took credit for the resurgence of the US Oil Industry. He has about as much to do with that as I did the last Apollo Mission to the moon.
And remember the media about to pee on themselves with excitement as a "new" kind of politician was coming onto the political scene in 2007. He was going to "unite" us. He was going to fundamentally change this country. He was going to utilize diplomacy in dealing with our adversaries, he was going to bring HOPE and CHANGE along with it.

About the only President who could make Jimmy Carter look good. Ole Jimmy meant well, he just surrounded himself with his Georgia buddies who many unfortunately were incompetent. Sometimes when you owe political favors, you owe them to folks that are clueless. But as to integrity and morals, and a belief in the American way, no comparison in the two. I don't believe Jimmy would stand there 22 times and lie to me about a program that he was promoting, knowing if the truth was told, he would never pass through Congress.

[badger]

It's not gonna get passed while President Obama's in office. It especially isn't going to now after the EPA river disaster in Colorado.

[Serenity Now]

It's not gonna get passed while President Obama's in office. It especially isn't going to now after the EPA river disaster in Colorado.

Fool's oil.

[olevetonahill]

Dont see a need for it, But I do see a need for the Jobs it will create

[Serenity Now]

Dont see a need for it, But I do see a need for the Jobs it will create
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/09/3-key-keystone-xl-questions-answered/


The construction phase, though, is expected to take only one to two years. After construction, the pipeline would employ a lesser number, primarily for maintenance. The total number of long-term jobs: about 50.

[olevetonahill]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/09/3-key-keystone-xl-questions-answered/

Jobs is Jobs ya Moran!

[Serenity Now]

Cost is $7 billion. 50 full time positions. Let's say $75,000 per year. That investment will pay off in the year 3881 between the 2nd and 3rd quarter.

I'm no job creator but I can come up with a better way to spend $7 billion to add jobs.

[olevetonahill]

Cost is $7 billion. 50 full time positions. Let's say $75,000 per year. That investment will pay off in the year 3881 between the 2nd and 3rd quarter.

I'm no job creator but I can come up with a better way to spend $7 billion to add jobs.


Is it YOUR money? Taxpayer money? How many Construction jobs? Are you really this simple?

[Serenity Now]

Those are short term jobs. If you're for job development get some bang for your buck.

I guess I should ask you, "are you really that dense"? My scenario is hyperbole to some extent, sure, but the point is, if you're spending $7 billion for 50 PERMANENT jobs beginning in the year 2017 and this is your plan, you're not doing it right.

[olevetonahill]

Those are short term jobs. If you're for job development get some bang for your buck.

I guess I should ask you, "are you really that dense"? My scenario is hyperbole to some extent, sure, but the point is, if you're spending $7 billion for 50 PERMANENT jobs beginning in the year 2017 and this is your plan, you're not doing it right.

No son I aint Dense at all. But your intelligence is in question!
Ill ask again Is it YOUR money?
The purpose of the thing is to get OIL to the refinery's Not so much Jobs. those are a By product.

[BoulderSooner79]

Perfect example of policy getting dictated by corporations and political donors. Warren Buffett wants so keep shipping oil using his railroads and not pipelines. Expect this to become even more prevalent with the wide open donations and super PACs.

[TAFBSooner]

OK, I answered your prayer for "one more oil boom."

Did you **** it away or not?

- God

[Tear Down This Wall]

On this topic, I'm disappointed in the board as a whole,and here is why...

...the topic ends with "5X longer than average" and there has not been one dick joke told. Not even a fleeting attempt at it.

You guys are getting soft.

[Serenity Now]

I'll give it a run....Is it the serge ibaka/john hamm of pipelines?

[hawaii 5-0]

Let the Canadians keep their dirty oil.

Or ship it west to British Columbia. Oh wait......even the Canadians nixed that idea. They don't want their Canadian Rockies polluted.

Can't they built their own refineries ?

A few thousand temporary jobs is a weak bandaid for our economy.

5-0

[dwarthog]

A few thousand temp jobs would probably drop the unemployment statistics a full percentage point with the way this admin counts jobs and then when they are gone no big deal, those people would go directly into the non-participation bucket.

Win- Win!

[Serenity Now]

A few thousand temp jobs would probably drop the unemployment statistics a full percentage point with the way this admin counts jobs and then when they are gone no big deal, those people would go directly into the non-participation bucket.

Win- Win!

I label you "glass half full".

[BoulderSooner79]

On this topic, I'm disappointed in the board as a whole,and here is why...

...the topic ends with "5X longer than average" and there has not been one dick joke told. Not even a fleeting attempt at it.

You guys are getting soft.

I see what you did there...