Obama administration rejected TransCanada's Keystone fallout: Canada to offer oil to China ,

[trooper]

Published: Wednesday, 18 Jan 2012 | 3:26 PM ET

"We're complete fools" for scuttling the Keystone Pipeline because it would've brought energy security to the U.S., well-known oilman T. Boone Pickens told CNBC Wednesday.

The chairman of BP Capital Management spoke after the Obama administration rejected TransCanada's [TRP 41.28 0.05 (+0.12%) ] $7 billion pipeline project running from the western province of Alberta to Houston.

Proponents said the pipeline would have generated thousands of jobs jobs and lessened dependence on foreign oil while opponents said it would've increased the chance of spills in environmentally sensitive regions.

"You want energy security for America and this was one part of the puzzle," said Pickens, long a proponent of developing oil from American shale and the backer of legislation promoting using alternative fuel sources in big trucks.

"We treat Canada as if it’s a secondary state of the United States," Pickens said. "Canada is a sovereign country, and they have told you you either take the pipeline, we’ll make the oil available to you or we’re going west to British Columbia and they’ll export the oil to China."

"So you’re going to fool around here and that oil’s gonna be connected to China instead of the United States," he added. "I mean, we’re complete fools

http://www.cnbc.com/id/46044297

[GreenzoneToGreenback]

Obamas 2012 campaign slogan:

Vote for me, cause the other guy will make you seek employement..

[Luigi1]

Keystone will go through once Obummer lines up Chinese contractors & he gets his kickback.

[Unitedrich]

This move by Obama just defies pure logic, but heck, what does one expect out of his corrupt administration?

[parmenio]

Like to hear from our liberal friends on this one.......

[desimo]

I thought he said that the first thing on his mind in the morning and the last thing on his mind at night was how to create more jobs. He obviously is not interested in oil production in America in that I have not heard him say one thing regarding oil fields in the Dakotas which can drawf those of the ME.

[tarsi]

Parmenio here you go! as with all things there are two sides to the story, so you tell us who is right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In announcing his decision to not grant permission for the Keystone pipeline extension, opponents of President Obama argue the president gave in to pressure from environmental activists.

In reality, the president was resisting an artificial deadline from Republicans trying to force his hand.

But the fact is, for the good of our country and our economy, rejecting the Keystone XL deal was the best decision possible.

Here are six facts about the proposed Keystone XL deal that make clear why the pipeline was a bad deal for America and why it deserved to be rejected:

1. Keystone XL Would Not Reduce Foreign Oil Dependency

The oil to be sent through Keystone XL pipeline was never destined for US markets. In its own presentation to investors about the proposed pipeline extension, TransCanada (the company behind Keystone XL) boasted that most if not all of the extracted and refined oil would be exported --- sold in oversees markets where oil fetches a higher price (and thus turns a higher profit for the company).

2. Keystone XL Would Have Increased Domestic Oil Prices

Currently, Canadian oil reserves stored in the Midwest help suppress gas prices in the United States, particularly for farmers in our nation’s heartland.

Related Stories

Obama administration rejects Keystone pipeline permit

Pipeline pushover: What Obama’s Keystone XL decision really tells the American public

In its permit application for the pipeline, TransCanada noted that the Keystone XL pipeline would allow the company to drain these reserves and export that fuel as well. According to TransCanada’s own statements, this would raise gas prices in the United States, especially in the Midwest.

3. Keystone XL Overstated Number of Jobs to be Created

In 2008, TransCanada’s original permit application to the State Department said the Keystone XL pipeline would create “a peak workforce of approximately 3,500 to 4,200 construction personnel” in temporary jobs building the pipeline.

By 2011, now facing growing opposition to the pipeline, TransCanada had inflated these numbers (using undisclosed formulas) to 20,000. Supporters of the proposal, backed by big oil, have since trumpeted these trumped up numbers.

4. Current Keystone Pipeline Leaked 12 Times in Last Year

The pipeline that the Obama administration has rejected the permit for would be an extension of a pipeline that has already leaked -- not just once, but 12 times in the last year.

While TransCanada tried to dismiss these leaks as “minor” averaging “just five to 10 gallons of oil” each, the leak on May 7, 2011 near Millner, N.D., spilled about 21,000 gallons of oil in total.

5. The Environmental Concerns About Oil Leaks Are Justified

Nebraska’s Republican Governor Dave Heineman strongly opposed the Keystone XL project because the pipeline would run through a massive and vital aquifer in his state the supplies clean drinking water to over 2 million Americans plus water that fuels the region’s agriculture industry.

Building the pipeline might have created a few thousand temporary jobs but even a minor oil spill in or near the aquifer would have jeopardized hundreds of thousands of jobs, not to mention the health and safety of millions.

Meanwhile, in Michigan where a similar tar sands pipeline spilled over 840,000 gallons of crude oil into the Kalamazoo River in 2010, residents are still complaining of headaches, dizziness and nausea while studies continue to look at the long-term effects of just being near such an oil spill when it happens.

6. Mining Tar Sands Would Worsen Global Warming

Assuming you believe, like the vast majority of the world’s scientists, that climate change is both real and of concern, the Canadian tar sands are the second largest carbon reserve in the world.

Mining these reserves would release all of that carbon into the atmosphere, to detrimental effect on our environment. Sure, Canada might go ahead and mine the tar sands anyway, but the United States doesn’t have to help pollute the planet and our own states in the process.

No matter how you look at it, the Keystone XL proposal was a slimy, scam of a deal. America is better than that.

We can create good-paying jobs that build our families and our economy for the future without hurting our environment today.

We can invest in innovative energy technology that not only reduces our dependence on dirty fuel but also puts us in the lead in critical, emerging markets.

We can prioritize good jobs and a competitive economy of the future, with all the upsides of American energy production and innovation and far, far fewer of the downsides that Keystone carried.

Let’s focus on more of those deals going forward.

Sally Kohn is a Fox News Contributor and grassroots strategist. You can find her online at http://sallykohn.com.

[desimo]

To worsen global warming you have to first have global warming. As Western Washington has been dumped with snow I do not think global warming is a concern.

There are equal number of people without agenda who support the safety of pipelines. I do not remember a lot of problems with the one in Alaska.

Right now any jobs created would be a good thing.

If Obama is just protesting what he thinks is an artificial time line then it is just another example of placing politics ahead of the betterment of the American people.

[tarsi]

Out of all the problems mentioned here you stick on global warming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and it appears what he is doing is looking out for the betterment of the American people, those in the midwest are American as well, just because this won't affect you it does others, its just another example of BIG BUSINESS trying to exploit the American people for their own personal gain, and for a few thousand TEMPORY jobs he should sell the American people out?

[desimo]

Out of all the problems mentioned here you stick on global warming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and it appears what he is doing is looking out for the betterment of the American people, those in the midwest are American as well, just because this won't affect you it does others, its just another example of BIG BUSINESS trying to exploit the American people for their own personal gain, and for a few thousand TEMPORY jobs he should sell the American people out?

This person is NOT making much sense. If this person is talking about my post, I did not get 'stuck' on global warming. The pipeline does NOT mean temporary jobs and would reduce oil prices. And how is 'big business' trying to exploit the American people? Sounds like someone needs to go back to their Occupy camp.

[TexasGranny]

Parmenio here you go! as with all things there are two sides to the story, so you tell us who is right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No matter how you look at it, the Keystone XL proposal was a slimy, scam of a deal. America is better than that.

We can create good-paying jobs that build our families and our economy for the future without hurting our environment today.

We can invest in innovative energy technology that not only reduces our dependence on dirty fuel but also puts us in the lead in critical, emerging markets.

We can prioritize good jobs and a competitive economy of the future, with all the upsides of American energy production and innovation and far, far fewer of the downsides that Keystone carried.

Let’s focus on more of those deals going forward.

Sally Kohn is a Fox News Contributor and grassroots strategist. You can find her online at http://sallykohn.com.

In the interest of "Fair and Balanced" lets take a look at another article on the same subject from the same news source. This is why our country is in such bad shape. Our "journalists" and "commentators" can completely alter the perception of some reading by the way they present the "facts".

Keystone and the U.S. -- Why does President Obama want our country to be energy poor?

By Thomas Pyle Published January 20, 2012 | FoxNews

One of the reasons the unemployment rate has been stuck above 8 percent for years is because the Obama administration is actively blocking the private sector from creating jobs. Approving the Keystone XL pipeline, now in its third year of review, would have gone a long way toward boosting American job creation and strengthening our energy security. But the President prefers the politics of energy poverty and has sided with environmentalist radicals over hardworking Americans and their families.

The decision for the president should have been simple because the question is simple—is a pipeline from Canada to the United States in the “national interest?” Precisely what part of stable oil supplies, tens of thousands of good-paying jobs, and strengthening trade with our closest ally is not in the national interest?

Apparently, that’s not good enough for the Obama administration. Somewhere along the way, it seems, the president has misunderstood the difference between what is good for America and what is good for the special interests that support him and staff his favorite lobbying groups.

The opponents of the Keystone XL claim that the pipeline would be an environmental catastrophe, yet the Obama administration’s extensive environmental review found otherwise. In fact, the State Department’s environmental studies confirmed what we knew from the beginning—that a new pipeline would have a limited environmental impact, much less so than transport by barge, truck, or railcar. That pipelines have a limited environmental impact is one of the reasons we have more than 50,000 miles of crude oil pipelines in the U.S. already.

Another common complaint is that a pipeline will increase greenhouse gas emissions. This argument only makes sense, however, if the oil were to stay in the ground forever. But as Austan Goolsbee, the former chairman of the Obama’s White House Council of Economic Advisers, recently said, “Eventually, [a pipeline] is going to be built. It may go to the Pacific, it may go through Nebraska, but it’s going to be built somewhere.”

Indeed, the Canadian sands oil will enter the global oil supply whether U.S. refineries is the destination or not. To date, firms in China—the world’s fastest growing consumer of energy—have spent over $18 billion in acquiring interests in Canada’s oil sands.

The reality at the White House has nothing to do with protecting the environment -- it’s about reinforcing a myth of energy scarcity on the United States and driving up the price of energy.

For decades, one of the key tenets of environmental doctrine has been that the United States, and North America as a whole, is running out of affordable energy sources like oil, natural gas, and coal. For this reason, they argue, our economy must switch to renewables like wind farms and solar panels that produce electricity at intermittent rates. Through mandates, government has forced consumers to buy these sources, and the Obama administration has propped up Big Green Energy through taxpayer-funded loans to companies like Solyndra.

Yet the discovery of cost-effective oil production from Canadian oil reserves—as well as the large-scale deployment of shale technologies here in the U.S.—turns the environmentalists’ politics of energy scarcity on its head, and that is at the heart of the administration’s opposition to Keystone XL. The president wants the United States to be energy poor.

But we are not energy poor. North America is the richest place on earth when it comes to affordable energy sources.

Recently, the Institute for Energy Research released The North American Energy Inventory, which pulls together data from government sources to prove that North America holds the world’s largest combined oil, coal, and natural gas resources in the world.

How vast? There is enough oil in North America to fuel our present needs for 250 years. That’s how vast.

But it does not matter how vast our resources are if we cannot access them. That’s the point of the Keystone XL pipeline—to provide better access to Canada’s oil resources and the jobs for American workers that come from developing them. After all, it’s a $7 billion pipeline, the majority of which will be built by American workers in at least five states.

An infrastructure project of this size will create real construction jobs, and it will create jobs in American refineries when the oil starts flowing. All of these jobs are private sector—without taxpayer subsidies—and will help get American working families back on their feet.

Earlier this week, the President’s Jobs Council understood this. They said that “We should allow more access to oil, natural gas and coal opportunities on federal lands” and move forward quickly on projects that “deliver electricity and fuel,” including pipelines. If that doesn’t include the Keystone XL pipeline, it’s hard to understand what the President’s Jobs Council has in mind.

Allowing the Keystone XL pipeline to be built will create thousands of jobs and give the U.S. access to more oil resources from Canada, with the end result of improving our energy security.

More than anything, the Keystone XL pipeline is about symbolism.

That President Obama would prefer to push the U.S. down the road toward energy poverty instead of allowing it to share in the bounty of North America’s energy riches should not be lost on U.S. consumers.

It’s time for this president to stop worrying about his own job prospects and start worrying about millions of Americans who haven’t had a job since he was sworn into office.

Thomas J. Pyle is President and CEO of the American Energy Alliance.

*****************************************************

So, now who do you think is telling the truth and who is showing bias in the article - both are opinion pieces.

Even Obama's own Jobs Council is for development.

[parmenio]

Parmenio here you go! as with all things there are two sides to the story, so you tell us who is right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In announcing his decision to not grant permission for the Keystone pipeline extension, opponents of President Obama argue the president gave in to pressure from environmental activists.

In reality, the president was resisting an artificial deadline from Republicans trying to force his hand.

But the fact is, for the good of our country and our economy, rejecting the Keystone XL deal was the best decision possible.

Here are six facts about the proposed Keystone XL deal that make clear why the pipeline was a bad deal for America and why it deserved to be rejected:

1. Keystone XL Would Not Reduce Foreign Oil Dependency

The oil to be sent through Keystone XL pipeline was never destined for US markets. In its own presentation to investors about the proposed pipeline extension, TransCanada (the company behind Keystone XL) boasted that most if not all of the extracted and refined oil would be exported --- sold in oversees markets where oil fetches a higher price (and thus turns a higher profit for the company).

2. Keystone XL Would Have Increased Domestic Oil Prices

Currently, Canadian oil reserves stored in the Midwest help suppress gas prices in the United States, particularly for farmers in our nation’s heartland.

Related Stories

Obama administration rejects Keystone pipeline permit

Pipeline pushover: What Obama’s Keystone XL decision really tells the American public

In its permit application for the pipeline, TransCanada noted that the Keystone XL pipeline would allow the company to drain these reserves and export that fuel as well. According to TransCanada’s own statements, this would raise gas prices in the United States, especially in the Midwest.

3. Keystone XL Overstated Number of Jobs to be Created

In 2008, TransCanada’s original permit application to the State Department said the Keystone XL pipeline would create “a peak workforce of approximately 3,500 to 4,200 construction personnel” in temporary jobs building the pipeline.

By 2011, now facing growing opposition to the pipeline, TransCanada had inflated these numbers (using undisclosed formulas) to 20,000. Supporters of the proposal, backed by big oil, have since trumpeted these trumped up numbers.

4. Current Keystone Pipeline Leaked 12 Times in Last Year

The pipeline that the Obama administration has rejected the permit for would be an extension of a pipeline that has already leaked -- not just once, but 12 times in the last year.

While TransCanada tried to dismiss these leaks as “minor” averaging “just five to 10 gallons of oil” each, the leak on May 7, 2011 near Millner, N.D., spilled about 21,000 gallons of oil in total.

5. The Environmental Concerns About Oil Leaks Are Justified

Nebraska’s Republican Governor Dave Heineman strongly opposed the Keystone XL project because the pipeline would run through a massive and vital aquifer in his state the supplies clean drinking water to over 2 million Americans plus water that fuels the region’s agriculture industry.

Building the pipeline might have created a few thousand temporary jobs but even a minor oil spill in or near the aquifer would have jeopardized hundreds of thousands of jobs, not to mention the health and safety of millions.

Meanwhile, in Michigan where a similar tar sands pipeline spilled over 840,000 gallons of crude oil into the Kalamazoo River in 2010, residents are still complaining of headaches, dizziness and nausea while studies continue to look at the long-term effects of just being near such an oil spill when it happens.

6. Mining Tar Sands Would Worsen Global Warming

Assuming you believe, like the vast majority of the world’s scientists, that climate change is both real and of concern, the Canadian tar sands are the second largest carbon reserve in the world.

Mining these reserves would release all of that carbon into the atmosphere, to detrimental effect on our environment. Sure, Canada might go ahead and mine the tar sands anyway, but the United States doesn’t have to help pollute the planet and our own states in the process.

No matter how you look at it, the Keystone XL proposal was a slimy, scam of a deal. America is better than that.

We can create good-paying jobs that build our families and our economy for the future without hurting our environment today.

We can invest in innovative energy technology that not only reduces our dependence on dirty fuel but also puts us in the lead in critical, emerging markets.

We can prioritize good jobs and a competitive economy of the future, with all the upsides of American energy production and innovation and far, far fewer of the downsides that Keystone carried.

Let’s focus on more of those deals going forward.

Sally Kohn is a Fox News Contributor and grassroots strategist. You can find her online at http://sallykohn.com.

If you don't already know Sally Kohn is a far left wing activist that FOX employes on their "fair and balance venue. She is another environmentalist WACKO!!!!

Edited January 21, 2012 by parmenio

[tarsi]

And again I say to you there are two sides to every story so I suppose the side that you believe is right? as usual anyone and everyone that does not agree with the right(which is what you are eluding to or turned it into)because the entire bases of your post just disagrees with everything simply because its Obama so my question is again WHO IS RIGHT????????????

[parmenio]

And again I say to you there are two sides to every story so I suppose the side that you believe is right? as usual anyone and everyone that does not agree with the right(which is what you are eluding to or turned it into)because the entire bases of your post just disagrees with everything simply because its Obama so my question is again WHO IS RIGHT????????????

Why would I place my trust on MARXISTS who want to destroy our country! Can't you see what they are doing..., look at the facts!!

[TexasGranny]

And again I say to you there are two sides to every story so I suppose the side that you believe is right? as usual anyone and everyone that does not agree with the right(which is what you are eluding to or turned it into)because the entire bases of your post just disagrees with everything simply because its Obama so my question is again WHO IS RIGHT????????????

You know the one thing that has always bothered me about the liberals is they always want everyone else to come over to their viewpoint. There is no compromise even when

presented with facts. If you don't believe me, try listening with an open mind to some of the liberal commentators and politicians, Wasserman-Schmidt comes to mind immediately

for her unadulterated stupid remarks meant to divide the country - Pelosi is another one - did it ever occur to you that conservatives might have a point that is worth considering.

All of the debates in Congress get reported as the Republicans are holding everything up - but you know what, compromise is a two-way street and the dems have been unwilling

to move off their ideaological stand so why is it just the Rep's that are blamed - because the MSM is biased, that's why - they never report the full picture only the liberal side. How

many times have ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC reported on all of the legislation passed by the Republican House to support job creation when they are all sitting on Harry Reid's

desk and he will not even bring them to the floor for consideration. I could go on and on, but why bother - none of you listen to what conservatives have to say anyway. Maybe in

November we will be able to get your attention.

[tarsi]

Let me ask a question her being far left as you say does that change any of the facts?

1.

In 2008, TransCanada’s original permit application to the State Department said the Keystone XL pipeline would create “a peak workforce of approximately 3,500 to 4,200 construction personnel” in temporary jobs building the pipeline.

By 2011, now facing growing opposition to the pipeline, TransCanada had inflated these numbers (using undisclosed formulas) to 20,000. Supporters of the proposal, backed by big oil, have since trumpeted these trumped up numbers.

4. Current Keystone Pipeline Leaked 12 Times in Last Year

The pipeline that the Obama administration has rejected the permit for would be an extension of a pipeline that has already leaked -- not just once, but 12 times in the last year.

While TransCanada tried to dismiss these leaks as “minor” averaging “just five to 10 gallons of oil” each, the leak on May 7, 2011 near Millner, N.D., spilled about 21,000 gallons of oil in total.

2.

Nebraska’s Republican Governor Dave Heineman strongly opposed the Keystone XL project because the pipeline would run through a massive and vital aquifer in his state the supplies clean drinking water to over 2 million Americans plus water that fuels the region’s agriculture industry.

3.

The oil to be sent through Keystone XL pipeline was never destined for US markets. In its own presentation to investors about the proposed pipeline extension, TransCanada (the company behind Keystone XL) boasted that most if not all of the extracted and refined oil would be exported --- sold in oversees markets where oil fetches a higher price (and thus turns a higher profit for the company).

[parmenio]

You know the one thing that has always bothered me about the liberals is they always want everyone else to come over to their viewpoint. There is no compromise even when

presented with facts. If you don't believe me, try listening with an open mind to some of the liberal commentators and politicians, Wasserman-Schmidt comes to mind immediately

for her unadulterated stupid remarks meant to divide the country - Pelosi is another one - did it ever occur to you that conservatives might have a point that is worth considering.

All of the debates in Congress get reported as the Republicans are holding everything up - but you know what, compromise is a two-way street and the dems have been unwilling

to move off their ideaological stand so why is it just the Rep's that are blamed - because the MSM is biased, that's why - they never report the full picture only the liberal side. How

many times have ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC reported on all of the legislation passed by the Republican House to support job creation when they are all sitting on Harry Reid's

desk and he will not even bring them to the floor for consideration. I could go on and on, but why bother - none of you listen to what conservatives have to say anyway. Maybe in

November we will be able to get your attention.

Well said... arguing with liberals is like banging your head against the wall. They have been brain washed in this country with their NEW IDEOLOGY. They want to change what has been working for decades in this country to try something that has failed time and time again in Europe, Asia etc. How can you have a reasonable discussion with these folks? You're right..., they will get the picture in November!

[chilli24]

I am a middle of the road Democrat, and I think that rejection of the Keystone Pipeline project was absolutely stupid, there have been many policies whereI have agreed with the Obama adminsitration. This is definitely not one of them.

[tarsi]

Parmenio I know you did not just say what you said CHANGE SOMETHING THAT HAS WORKED FOR DECADES, are you kidding me, I will give you one thing it is a waste of time, you certainly just proved it with that statement, did you type that with a straight face? we are all entiltled to our own beliefs, but now I truly have a full understanding of what our countries problem is, this is exactly what you all believe, WOW........ "what has worked in this country for decades" WOW.... good luck and yes November I can't wait as well good day to you WOW i'm in shock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[CrappieShark]

These socialiats are for destroying our constitution, allowing non-Americans to be president, destroying jobs, war in every country in every situation, destroying our economy, building the economy of Iraq and other Muslim nations, Ramadan instead of Christmas, the RFID chip, Genocide of Americans. I hesitate to call them democrats because a lot of democrats are waking up. Repubicans are too. These are socialists. Science has proven there is no global warming. As a fact the temperatures show a cooling trend instead of warming when you look at all the data collected. Our earth goes through these trends and always has though. Environment and Air purity is big on the agenda? Well then let me ask you why we use weapons that cause environmnetal catastophre and destroy humanity for decades. Why does this administration continue with these wars and want more war when it is America's best interest to defend our borders and only war against a provocateur. Sabre rattling is not provacation by the way. If it is we are the biggest provacateur in the world. Anybody who is for FEMA and the NDAA bill and warmongering and the federal reserve and the continuation of the taxation that is destroying the American worker needs to form your own seperate constitution, keep the Obama administration, keep the federal reserve, separate yourselves from the USA and become your own Republic and watch as we get our constitution back and our political structure right how much better our lives would be than yours. Of course you will lose the US military that keeps you safe and helps protect you from your well deserved enemies. You would end up with no allies and would be in-fighting just as all Muslim run countries do all the time. OOPS we are starting to do that here under a MUSLIM .

[parmenio]

Parmenio I know you did not just say what you said CHANGE SOMETHING THAT HAS WORKED FOR DECADES, are you kidding me, I will give you one thing it is a waste of time, you certainly just proved it with that statement, did you type that with a straight face? we are all entiltled to our own beliefs, but now I truly have a full understanding of what our countries problem is, this is exactly what you all believe, WOW........ "what has worked in this country for decades" WOW.... good luck and yes November I can't wait as well good day to you WOW i'm in shock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Laissez-faire..., read on it! You may learn something new! This principle began to get corrupted in the early 1900's when both partlies that had a liberal agenda wanted to change this country from a capitalist economy to an entitlement large-government economy known as authortarian socialism. It has gradually crept into our way of life over the generations and taught in our schools. We had become like crabs slowly getting boiled in water and not realizing the danger.

Anyone who embraces this Marxist ideology has been brain washed by the left. They are no better than a cow being led by the nose in the farm yard relying for food and drink by its master(elitists). These are NOT the principles of of our founders.

Edited January 21, 2012 by parmenio

[Barbara020548]

Parmenio here you go! as with all things there are two sides to the story, so you tell us who is right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In announcing his decision to not grant permission for the Keystone pipeline extension, opponents of President Obama argue the president gave in to pressure from environmental activists.

In reality, the president was resisting an artificial deadline from Republicans trying to force his hand.

But the fact is, for the good of our country and our economy, rejecting the Keystone XL deal was the best decision possible.

Here are six facts about the proposed Keystone XL deal that make clear why the pipeline was a bad deal for America and why it deserved to be rejected:

1. Keystone XL Would Not Reduce Foreign Oil Dependency

The oil to be sent through Keystone XL pipeline was never destined for US markets. In its own presentation to investors about the proposed pipeline extension, TransCanada (the company behind Keystone XL) boasted that most if not all of the extracted and refined oil would be exported --- sold in oversees markets where oil fetches a higher price (and thus turns a higher profit for the company).

2. Keystone XL Would Have Increased Domestic Oil Prices

Currently, Canadian oil reserves stored in the Midwest help suppress gas prices in the United States, particularly for farmers in our nation’s heartland.

Related Stories

Obama administration rejects Keystone pipeline permit

Pipeline pushover: What Obama’s Keystone XL decision really tells the American public

In its permit application for the pipeline, TransCanada noted that the Keystone XL pipeline would allow the company to drain these reserves and export that fuel as well. According to TransCanada’s own statements, this would raise gas prices in the United States, especially in the Midwest.

3. Keystone XL Overstated Number of Jobs to be Created

In 2008, TransCanada’s original permit application to the State Department said the Keystone XL pipeline would create “a peak workforce of approximately 3,500 to 4,200 construction personnel” in temporary jobs building the pipeline.

By 2011, now facing growing opposition to the pipeline, TransCanada had inflated these numbers (using undisclosed formulas) to 20,000. Supporters of the proposal, backed by big oil, have since trumpeted these trumped up numbers.

4. Current Keystone Pipeline Leaked 12 Times in Last Year

The pipeline that the Obama administration has rejected the permit for would be an extension of a pipeline that has already leaked -- not just once, but 12 times in the last year.

While TransCanada tried to dismiss these leaks as “minor” averaging “just five to 10 gallons of oil” each, the leak on May 7, 2011 near Millner, N.D., spilled about 21,000 gallons of oil in total.

5. The Environmental Concerns About Oil Leaks Are Justified

Nebraska’s Republican Governor Dave Heineman strongly opposed the Keystone XL project because the pipeline would run through a massive and vital aquifer in his state the supplies clean drinking water to over 2 million Americans plus water that fuels the region’s agriculture industry.

Building the pipeline might have created a few thousand temporary jobs but even a minor oil spill in or near the aquifer would have jeopardized hundreds of thousands of jobs, not to mention the health and safety of millions.

Meanwhile, in Michigan where a similar tar sands pipeline spilled over 840,000 gallons of crude oil into the Kalamazoo River in 2010, residents are still complaining of headaches, dizziness and nausea while studies continue to look at the long-term effects of just being near such an oil spill when it happens.

6. Mining Tar Sands Would Worsen Global Warming

Assuming you believe, like the vast majority of the world’s scientists, that climate change is both real and of concern, the Canadian tar sands are the second largest carbon reserve in the world.

Mining these reserves would release all of that carbon into the atmosphere, to detrimental effect on our environment. Sure, Canada might go ahead and mine the tar sands anyway, but the United States doesn’t have to help pollute the planet and our own states in the process.

No matter how you look at it, the Keystone XL proposal was a slimy, scam of a deal. America is better than that.

We can create good-paying jobs that build our families and our economy for the future without hurting our environment today.

We can invest in innovative energy technology that not only reduces our dependence on dirty fuel but also puts us in the lead in critical, emerging markets.

We can prioritize good jobs and a competitive economy of the future, with all the upsides of American energy production and innovation and far, far fewer of the downsides that Keystone carried.

Let’s focus on more of those deals going forward.

Sally Kohn is a Fox News Contributor and grassroots strategist. You can find her online at http://sallykohn.com.

[desimo]

So many of the jobs from the stimulus package were only temporary so I do not see the problem with the pipeline creating temporary jobs. Right now ANY job would be appreciated.

[parmenio]

So many of the jobs from the stimulus package were only temporary so I do not see the problem with the pipeline creating temporary jobs. Right now ANY job would be appreciated.

Marxists don't look at it that way. They want ALL of us to be dependent on government. Like a bunch of LAZY bums!

[parmenio]

...still didn't get a straight answer from tarsi or Barbara0205487on whether or not they are familiar with laissez faire and why they would disagree with the concept.