Many Americans lukewarm on Obama Keystone pipeline rejection

[uawchild]

Source: Reuters

Many Americans are lukewarm on President Barack Obama's rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline, with more than a third saying they didn't care either way, a new Reuters/Ipsos poll shows.

Of 920 adults asked between Nov. 9 through Nov. 11 about the president's decision, 35 percent said they neither agreed nor disagreed. Another 14 percent said they only somewhat agreed and 13 percent said they somewhat disagreed.

TransCanada's proposed Keystone XL pipeline to link existing networks to let oil flow from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico, was rejected by the Obama administration on Nov. 6 after years of deliberation.

The 1,200-mile (1931 km) pipeline out of Alberta's oil sands became a flashpoint for environmentalists, who argued the U.S. should keep the dirtiest fossil fuels in the ground as the country shifts to renewable energy and not enable additional oil extraction. Activists celebrated Obama's decision in Lafayette Square across from the White House. The poll showed how starkly the issue of approving the pipeline divides along political fault lines, with 30 percent of Democrats saying they strongly agreed, but just 6 percent of Republicans.

The approval process for the pipeline, which became an issue in the U.S. Democratic presidential race, began when Hillary Clinton was Obama's secretary of state. For weeks on the campaign trail she resisted staking out her position, saying she would wait for the administration's decision. In September she said she could wait no longer and recommended the pipeline's rejection.

Clinton's chief challenger, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, has long said rejecting the pipeline was a "no brainer."


Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/13/us-usa-keystone-poll-idUSKCN0T215920151113#Bx6scSiPXPgCbiOL.97

---

How anyone could be in favor of thousands of miles of pipeline to further the extraction of the Tar Sands is beyond me. The bitumen from those fields should be left in the ground and never extracted -- already just the local environmental damage in Alberta, Canada alone is enough to preclude further "development".

[Blue_Adept]

1. Considering how many years its been talked about

and the back and forth and disinformation all around, it's no surprise that a good chunk of the electorate has tuned it out.

[underpants]

2. What a weak a$$ headline from Reuters

It looks like the small set of responders just didn't care. Probably it hasn't been in the news nearly as much as it should have been.

[PSPS]

3. No kidding. I suppose you could say "many" people believe the earth is flat too.

[Sunlei]

4. Canada doesn't like fility sludge either.Love oil sludge people can always loveon Utahs shale mines

That state has just started mining that crap.

[snooper2]

5. So more bomb trains...let me know when the next pipeline outrage is ginned up

Funny how multi-billion dollar corporations on both sides manipulate the gullible masses to "FIGHT FOR THE CAUSE!"

-and the sheeple follow it-



Wonder how many DU'ers know that the Buffet owns Burlington Northern Santa Fe

Hmmm....Wonder why HE would be so vocal against a pipeline....Just wonder

[Fred Sanders]

6. "Lukewarm"...."on rejection"? Corporate media headline writers are paid by the amount of deception.

The government of Canada changed to far more leftist and are climate change believers and doers is the main political event driving all decisions regarding Keystone, not to mention the even more leftist government recently elected in charge of the Alberts Tar Sands....it is not always about what America wants or does!

[blackspade]

7. What a weird headline

A better one would be "American public unconcerned about pipeline rejection."

The fact that the public is largely fine with the rejection shows how the M$M is trying to create a problem for Obama when there is none.
This was a victory for the environment and the future of humanity, so kudos to Obama for taking care of business on this front!

[branford]

8. What evidence is there that the pipeline denial will mean the tar sands will not be exploited.

The only factor that apparently determines whether the oil will be extracted is its financial viability, and low oil prices that would make the tar sands a poor investment and tend to increase carbon fuel usage. The tar sand oil is also still moved south of the border in less safe trains and trucks.

[uawchild]

10. Canadians seem to feel it will have an impact on Tar Sands development

"Keystone XL pipeline rejection sends a chill over Canada’s energy industry

The rejection of TransCanada Corp.’s Keystone XL pipeline project puts new pressure on Canada’s energy industry to figure out how to ship growing oil sands production from the landlocked west to global markets.

U.S. President Barack Obama’s categorical “no” to the 830,000-barrel-a-day project will not immediately shut down new oil sands projects but could have a cooling effect on growth in the industry, already stung by more than a year of sharply lower oil prices.

Hal Kvisle – the man who conceived the Keystone XL pipeline when he was TransCanada’s chief executive officer – called Friday “a sad day.”

“This is very difficult for the Canadian oil and gas industry,” Mr. Kvisle, who headed TransCanada from 2001 to 2010, said in an interview.

“And access to market is the single biggest problem we face. In many ways, it is even bigger than $45 oil. Forty-five-dollar oil will come and go as global supply and demand sorts itself out. But if Western Canada can’t get access to markets, and we persist with things like dangerous rail transportation, it is just bad.” "

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/keystone-xl-pipeline-rejection-sends-a-chill-over-canadas-energy-industry/article27163985/

[branford]

11. People want to buy the tar sands oil.

It therefore will be developed and shipped. However, they'll continue to use far more dangerous and carbon intensive trains and trucks. It's obvious and stated in your own cited article.

The only thing that will keep the oil in the ground is economics, and if it's still viable at $45/barrel, it will continue to be extracted for the foreseeable future, just shipped more dangerously and with greater emissions.

The denial of the Keystone permit will not keep one drop of tar sands oil in the ground, and now the USA will not reap any financial benefit.

The Keystone denial was symbolic, nothing more.

[uawchild]

12. Canadians seem to feel there is a transportation bottleneck that threatens further development

“And access to market is the single biggest problem we face. In many ways, it is even bigger than $45 oil."

The rail system is not an infinite resource, apparently.

"Food or Fuel? The Rail Car Shortage Conundrum"
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/food-or-fuel-rail-car-shortage-conundrum-n209781

Canadians seem to feel transportation bottlenecks will impact tar sands development:

"Oil pipeline infrastructure bottlenecks costing Canadian economy billions of dollars: Fraser Institute

CALGARY, Alta.–Canada’s economy loses tens of millions of dollars daily because pipeline bottlenecks choke access to more lucrative markets for Western Canadian conventional heavy crude oil and oil sands bitumen, concludes a new study published today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

Most Western crude sells at a discount in the United States midcontinent region, where oil pipelines are generally operating at or close to full capacity. Similar heavy oils fetch higher prices at refineries in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico region and in the U.S. northeast according to The Canadian Oil Transport Conundrum.

Even the proposed Keystone XL pipeline won’t resolve the problem because Canadian producers would still have to compete for capacity in the line with surging U.S. shale oil production from North Dakota and a number of other states, the study concludes. "

http://www.canadianshipper.com/sustainability/oil-pipeline-infrastructure-bottlenecks-costing-canadian-economy-billions-of-dollars-fraser/1002611992/

I agree with you that the death of the keystone pipeline won't completely stop tar sand exploitation, but we seem to disagree on how much of an impact it has on the increased rate of exploitation. Canadians seem to feel it is a major setback for increased exploitation, I tend to agree with them.

Thank you for your thought provoking replies on this important issue.

[branford]

13. I'm not supporting the Keystone project per se, or disagreeing that bottlenecks

may have a short-term impact on development.

However, if Canada is losing millions of dollars due to the transportation bottleneck, as your articles correctly suggest, simple economics dictate that Canadians will find alternatives rather than keep the oil in the ground. Or far worse, they'll push existing transport much harder than recommended for the aging infrastructure, resulting in more oil spills and accidents both in the USA and Canada in order to meet ever growing demand, particularly in Asia.

If oil drops in price, it may have longer-term impacts on tar sands development, but such a situation is arguably worse than the tar sands, as low oil prices increases overall oil usage and makes alternative green energy and related research far less economical and competitive.

Keystone became a symbol of the environmental movement. I hope that future generation don't regret that strategic decision. In a world of bad environmental choices, Keystone might have been the lesser evil. A pipeline may have been safer and less carbon intensive than rail and truck, and America might have financially benefited from oil that was extracted whether we believed it prudent or not.

[watoos]

9. Someone explain to me

where it would be in the interests of the U.S. to ship Canadian tar sands across a major aquifer to a Saudi Arabian refinery in a tax free zone which will allow Saudi Arabia to sell fuel wherever, and not have to pay taxes to the United States?
What am I missing? Lukewarm, lolol, oh but wait, I forgot, 35 permanent jobs created.