Reprinted with Permission from the Heritage Foundation:
It only took President Barack Obama 2,604 days to reject the permit application for the Keystone XL pipeline.
In a statement today, Obama said the pipeline “would not serve the national interest of the United States.”
“America is now a global leader when it comes to taking serious action to fight climate change,” Obama added. “And frankly, approving this project would have undercut that global leadership.”
Former Obama administration Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu hit the nail on the head: “The decision on whether the construction should happen was a political one and not a scientific one.”
Here are the top nine reasons Obama is wrong on Keystone XL.
- Jobs and economic growth. Opponents will minimize the job numbers, saying that the pipeline will create only “a handful” of permanent jobs—and that’s correct. In his speech Obama said, “So if Congress is serious about wanting to create jobs, this was not the way to do it.” But here’s what that argument misses: the tens of thousands of construction jobs that the pipeline project will create. fact, simply building the southern portion—which didn’t need Obama’s approval—has already created 4,000 construction jobs. And if opponents are dismissive of Keystone XL, they should be dismissive of all construction projects as they’re all temporary – because they’re construction jobs. Further, Keystone XL would add economic value, transport an important energy resource efficiently and would result in billions of dollars of tax revenue for states it runs through.
- Stable supply of oil from an important trading partner that will lower gas prices. The pipeline would carry up to 830,000 barrels of oil from Canada to the Gulf Coast, where U.S. refineries are already equipped to handle heavier crudes. The pipeline will efficiently provide supply from a secure source and a friendly and important trading partner. Contra Obama’s claim today that “the pipeline would not lower gas prices for American consumers,” increased oil supplies will lower gas prices, though the impact may be small
- Safest mode of getting oil and gas to Americans. Many in the United States live near a pipeline without even knowing about it. America has more than 500,000 miles of crude oil, petroleum and natural gas pipelines and another 2 million miles of natural gas distribution pipelines. When it comes to accidents, injuries or fatalities, pipelines are the safest mode of transporting oil and gas.
- Should be a business decision, not a government one. In concluding with Secretary of State John Kerry’s assessment that the project would not be in the national interest, Obama said, “The pipeline would not make a meaningful longterm contribution to our economy.” That is not the role of the federal government to make that determination. The federal government shouldn’t make that determination with the construction of a new restaurant or boutique shop. And they shouldn’t make that determination with a pipeline. After the State Department concluded that the pipeline was environmentally safe, the decision to build Keystone XL should be a business decision – not a government one.
- We’ve done this before. The Keystone XL Pipeline is just a portion of the larger Keystone Pipeline System. You can view a map of the entire system here. Unbeknownst to many is the fact that the U.S. has already granted one of those presidential permits for the Keystone Pipeline System. For phase I of the Keystone Pipeline System, TransCanada filed an application with the Department of State (DOS) in April 2006, and the department began an environmental review in September 2006. TransCanada received its presidential permit for phase I in March 2008. From beginning to end, the process took 23 months. It has taken 86 months for Obama to say no.
- Environmentally safe. It was Albert Einstein who said the definition of insanity was “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” The State Department must be teetering on the edge of insanity, because after multiple environmental reviews concluding that Keystone XL poses minimal environmental risk to soil, wetlands, water resources, vegetation, fish, and wildlife, the Obama administration still rejected the permit application.
- Negligible climate impact. In a speech in June 2013, Obama said the climate effects of Keystone XL would have a major impact on the administration’s decision. These effects, however, would be minimal. The State Department’s final environmental impact statement concludes that the Canadian oil is coming out of the ground whether Keystone XL is built or not, so the difference in greenhouse gas emissions is miniscule. No matter your position on climate change, Keystone XL won’t make a difference.
- Can be built without the help of the taxpayer. Building and operating Keystone XL will result in real private-sector jobs that will grow the U.S. economy. This is much different from the president’s taxpayer-funded green jobs plan that merely siphons resources out of the market and forces pricier energy on the American public.
- The people want it. Lots of people want it. A CNN poll in the beginning of the year found that 57 percent of Americans support the project, while just 28 percent oppose it. Many unions want it. Former Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar called the project a “win-win.” Congress sent a bill to Obama’s desk, demonstrating their will to approve the project. Sadly, the Obama administration is catering to the small group of radical environmental activists who don’t want the pipeline.
Last April, the Washington Post slammed the Obama administration’s continued delay of a Keystone XL decision, calling it “absurd” and “embarrassing.” Rejecting the permit application is even more absurd and more embarrassing.
This group should really spend a little money on hiring a writer trained in argumentation. Many of the points are irrelevant and they even take out a few of their own arguments.
Predictably juvenile response. It’s like a bunch of high school sophomores wrote it.
Just skimming the headings I count at least 4 blatant lies.
Funny, I always think the same of your posts, Heisenberg. When was the last time you supported something that was good, decent, and made sense?
I’m sure you do. I support everything that does make sense. For instance just a day or two ago I agreed with Blog Pundit Troy Jones that Ben Carson would have the last laugh. Albeit Carson’s laugh would be a weird, disconnected chuckle. And he would not be having the last laugh as the Republican candidate.
The biggest problem is that there is so little in this intellectual hog wallow that makes real sense and that was the reason for my initial post. That writing above really does look like a bunch of high school sophomores did it.
This is a sad day for America. That oil would have created billions in revenue and tens of thousands of jobs. Don’t cry to me when gas goes to $6.00 a barrel. So long John Galt.
Gas goes to $6.00 a barrel? Bwahaha! What gas are you sniffing? The word you’re looking for is gallon. Do you work for The Heritage Foundation?
I would guess he meant $6.00 a gallon, so you can put away your snide comments; I’m sure you’re perfect (not).
I can’t wait till it goes to $6.00 per barrel! That means about 20 cents a gallon!
Clearly this was political in nature, but doesn’t tell the whole story. Mr. Obama believes that we need to be leaders to save our planet and its citizens from a catastrophic change in our climate and he sees this as just another step in fighting climate change. The less oil that comes out of the ground the less carbon that is released into the air. And what does a pipeline get us? Temporary construction jobs, some property taxes and pumping station electricity sales. Is that worth the risk of polluting our home? Not in my book.
If the Keystone pipeline were to be built, the oil would just go to China. America is merely a conduit for China’s thirst for oil if the pipeline is built. Why are the Republicans soft on China?
Currently, China is being very aggressive in claiming disputed islands in the South China Sea. A Hong Kong consortium is working to build a canal in Nicaragua to revival the Panama Canal. China is also negotiating with the western African nation of Namibia to build a naval base in the Atlantic Ocean.
Forty years ago, Ronald Reagan made a name for himself by opposing the Panama Canal treaty. I wonder what he would think of Chinas actions today?
Would he really support a pipeline which invites greater Chinese hegemony in the western hemisphere with the help of a new Nicaraguan canal and an Atlantic fleet ported at Namibia? Heck, Reagan didn’t even want communists in Grenada.
Why are Republicans soft on China, I ask again? George W. Bush was the first president who allowed a communist country (China) to buy our Treasury bills. Now, Senator Thune wants a pipeline to facilitate the international ambitions of a communist country with hegemonic tendencies and I ask, why?
This Veterans Day, let us not only remember the veterans, but also remember what they fought for and then ask, what are we doing as a nation to preserve the accomplishments and freedoms which came from their sacrifices?
So this rejection in your mind is what stands for a strong foreign policy. We won’t stand up to Assad in Syria, won’t stand up to Putin in Ukraine or Crimea, but by gosh we won’t build a pipeline because some of the oil might go to China. I am not sure we can get any tougher than that.
Syria, Isil, and Putin are the “AAAs” compared to China. The real challenge to America in the 21st century is China.
Syria and Isil are by-products of the failed Bush Doctrine, which must be dealt with, but if we ignore China then we deny our proper place in the world in the 21st century.
Putin is a remnant of the cold war. He must be watched and controlled, but his relevance speaks more to how we have failed as a country in the post cold war era to lead the world in the right direction. Instead, we have been marred in an era of wealth generation for the few, which has aided in giving China a greater reverence in the world and in our national policies; and the international politics of 9/11 and the Bush Doctrine, which has caused our nation to be tangent to its true beliefs and core. Not to the mention, the paralyzing results of the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression which has further kicked the can down the road in our ability to strengthen our domestic position so that our international presence can be more credible and relevant.
So we’ll ingnore what you term the AAA’s; sounds like a fine plan.
If China is going to be getting the oil and somehow, someway it is going to cost money to get it there, why shouldn’t the USA get some of that money?
Should we tell Canada, one of the best friends we’ve got, that they may not sell to China?
Canada is already starting plans to build a pipeline to Canada’s west coast . . .to export oil to China.
Winston–clearly you need to take an economics class…
And in this economics class, let me guess, there will be an explanation of supply-side economics as backed up by the Laffer curve or should we say the laughable curve.
KXL is untenable. Recall the reminder from TCMack that the Army Corps of Engineers touted the construction of the Oahe Dam on the geological formation known as Pierre Shale. That same shale accounts for the systematic breakup of roadways and railbeds in South Dakota likewise confounding KeystoneXL pipeline engineers. RCPE is content to move product at ten miles an hour between Wall and Fort Pierre where Cretaceous shale buckles track bed every year.
Exactly, and explained very well.
President Barrack Hussien Obama just issued an Executive Order stopping all non-green transmission of electricity during any period which averages 50% above or below average usage consumption rates. Only Green energy will be able to fill the void created by this Mandate. Those people not served by renewable energy will be compensated with diesel generators as will hospitals serving Large communities of immigrant status.