These freshly-minted environmentalists are teabaggers who don’t want to
see their property values go down: (insert obligatory reference to karma)

Gov. Heineman in 2010:

We feel compelled to guard against a regulatory approach that would increase the cost of electricity and gasoline prices, manufactured products, and ultimately harm the competitiveness of the US economy. As governors, we strongly urge Congress to stop harmful EPA regulation of greenhouse gas emissions that could damage those vital interests. We ask that Congress continue its work to pass comprehensive legislation that balances the role of conservation and climate security with the production of abundant and affordable American energy. The EPA has initiated efforts to impose greenhouse gas regulations that could be harmful to our economies at an especially critical time. As Governors, we are gravely concerned about such regulation.

I think someone will be able figure out a way to make this pipeline completely indestructible and leakproof, impervious to earthquakes, corrosion, bad welds, bad pipe, and so on, (unlike every other pipeline in the world)

and then will be able to go ahead with it, and vote for it.

Is there a politician/regulator anywhere, that has power, that has withstood the favours and attacks of oil companies?

knope.

I fail to see why Nebraska needs to allow this potential problem to cross their state if the people don’t want it, especially to benefit another country.

We can always get clean water from the Gulf of Mexico because Mr. O has his boot on the neck of BP.

And your point is……? So property owners want to guard against their property values going down…this is wrong why? And of course you fail to address the problem of pipes carrying crude oil going over the Ogallalala Acquifer, which supplies much of the water there. Just who are you speaking for anyway…the big oil companies who will make billions from this, or the people of Nebraska? Because this refined oil will be sold on the world market, and not necessarily benefit the US or the good people of Nebraska.

Fess up allan!

For an interesting perspective, compare the proposed Keystone map with the one at this AOPL site.

http://www.aopl.org/

Since Nebraska already has thousands of miles of existing oil and gas pipeline, I doubt that the introduction of one more pipe to the environment is going to sway anyone who’s not already against it.

The Rs are always yelling about States’ Rights, so why doesn’t Nebraska have the right to say NO to this. I think they do.

I predict significant campaign contributions from someone in no way linked to keystone and then the pipe being approved.

Boxturtle (IOW, I think the GOPers in Neb are holding out for more money, no real environmental concerns)

I fail to see why Nebraska needs to allow this potential problem to cross their state if the people don’t want it, especially to benefit another country.

you don’t understand, the republican objection is strictly kabuke, they are putting on a show so they can blame obama and still get their corporate swill

Is this the 40′th Keystone pipeline? Is that why the XL is there?

BT,
Bingo, follow the $$

The silly things China will do for cheap energy.

And of course you fail to address the problem of pipes carrying crude oil going over the Ogallalala Acquifer, which supplies much of the water there

There’s this:

It turns out the aquaifer isn’t a lake.

As hydrogeologist Jim Goeke, an aquifer expert at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, has noted several times, any spill from the pipeline would be extremely limited and not affect the aquifer in general. Any leak in the pipeline would only affect “10′s or 100′s of feet around the pipeline.” The very structure of the aquifer as a composite collection of porous rock, sand, and sediment makes it so that oil could not permeate the general aquifer.

The XL stands for Xtra Large pipeline. This one is also running under pressure – something “all those other pipelines already in Nebraska” are not.

Another pipeline with the exact same design as this one – the supposedly super safe one – that was just built about two years ago – has already ruptured and spilled oil. And it was only running one-third full and not under pressure.

What could possibly go wrong?

The slurry (and yes it is not oil) that would be carried in the XL pipeline is a mixture of sand, oil, and a lot of chemicals that have been added to make the stuff liquid enough to push through the pipe. It is a noxious brew of filthy stuff.

It is not for US consumption – it is going to other countries after it is refined. All of it. It will do absolutely nothing for gas prices here. We actually have an oil glut here. Gas prices are the result of speculation in the commodities market – not a condition of supply.

So no – this pipeline is NOT just like any other pipeline already here in the US. It does not benefit us in the least – and poses only tremendous risks.

Somehow this doesn’t make me feel better. The oil will simply settle to the bottom and stay there forever but not effect anything?

BT,
Extending your prediction, it would be interesting to compare names of campaign contributions and those that expect to make $$ from the XL pipeline

That assumes of course that the spill doesn’t happen in or near a body of water.

porous rock, sand, and sediment

of course this is exactly the problem. Oil is a liquid – and thus can travel through “porous” substrates. This hydrogeologist has obviously not been doing any serious work on the permeability of soils. And he is making a big assumption about the “oil” in this pipeline which is full of chemicals – which may or may not remain mixed with the oil once they are exposed to the weather in a spill condition.

This guy OMB is actually Dr. Dave Billesbach, PhD University of Nebraska – Lincoln.

He and his research partner Dr. Tim Arkebauer PhD also of UNL are the only 2 researchers to have made a complete water audit of the Sand Hills, and specifically as regards the Ogallala Acquifer.

Goeke is speaking out of his depth on this issue.

Good points, and oil cleanups are extremely difficult, time consuming and expensive. Those cast are always passed on from the company cleanup to the consumer. The toxic surfactant chemicals move much faster through the environment into the water where they disburse into that giant aquifer.
This is a tragedy of epic proportion. Bill was here last night giving a talk.
San Luis Obispo CA

I believe the federal preemption doctrine precludes the State of Nebraska from enacting any legislation relative to the Keystone pipeline that conflicts with existing federal law.

At this stage of the process, probably the only available options are political and judicial.

The political option is to meet with public officials from the states through which the pipeline will pass, as well as states in which the aquifer is located, to brainstorm and develop a plan to persuade Obama to refuse to sign-off on the existing plan.

The judicial option would be to file a lawsuit directly in the United States Supreme Court asking it to appoint a Special Master to hold evidentiary hearings regarding whether the legal process followed so far complies with existing federal environmental laws. For example, I think it is pretty clear that the organization that prepared the environmental impact statement has a major conflict of interest that would have made it virtually impossible for it to have produced an objective report and reasonable recommendation. The conclusion that no significant adverse consequences are likely is absurd on it face, since every oil pipeline ever built has sprung significant leaks causing serious environmental harm.

Under the Constitution, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction to consider and rule on legal issues arising under the U.S. Constitution and federal statutes in a case in which one or more states sue the federal government. Original jurisdiction, as opposed to appellate jurisdiction, means the the states should sue the federal government by filing a complaint directly in the Supreme Court seeking injunctive and declaratory relief.

However, it is very late in this particular game to suddenly declare, “Whoa, Nellie,” which is why I suspect the Nebraska Governor is not serious about stopping the project. Reading between the lines, so to speak, I think he is using one of Obama’s favorite bullshit ploys, which is to stake out a firm position for political reasons about an important issue, but do nothing to implement that position. Obama is doing that regarding the need to create jobs, but he is doing nothing to line up enough votes to pass the necessary legislation.

This is a simple case of NIMBY, and, probably, the tea baggers of Nebraska hoping for a larger stipend from the Koch’s et al. Its humorous to read comments about the safety of the pipeline, the attitude would undoubtedly be a lot different when the inevitable “accident” were to happen to their drinking water or sprayed on their food.

we can trust the oil and pipeline companies, like alantx does, because, they don’t ever bribe regulators with hookers and drugs, lie about oil spills in pipelines, and from wells, never manipulate the price by not building new refineries for fifty years, and if there is any damage, which there won’t be, they will certainly make it better immediately, as in the exxon spill in Alaska.

and the gulf, is completely recovered from bp spill isn’t it? everyone says it is, and they’re drilling again, without any changes, so it must be fine.

besides, alan is right, it’s already polluted with oil, and who knows what else, so, whats another few million gallons down there. no big deal.

and really about those crops, canola, for instance is an oil seed, it probably would benefit from a little raw crude being sprayed on it.

so, Like Alantx. I just don’t see where there’s a problem. got to go for a drive now in my cadillac suv.

oh yeah, forgot, I nominate

allan1tx,

for the position of Official Moran, of Firedoglake

NAFTA chapter 11. I’ll say it again, NAFTA chapter 11. I’m not going to stop saying it. This is really important.

My point is that hypocrisy (and kabuki, as BT points out) is the elephant in the room.
I, too, want it stopped, but don’t trust the Governor and his pals. And, mafr@23, please get your allans straight!

Um, pretty sure it’s snark. Karma snark highlighting the irony.

Guilt by association :-)

Posted on Firedoglake by speakingupnow January 25th, 2011 at 10:25 am «
It seems to me that the following has numerous repercussions:
“The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) includes an array of new corporate investment rights and protections that are unprecedented in scope and power. NAFTA allows corporations to sue the national government of a NAFTA country in secret arbitration tribunals if they feel that a regulation or government decision affects their investment in conflict with these new NAFTA rights. If a corporation wins, the taxpayers of the “losing” NAFTA nation must foot the bill. This extraordinary attack on governments’ ability to regulate in the public interest is a key element of recent and proposed NAFTA expansions like the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and agreements with Peru, Panama and Colombia.” From – NAFTA’s Chapter 11: Corporate Cases
http://www.citizen.org/Page.aspx?pid=1218

For the price of clearing and building a pipeline across the US, wouldn’t it make more sense to build a modern refinery near the Canadian Border. This would minimize the threat to the environment while providing refined oil products to the US. The only reason for taking the pipeline to Houston would be if your real intention was to sell the oil products to foreign markets, using the Houston ports.

After doing a little research and figuring out there is almost 170,000 miles of oil and gas pipelines in the US, and Keystone want’s to add 1% to that figure, I didn’t think there was much chance of it being stopped.

Those are good points you make about pressure and chemicals, if correct. I’m no expert, but I don’t know how oil would get from point a to point b if it wasn’t under pressure.

Then I poked around a little more and found out this horse is already out of the barn. This isn’t even a new pipeline, just an extension.

The Keystone pipeline, which became operational in 2010, brings about 435,000 barrels of crude oil per day from Albert, Canada, to refineries in Texas. Proposed additions to the pipeline would up that delivery to about 700,000 to 900,000 barrels per day.

That would make sense on the surface, but it’s more complicated than that.

Once the crude is refined it’s sent out over hundreds of thousands of miles of existing pipelines to transfer stations all over the US, where it’s loaded on a semi and driven the last few miles to your local 7-11.

If you built the refinery in ND, you’d need 100x more pipelines to get the refined fuel to the transfer stations.