Why shouldn't we build the keystone pipeline?

Question

Why shouldn't we build the keystone pipeline?

Answer 1

It rhymes with BP---oh woops.

Answer 2

All of what chosen 1 wrote, and add to that that there is a very sensitive water source (aquifer) that lies very close to the surface and services the lifelines to four different states, that could be endangered because this particular type of oil (shale) needs to be piped under much more pressure than conventional piping and is more subject to leaking.

Answer 3

The three-toed pygmy salamander would be forced to relocate to the other side of the hill.

Answer 4

Two Years On, Tar Sands Spill Casts Long Shadow



This week, as Senate Democrats narrowly defeated a renewed—and some say misguided—call to rush construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, residents and officials at the site of the country's largest-ever tar sands oil spill are still reeling nearly two years after the fact. A look at the fallout from that incident in Michigan reveals that a spill of diluted bitumen, the kind from Alberta's tar sands that Keystone would carry, is a far nastier beast than your typical spill of conventional crude. It also shows that cleaning it up can be just as damaging to the environment as the spill itself.

Answer 5

It doesn't create jobs in America. It creates 1500 temporary jobs, but Canadians would do the bulk of the work. Canadian materials would be used as well.

It's an EXPORT pipeline, meant to be shipped to Europe and china, not for US consumption.



Democrats want to make sure it's safe, but we also oppose to a foreign company forcing eminent domain on American landowners.



Nevertheless, democrats provided a way forward just yesterday, if republicans would agree to use American steel, American workers, and have the oil remain in the US for American use. Republicans rejected the amendment. http://current.com/shows/upstream/93696456_breaking-republicans-kill-wyden-amendment-to-keep-keystone-xl-us-friendly.htm

Answer 6

Let's look at it from the other side, just to try things out...

Why allow the pipeline?

We don't need it, it's not the only one bringing fuel down from Canada, it crosses private property, offers environmental risks, becomes a terrorist target, and in 15 or 50 years, becomes a burden when it needs to be torn down.

All for what purpose?

To pump oil to Texas where there's already oil?

It's almost a parody of common sense, yet it is being hailed as a life-saving measure by some.

I just don't see a need for the darn thing.

Show me a single positive, and I'm willing to consider a change in my stance.

Answer 7

Stealing peoples land for private use via eminent domain is still property theft. I'm cool with the pipeline as long as that isn't the case.

Answer 8

There are environmental concerns that should be addressed first.

Answer 9

The simple answer is because the final route hasn't been determined. Due to the fact that the Keystone pipeline is an international pipeline, the governors of the states can block the pipeline, if it passes through their state. Gov. Dave Heineman, the Republican governor of Nebraska, did just that. Heineman expects to offer details for the new route before the election in November. However, it doesn't make sense to approve the pipeline before a final route has been determined with the accompanying environmental studies.

Answer 10

1. The oil isn't being sold to us therefor it will not effect the price of gas at all.



2. Nebraska doesn't want the pipeline going through it's state, and I don't blame them. It's an environmental disaster waiting to happen whether you want to admit it or not.



3. The oil is being sold to China.



4. The jobs created by the pipeline would be temporary. It does not require an unlimited amount of steel, and it does not require an unlimited number of workers. This is a fantasy created by your oil puppeteers.



5. I have replied to these exact questions politely and intelligently, and every single time I have been flat out ignored. So please stop asking questions you have no desire to find an answer to.

Answer 11

We should, but the liberals are against it as always, they say more drilling won't effect the price of gas, but the LOSS of imported oil from the Middle East will effect it--OIL IS OIL--whether it comes out of the ground HERE or in the Middle East********************************************************************************************************

Answer 12

The left wants gas prices to rise, and they are against anything that would help alleviate the pain at the pump. Obama himself said his economic policy would cause energy prices to "necessarily skyrocket". The energy "czar" said he wants gas prices to match Europe's, $10 a gallon. The pipeline would not hurt the environment in any significant way. The other ones didn't.



Even if gas prices did not go down one penny, it would still create jobs. The left is losing on this one and they know it.

Answer 13

Environmental extremism and fear mongering.



Also you have scumbag groups like environmentalist nutjobs, or on the other side the 'biofuel' lobby who'd rather keep gas and oil prices as high as possible to keep their business profitable, so anything that might go against their business plan is lobbied against.



And Obomber is by far dumb enough to fall for it. What an idiot.