Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Karmadillo

(9,253 posts)
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 07:23 AM Jan 2012

A reason for the decision? Buffett’s Burlington Northern Among Pipeline Winners

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-23/buffett-s-burlington-northern-among-winners-in-obama-rejection-of-pipeline.html

Warren Buffett’s Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that stand to benefit from the Obama administration’s decision to reject TransCanada Corp. (TRP)’s Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.

With modest expansion, railroads can handle all new oil produced in western Canada through 2030, according to an analysis of the Keystone proposal by the U.S. State Department.

“Whatever people bring to us, we’re ready to haul,” Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett’s Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A), said in an interview. If Keystone XL “doesn’t happen, we’re here to haul.”

The State Department denied TransCanada a permit on Jan. 18, saying there was not enough time to study the proposal by Feb. 21, a deadline Congress imposed on President Barack Obama. Calgary-based TransCanada has said it intends to re-apply with a route that avoids an environmentally sensitive region of Nebraska, something the Obama administration encouraged.

more...
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A reason for the decision? Buffett’s Burlington Northern Among Pipeline Winners (Original Post) Karmadillo Jan 2012 OP
Doesn't make tar sands a better source of energy. However-- eridani Jan 2012 #1
TransCanada, Koch Brothers. tsuki Jan 2012 #2
K&R (nt) T S Justly Jan 2012 #3
A reason? You're accusing Obama of doing it to benefit Buffett? muriel_volestrangler Jan 2012 #4
Why spread right wing talking points? FSogol Jan 2012 #5
Keep trying...nt SidDithers Jan 2012 #6
You ignore the very obvious true reason that was given by the administration karynnj Jan 2012 #7
BULL SHIT FreakinDJ Jan 2012 #8

eridani

(51,907 posts)
1. Doesn't make tar sands a better source of energy. However--
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 07:36 AM
Jan 2012

--rail shipping beats the bejeezus out of sandblasting the interior of a metal pipe.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,294 posts)
4. A reason? You're accusing Obama of doing it to benefit Buffett?
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 09:23 AM
Jan 2012

Wow. I didn't think I'd see DU start a rumour like that. Were you in favour of the pipeline, then? Could you not see any reason to turn it down, so you have to reach for this?

FSogol

(45,466 posts)
5. Why spread right wing talking points?
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 09:47 AM
Jan 2012

You think Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC looks for pipeline projects to stop on the off chance they get the bid to hall the freight themselves?

You think Buffet has enough of a connection to the company to mastermind this tenuous conspiracy?

You think Obama had a meeting where he said, "let's stop the pipeline not because of environmental concerns, but so Super-liberal mastermind, Warren Buffet gets a freight contract?

Are you promoting Canadian rail companies over US based companies? Are you promoting the pipeline?

Hope the your local grocery store has plenty of Alcoa's products.

karynnj

(59,500 posts)
7. You ignore the very obvious true reason that was given by the administration
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 10:07 AM
Jan 2012

The fact is that the Republicans doomed the project by demanding that it be rejected or approved within two months. This meant that to approve it - they would have had to waive ALL of the environmental investigations because the route had just been changed because the Republican state of Nebraska rejected the original route (correctly) for environmental reasons.

This changed a politically difficult decision that pitted unions (who would build the pipeline) against environmentalists to a decision based on the need to do the appropriate planning. This article says that TransCanada may reapply. If they do, the affect of teh republican powerplay was that they just shifted the timeline by at least 3 or 4 months into the future because they have to restart the effort.

 

FreakinDJ

(17,644 posts)
8. BULL SHIT
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 10:07 AM
Jan 2012

Besides all the environmental concerns - the refineries in the Gulf where that oil is destined are designed to EXPORT petroleum products from a Free Enterprise Zone (Tax Free) and would have caused HIGH GAS PRICES IN THE USA

Being the US Economy is dependent on the price of gas - Obama dodged an Economy Killer

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A reason for the decision...