Following the Tragedy at Lac-Mégantic shipping Crude Oil by Train in Canada will be more Costly

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 27th, 2014

Week in Review

On July 6, 2013, a 4,701 ft-long train weighing 10,287 tons carrying crude oil stopped for the night at Nantes, Quebec.  She stopped on the mainline as the siding was occupied.  The crew of one parked the train, set the manual handbrakes on all 5 locomotives and 10 of the 72 freight cars and shut down 4 of the 5 locomotives.  Leaving one on to supply air pressure for the air brakes.  Then caught a taxi and headed for a motel.

The running locomotive had a broken piston.  Causing the engine to puff out black smoke and sparks as it sat there idling.  Later that night someone called 911 and reported that there was a fire on that locomotive.  The fire department arrived and per their protocol shut down the running locomotive before putting out the fire.  Otherwise the running locomotive would only continue to feed the fire by pumping more fuel into it.  After they put out the fire they called the railroad who sent some personnel out to make sure the train was okay.  After they did they left, too.  But ever since the fire department had shut down that locomotive air pressure had been dropping in the train line.  Eventually this loss of air pressure released the air brakes.  Leaving only the manual handbrakes to hold the train.  Which they couldn’t.  The train started to coast downhill.  Picking up speed.  Reaching about 60 mph as it hit a slow curve with a speed limit of 10 mph in Lac-Mégantic and jumped the track.  Derailing 63 of the 72 tank cars.  Subsequent tank car punctures, oil spills and explosions killed some 47 people and destroyed over 30 buildings.

This is the danger of shipping crude oil in rail cars.  There’s a lot of potential and kinetic energy to control.  Especially at these weights.  For that puts a lot of mass in motion that can become impossible to stop.  Of course, adding safety features to prevent things like this from happening, such as making these tank cars puncture-proof, can add a lot of non-revenue weight.  Which takes more fuel to move.  And that costs more money.  Which will raise the cost of delivering this crude oil to refineries.  And increase the cost of the refined products they make from it.  Unless the railroads find other ways to cut costs.  Say by shortening delivery times by traveling faster.  Allowing them an extra revenue-producing delivery or two per year to make up for the additional costs.  But thanks to the tragedy at Lac-Mégantic, though, not only will they be adding additional non-revenue weight they will be slowing their trains down, too (see Rail safety improvements announced by Lisa Raitt in wake of Lac-Mégantic posted 4/23/2014 on CBC News).

Changes to improve rail safety were announced Wednesday by federal Transport Minister Lisa Raitt in response to recommendations made by the Transportation Safety Board in the aftermath of the tragedy in Lac-Mégantic, Que.

The federal government wants a three-year phase-out or retrofit of older tank cars that are used to transport crude oil or ethanol by rail, but will not implement a key TSB recommendation that rail companies conduct route planning when transporting dangerous goods…

There are 65,000 of the more robust Dot-111 cars in North America that must be phased out or retrofitted within three years if used in Canada, Raitt said, adding, “Officials have advised us three years is doable.”  She said she couldn’t calculate the cost of the retrofits, but told reporters, “industry will be footing the bill…”

The transport minister also announced that mandatory emergency response plans will be required for all crude oil shipments in Canada…

Raitt also said railway companies will be required to reduce the speed of trains carrying dangerous goods. The speed limit will be 80 kilometres an hour [about 49 mph] for key trains, she said. She added that risk assessments will be conducted in certain areas of the country about further speed restrictions, a request that came from the Canadian Federation of Municipalities…

Brian Stevens head of UNIFOR, which represents thousands of unionized rail car inspectors at CN, CP and other Canadian rail companies, called today’s announcement a disappointment.

“This announcement really falls short, and lets Canadians down,” he told CBC News.

“These DOT-11 cars, they should be banned from carrying crude oil immediately. They can still be used to carry vegetable oil, or diesel fuel, but for carrying this dangerous crude there should be an immediate moratorium and that should have been easy enough for the minister to do and she failed to do that.

“There’s a lot of other tank cars in the system that can carry crude,” Stevens explained. “There doesn’t need to be this reliance on these antiquated cars that are prone to puncture.”

Industry will not be footing the bill.  That industry’s customers will be footing the bill.  As all businesses pass on their costs to their customers.  As it is the only way a business can stay in business.  Because they need to make money to pay all of their employees as well as all of their bills.  So if their costs increase they will have to raise their prices to ensure they can pay all of their employees and all of their bills.

What will the cost of this retrofit be?  To make these 65,000 tank cars puncture-proof?  Well, adding weight to these cars will take labor and material.  That additional weight may require modifications to the springs, brakes and bearings.  Perhaps even requiring another axel or two per car.  Let’s assume that it will take a crew of 6 three days to complete this retrofit per tank car (disassemble, reinforce and reassemble as well as completing other modifications required because of the additional weight).  Assuming a union labor cost (including taxes and benefits) of $125/hour and non-labor costs equaling labor costs would bring the retrofit for these 65,000 tanks cars to approximately $2.34 billion.  Which they will, of course, pass on to their customers.  Who will pass it on all the way to the gas station where we fill up our cars.  They will also pass down the additional fuel costs to pull all that additional nonrevenue weight.

Making these trains safer will be costly.  Of course, it begs this burning question: Why not just build pipelines?  Like the Keystone XL pipeline?  Which can deliver more crude oil faster and safer than any train can deliver it.  And with a smaller environmental impact.  As pipelines don’t crash or puncture.  So why not be safer and build the Keystone XL pipeline in lieu of using a more dangerous mode of transportation that results in tragedies like that at Lac-Mégantic?  Why?  Because of politics.  To shore up the Democrat base President Obama would rather risk Lac-Mégantic tragedies.  Instead of doing what’s best for the American economy.  And the American people.  Namely, building the Keystone XL pipeline.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Oil Trains Derail as President Obama tries to Enrich his Rich Billionaire Friends

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 4th, 2014

Week in Review

If there are two things President Obama doesn’t like they are rich people and oil.  Well, at least he acts that way.  Espousing more concern for the working man.  And clean energy.  Which is why President Obama said “no” to the Keystone XL pipeline.  Or could there have been another reason (see BNSF opens North Dakota track as oil by rail faces more scrutiny by Nicholas Sakelaris posted 1/2/2014 on the Dallas Business Journal)?

Burlington Northern Santa Fe re-opened the double track Thursday morning outside Casselton, N.D., where an oil train collided with a grain train, causing a massive fireball-like explosion earlier this week…

Fort Worth-based BNSF hauls an estimated 750,000 barrels of crude oil per day. The railroad carried an estimated 100 million barrels of crude oil out of the Bakken in 2012, a massive increase from previous years.

You know who owns Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)?  Warren Buffett.  For BNSF is a wholly owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway.  So Warren Buffet is profiting greatly from President Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline.  One can’t help to wonder if that has anything to do with the Buffett Rule (see Buffett would profit from Keystone cancellation by Dave Boyer posted 1/24/2012 on The Washington Times).

Warren Buffett, whom President Obama likes to cite as a fair-minded billionaire while arguing for higher taxes on the wealthy, stands to benefit from the president’s decision to reject the Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.

Mr. Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. owns Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC, which is among the railroads that would transport oil produced in western Canada if the pipeline isn’t built…

If completed, the $7 billion Keystone XL would deliver 700,000 barrels a day of crude from oil sands in Canada to Texas refineries on the coast of the Gulf of Mexico. It would traverse about 1,600 miles.

The State Department’s review of the project said shipping oil via rail is more costly than delivering it to refineries by pipeline.

Mr. Obama often cites Mr. Buffett as an example of a civic-minded billionaire because the entrepreneur has said he should pay a higher tax rate than his secretary. Mr. Buffett and the president like to tell the story of how Mr. Buffett pays a 15 percent effective tax rate, while his secretary pays a higher rate even though she earns only a fraction of what he does.

The president has called his push for higher taxes on the wealthy the “Buffett rule.”

Funny.  Warren Buffett says we should tax rich people more and the Keystone XL pipeline doesn’t get built.  Instead that oil goes on Buffett’s trains.  Making him a lot of money.  Just like the president’s rich friends on Wall Street are making a lot of money.  Who have all gotten richer under the Obama presidency while median family income fell for Main Street.  So more oil is traveling across the country.  Some of which is derailing and soaking into our pristine environment.  Or exploding.  While rich people are getting richer.  And President Obama would have us believe he’s for the working man and clean energy.

It would seem President Obama is more for getting Democrat supporters rich than helping Main Street.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

President Obama’s opposition to the Keystone XL Pipeline puts more Oil on Trains like the one in Lac-Mégantic

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 29th, 2013

Week in Review

Oil fuels the modern economy.  We use it everywhere.  And can’t live without it.  Even those people who hate it sipping their coffee while they surf the Internet and engage in social media in their favorite coffee shop.  None of which they could do if it were not for oil.  The coffee they drink crossed the ocean on a ship burning diesel refined from oil.  The smartphone they use contains plastic.  Made from oil.  And these smartphones crossed the ocean on a ship burning diesel before they could use them.  The cars in the drive-thru at the coffee shops are burning gasoline refined from oil.  The freight trains and trucks burn diesel that deliver the goods these coffee shops sell.

Oil makes everything better in our lives.  Without oil life expectancy would plummet.  As hospitals wouldn’t have any life-saving equipment made from plastic.  Ambulances couldn’t speed patients to the hospital.  And there would be no backup generators during a power outage.  As there would be no backup power available at our wastewater treatment plants.  Or at our freshwater pumping stations.  We would return to the 19th century.  Using steam and water power in our factories.  Horses in our cities.  Doing our business in an outhouse.  And drawing our water from a well.  Except for the rich, of course.  Who would be able to enjoy these luxuries.  Luxuries that most of us take for granted today.

Oil is so important in our lives that we should be doing everything within our power to make it as inexpensive and plentiful as possible.  Like building the Keystone XL pipeline.  So we can transport oil safely in large quantities.  Reducing the cost of transportation.  Thus lowering the price at the pump.  Which would also prevent things like this from happening (see What’s in rail tankers and why can’t we know? posted 9/27/2013 on CBC News).

Nearly three months after the  Lac-Mégantic disaster, rail safety remains at the top of the national agenda with a meeting of federal and provincial transport ministers this week focusing on the question of what is in tanker cars and why provinces and municipalities can’t get that information.​

After the conclusion of the meeting in Winnipeg, Manitoba’s transportation minister said the legacy of the Lac-Mégantic disaster in July must be safer rail system across Canada.

Steve Ashton said there is an urgent need to look comprehensively at rail safety at a time when more oil is being shipped by rail and the Lac Mégantic disaster is fresh in the public mind.

This is what happens when the environmentalists get their way.  And President Obama secures their support.  And their money.  President Obama opposes the Keystone XL pipeline.  And other pipelines where he can.  Because his liberal base hates oil.  Even though the lives they enjoy would not be possible without oil.  So their opposition to oil and pipelines forces oil onto trains.  That travel through our cities.  Sometimes derail.  And explode.  Killing 47 in Lac-Mégantic.  And destroying a part of that city.

With continued opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline more oil will travel by train.  More trains will derail.  And explode.  But the Democrats will secure the support of their liberal base.  And the environmentalists can claim a victory in the war against oil.  While they enjoy their coffee and smartphones in their favorite coffee shop.  That only oil makes possible.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Obama’s Rejection of the Keystone XL Pipeline raises Food Prices and makes the World a more Polluted Place

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 13th, 2013

Week in Review

President Obama yielded to the environmentalists in his liberal base on the Keystone XL pipeline.  Who opposed it on environmental grounds.  Ironic as the environment will be at greater risk if the president doesn’t let them build the pipeline.  And to make matters worse the price of gasoline will go up also.  Making one of the worst economic recoveries in U.S. history worse.  By leaving less money in consumers’ pockets.  While at the same time raising the price of everything that uses refined oil to get to market (see Killing Keystone Seen as Risking More Oil Spills by Rail by Rebecca Penty & Jim Efstathiou Jr. posted 4/9/2013 on Bloomberg).

A rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline by President Barack Obama would push more of Canada’s $73 billion oil exports onto trains, which register almost three times more spills than pipelines…

Shipping more supplies by rail would lead to higher costs for oil producers because train shipments are more expensive than pipelines…

Without Keystone, designed to carry 830,000 barrels a day of oil, shipments of Canadian crude by rail would rise an additional 42 percent by 2017, according to RBC Capital Markets.

“One of the unintended consequences of delaying Keystone XL is that more oil has been getting to markets in Canada and the United States using rail, truck and water-borne tankers,” Shawn Howard, a spokesman for TransCanada, said in an e-mail. “None of those methods of transportation are as safe as moving it by pipelines,” he said.

Trains are one of the most efficient ways to transport heavy freight.  Bulk freight carriers on the Great Lakes can ship heavy freight cheaper but they don’t travel as fast as trains.  And they can only travel on water.  A train can travel almost anywhere.  Over, under and around bodies of water.  Something a ship just can’t do with land.  But the benefit of train transport comes with a cost.  Rail infrastructure is very costly.  And you have to have it wherever a train travels.  Unlike a ship.  Still, rail is the best way to transport bulk freight.  Except that kind of bulk freight that we can push through a pipeline.

To think of the immense advantage of moving things by pipeline consider the hot water in your house when having a bath.  Without the pipeline system in your house you would have to heat water outside over a fire.  Then carry it in small containers and pour it into your bathtub.  Container after container you would have to fill with cold water.  Carry it to where you converted it into hot water.  Then carry the hot water by foot where you could stumble or fall, spilling your converted cold water.  Leaving you a mess to clean up.  And the need to burn more fuel to convert more cold water into hot water.

Now imagine having a bath by simply opening the hot water tap at your bathtub and letting it fill your tub.  It’s a whole lot easier.  Less chance to spill water.  And you burn less fuel.  So which would you rather do?  Clearly moving anything by pipeline is the best way to move anything.  You reduce the chance of spills because the only moving part is the oil in the pipeline.  And there are no loading and unloading costs to factor into the price of gasoline.  As the refineries basically have a hot water tap to turn on when they want to refine oil.  It just doesn’t get simpler than that.

Keystone XL pipeline doesn’t put the people or the environment first.  Just those people who oppose businesses and capitalism.  Who don’t care that people have to spend more to put gasoline into their cars.  Or have to spend more at the grocery store thanks to higher fuel costs passed along in higher food prices.  For if it were up to them people wouldn’t even have cars.  Or enjoy eating anything that came from an animal.  That’s the world the environmentalists have in mind for the American people.  Where the people sacrifice.  So the animals can enjoy a pristine environment.  Where they can happily eat each other.  And crap all over the place.  The way Mother Nature meant it to be.  Before God created man.  Who the environmentalist hate.  And blame for making a mess of everything.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

With the Rejection of the Keystone XL Pipeline more Oil spills from Derailed Rail Cars

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 31st, 2013

Week in Review

The Obama administration has shut down oil drilling on federal land.  While at the same time urging us to quit being so dependent on oil from countries where oil revenues find their way into the hands of terrorists.  Being denied to do one thing (more domestic drilling) leaves us more dependent on the other thing (foreign oil that pays for terrorism).  So we turn to another option.  Importing foreign oil from a friend and neighbor.  Canada.  But the president intervened there, too.  By refusing to approve the Keystone XL pipeline.  Because of environmental concerns.  So to get that oil to U.S. refineries we’ve turned to the only other option.  Shipping it by rail (see Canadian Pacific oil spill cleanup to last two days by Edward McAllister posted 3/28/2013 on Reuters).

Recovery efforts were underway on Thursday to clean up an oil spill in western Minnesota, a day after a mile-long Canadian Pacific Railway train derailed, rupturing three tankers and leaking around 15,000 gallons of fuel…

The spill, which has triggered an investigation by federal officials, came as a debate rages over the environmental risks of transporting Alberta tar sands crude across the border from Canada.

This was the first major spill since a boom in North American oil production began to outgrow the existing pipeline network, prompting a huge rise in crude-by-rail transport three years ago…

As crude by rail has increased in the United States, so have spill incidents. Of the 132 incidents that occurred while trains were in transit in the United States between 2002 and 2012, 112 occurred in the last three years, according to data from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.

So we can expect about 38 spills per year from trains shipping that Canadian oil to U.S. refineries.  It would seem that building that Keystone XL pipeline would be the more environmentally friendly option.

So here are our options.  Build the pipeline and eliminate the spills from rail transport.  Not build the pipeline and continue the spills from rail transport.  Or issue an executive order confiscating our cars.  So we don’t need any oil.  Which will be the only way we’ll make the reductions they want in our oil consumption.  As existing sales of electric cars prove.  We’re not buying them.  Because they aren’t as dependable as our gasoline-powered cars.  And don’t give us anywhere near the freedom gasoline gives us.

No, gasoline is here to stay for the foreseeable future.  And the anti-oil policies are only increasing the cost of the gasoline we buy.  Increasing the cost of food.  And everything else that ships with an internal combustion engine providing the motive force.  Leaving us with less in the family budget.  Sacrificing the quality of our lives to keep the environmentalist money flowing into the Obama administration.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , ,

President Obama disagrees with Adults, Republicans, Independents and Democrats over Keystone XL Pipeline

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 24th, 2012

Week in Review

Republicans are most in favor of the Keystone XL pipeline.  But they’re not the only ones in favor of it (see Americans Favor Keystone XL Pipeline by Elizabeth Mendes posted 3/22/2012 on Gallup).

A solid majority of Americans [57%-29%] think the U.S. government should approve of building the Keystone XL pipeline, while 29% think it should not. Republicans [81%-9%] are almost twice as likely as Democrats [44%-38%] to want the government to approve the oil pipeline. About half of independents [51%-35%] also approve…

The proposal from TransCanada Corporation for building a pipeline to carry crude oil from Canada down to the Gulf of Mexico, first made in 2005, needs approval from the U.S. president because it crosses an international border. The Republicans in Congress inserted a provision on the pipeline in the payroll tax extension bill late last year, but in January, President Obama rejected TransCanada’s permit entirely. However, the administration is allowing TransCanada to reapply for the permit it needs.

The pipeline would travel through the Midwest and the South, and Americans in those two regions are the most likely to approve of the project. Nearly 7 in 10 Midwesterners want the government to approve the building of the pipeline and 61% of those in the South do as well. There has been discussion in Washington and in the media about the potential new jobs the pipeline project would create, which may partly explain the higher support seen in those regions. Americans in the West and East are less likely to approve.

Did you catch that?  TransCanada Corporation has been working on this since 2005.  It’s now 2012.  This kind of gives you an idea of the regulatory hoops Big Oil has to jump through and how many palms they have to grease to get approval.  And then the president rejected their permit.  As a nod to his environmentalist base.  And now TransCanada Corporation is right back where they started.  After who knows how many millions of dollars they’ve spent to get to the Obama rejection.

What is really fascinating is that the people the president is protecting with his permit rejection, those in the route of the pipeline that may suffer the ‘horrors’ of environmental impact, are the ones most in favor of running the pipeline.  And the environmentalists who oppose it live where all the rich and connected environmentalists live.  In California and New York.  (Al Gore lives in a mansion on a beach in California despite global warming and rising oceans.  Yes, environmentalists are rich.)  The people who will be least impacted by any environmental fallout.  And the people that have the most to gain.  As California and New York have some of the highest gas prices in the nation.  Which tells you something.  Environmentalists are rich and can pay for gas whatever it costs.  And they don’t care about the poor and middle class who are hurt by high gas prices.  Which means, of course, that the president is protecting his rich fiends over the poor and middle class.  So much for the Democrat Party being the party that protects the working class.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

President Obama stops the Keystone XL Pipeline because it’s in our Best Interest to pay High Gasoline Prices

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 24th, 2012

Week in Review

The Obama administration stopped the Keystone XL pipeline.  In the face of rising gasoline prices.  Which doesn’t make sense.  Because that pipeline will lower oil prices in the future when it’s pumping oil.  And lower gas prices.  So approving the pipeline would have been the smart thing to do in the long run.  The problem is that it doesn’t help them in the short run on something that is far more important than lowering gas prices (see Obama defends handling of Keystone pipeline by KEN THOMAS, Associated Press, posted 3/22/2012 on Yahoo! News).

Deep in Republican oil country, Obama said lawmakers refused to give his administration enough time review the controversial 1,170-mile Keystone XL pipeline in order to ensure that it wouldn’t compromise the health and safety of people living in surrounding areas.

“Unfortunately, Congress decided they wanted their own timeline,” Obama said. “Not the company, not the experts, but members of Congress who decided this might be a fun political issue decided to try to intervene and make it impossible for us to make an informed decision.”

Really?  You want to use that as your excuse for stopping the Keystone XL pipeline?  That your experts didn’t have enough time to help you arrive at an informed decision?   Just like your experts helped you to arrive at an informed decision to fund Solyndra?  And all those other green energy initiatives that couldn’t receive the necessary private investment capital?  And failed?  That’s the excuse you want to use?

First of all, the president’s experts really aren’t all that good.  Based on their track record of helping people arrive at informed decisions.  Secondly, everyone knows this was a nod to the environmentalist base.  And is purely political.  To help them with fund raising.  And their reelection chances.  As their record on energy and gas prices (or the economy in general) isn’t going to garner them any votes.  So they have to make sure they get 100% of the vote from those who hate oil.  (And a healthy economy.)  The people who wanted them to stop the Keystone XL pipeline.  The environmentalist base. 

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

The Environmentalists are Demanding Obama Damage the Economy by Killing the Keystone XL Pipeline

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 5th, 2011

Week in Review

If you’ve ever wondered if liberals (that 20% of the electorate hell-bent on running all of our lives) are bad for the country just follow this pipeline saga (see Green groups warn Obama he’ll pay price for approving pipeline by Ben Geman posted 11/4/2011 on The Hill).

Environmentalists warned bluntly Friday that President Obama’s reelection campaign will pay a heavy price if he approves a controversial oil sands pipeline…

[Tiernan Sittenfeld’s, a top official with the League of Conservation Voters (LCV),] comments come days after Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said that approval would hurt the group’s ability to mobilize members on Obama’s behalf.

The Sierra Club and LCV have the environmental movement’s largest political campaign operations.

Once again it’s not about jobs and the economy after all.  It’s about the money.  It’s always about the money.  And if Obama can get political contributions during record unemployment then he doesn’t need to create jobs.  He hasn’t yet.  So why start now?  (All that stimulus didn’t stimulate anything other than Obama’s political cronies’ appetite for more stimulus).  So the country can continue to wallow in recession.  As long as the money keeps rolling in.

Environmentalists also argue that rejection of the project would help Obama politically.

Help Obama politically.  While damaging the economy.

Building the thing will create real jobs.  And when they build it gasoline prices will go down.  Via the laws of supply and demand.  Which means consumer prices will go down.  Because the cost of everything has an energy cost component.  And people will pay less to gas up their cars.  Leaving them with more money for their households.

So the environmentalists are urging Obama to sacrifice all of that.  To improve politically.  I must have missed that part in the presidential oath of office.  Where it was all about the president.  And not the people.

The project puts Obama in a tough spot politically at a time when the economy and jobs are shaping up as the dominant issues in next year’s election…

Several unions are backing the project, including the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the International Union of Operating Engineers, and the Laborers’ International Union, and the Building and Construction Trades Department of the AFL-CIO.

But labor is not united on the project. The Amalgamated Transit Union and the Transport Workers Union both oppose Keystone XL.

Tough spot indeed.  That’s a lot of union support for the pipeline.  Because these union people will be building that pipeline.  And they desperately want jobs in this rotten Obama economy.  The only unions against it are the ones who will lose jobs because of a pipeline.  The trucking industry.  And the railroad industry.  Who would prefer to restrict the supply of oil.  To raise the price at the pump for the masses.  So the few who transport it can keep their jobs.

“Burning the oil fields of Saudi Arabia, more than anything else, is what has raised the temperature of the planet a degree already. We didn’t know about climate change when … people found oil in Saudi Arabia, so it was natural to go burn it,” McKibben said.

“Now that we do, if we find a second Saudi Arabia and just do the same thing, then we are idiots,” he said.

Well, he’s right about one thing.  They are idiots.  For we don’t know what raised the temperature of the planet.  If the temperature is raising you just can’t point at one thing and say it’s responsible.  What about the sun?  And the solar minimum?  The sun is more likely changing global temperatures than man.  Just like it did during the ice ages.  When the planet really warmed and cool.  Before anyone ever burned a fossil fuel.

Obama is tied into the lunatic left because that’s all he has.  His economic policies have been an abject failure.  Both for the economy.  And for his rewarding of campaign donors with federal tax dollars, a.k.a. stimulus.  Because his crony capitalism will be all for naught if he loses reelection.

So, no, liberalism is not good for the country.  And right now it’s not all that good for a liberal president.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Environmentalists are Telling Obama to Just Say No to a Canadian Oil Pipeline

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 5th, 2011

Week in Review

The Obama administration wants to make the U.S. independent of terrorist-sponsored Middle East oil.  Or so they say.  Because the U.S. is one pipeline away from making that happen.  Thanks to our energy-rich good friends to the north.  But the Obama administration is all but telling them to pound sand (see Canada toughens tone for TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline approval by Bruce Nichols, Reuters, posted 10/31/2011 on The Vancouver Sun).

In the face of rising environmental opposition to the planned pipeline, which would carry 700,000 barrels per day of supply from Canada’s oilsands projects to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast, the Obama administration has signalled that it may miss a year-end target for approval.

Oliver said a delay by the Obama administration would not be fatal to the project, and that Calgary-based TransCanada has multiple options — including customers in Asia…

Following Environmental Protection Agency complaints about its initial analysis, the State Department said it would undertake a supplemental review.

Unbelievable.  As if killing the oil business in the U.S. wasn’t bad enough.  Now the Obama administration appears determined to make gasoline as expensive as possible in the future.  To please the environmentalists.  At the expense of the American economy.  And the U.S. consumer.

It’s pretty sad when the Canadians are telling the Americans to lighten up on their environmental policies.  I mean, Canada has always been greener than America.  Yet here they are.  The energy producers.  And the Americans are hugging the trees.

The Chinese are in full support of the Obama policies.  Because those policies look like they’re going to hook up China with a lot of cheap oil.  Now that the Americans appear to be out of the oil market.  And determined to stay in the recession market.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,