President Barack Obama rejects KXL: WSJ

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Obama's decision is entirely based on pandering to the special interest groups that comprise his base and not on rational thought. To think that this decision would be any different had Canada implemented different environmental policy is foolish.

The president's entire rationale for rejecting the project does not make sense. In 2013, he stated that the project should only be approved if it should be approved only if it doesn't exacerbate carbon pollution. The existence of a pipeline has no impact on carbon pollution levels and Alberta's oil sands will be developed regardless of whether Keystone XL exists or not. In fact, by reducing the spread between WTI, the potential exists to make additional emission reducing technologies economical to implement for Alberta oil.

Not to mention the fact that America has built the equivalent of 10 Keystone pipelines since 2010 without incident. The decision is purely a political sideshow.

All of this and, for the first time in eons (or ever.....can't remember exactly), the US is in a position to export oil. As many have said, it's time to turn our attention to other markets and get our product to the east and west tidal waters.

[burn_this_city]

Eight years of farting around is hilarious and pathetic. Just like his Syria redline he's a spineless President who can't make a firm decision on anything.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by Slava

... By the same token you would expect a federal government here to ram through a pipeline in Canada to get our oil to markets because they stand to gain a lot.

Yes. Our own intergovernmental squabbles between the provinces and federal inability to help facilitate the negotiation processes and make necessary overarching decisions in the best interests of the country are equally appalling. Alberta oil must be given an outlet to the sea ports. Alberta has fed half of Canada for decades. Now, when it needs the rest of Canada to help it get back on track, the rest of Canada says "meh, screw you, you deserve it".

Obama's decision is nothing but politics of R vs D. Canada's lack of action is nothing but cowardliness.

[Drak]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Eight years of farting around is hilarious and pathetic. Just like his Syria redline he's a spineless President who can't make a firm decision on anything.

That is pretty exaggerated. He has completed a number of significant accomplishments.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Eight years of farting around is hilarious and pathetic. Just like his Syria redline he's a spineless President who can't make a firm decision on anything.

That's a pretty Apt description IMO. Spineless.

[Huntingwhale]

Thanks a lot Obama

[InglewoodFan]

My biggest frustration with the whole "dirty oil" line of reasoning is that something like 70% of the CO2 emissions from a barrel of oil are from the end user. That is - cars.

I've been to international carbon capture conferences, and it was put bluntly to me - cars vote, power plants don't. This can also apply to refineries, etc. As far as bang for your buck in mitigating CO2 the obvious target is cars but that would be political suicide.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by InglewoodFan

My biggest frustration with the whole "dirty oil" line of reasoning is that something like 70% of the CO2 emissions from a barrel of oil are from the end user. That is - cars.

I've been to international carbon capture conferences, and it was put bluntly to me - cars vote, power plants don't. This can also apply to refineries, etc. As far as bang for your buck in mitigating CO2 the obvious target is cars but that would be political suicide.

US has not really increased gas taxes, but their auto emissions standards are quite aggressive. They've put the burden on manufacturers, not consumers.

That said some of the largest companies in the US are trying to make the internal combustion engine obsolete.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by Bunk

US has not really increased gas taxes, but their auto emissions standards are quite aggressive. They've put the burden on manufacturers, not consumers.

That said some of the largest companies in the US are trying to make the internal combustion engine obsolete.

So much so companies have to lie and cheat to hit those standards.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Bunk

US has not really increased gas taxes, but their auto emissions standards are quite aggressive. They've put the burden on manufacturers, not consumers.

That said some of the largest companies in the US are trying to make the internal combustion engine obsolete.

You mean Tesla? That giant rent-seeking, loss-making, hyped up, wanna-be visionary company?

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by peter12

You mean Tesla? That giant rent-seeking, loss-making, hyped up, wanna-be visionary company?

This was just too easy...

Sandy Lyle: All right, we all need to look into our hearts and go, "Do I think this dude is gonna die in a few years or not?" Is old Leland here gonna fight off a man... who goes by the last name "Reaper," first name "Grim"? Or will this BASE-jumping, crocodile-wrestling, shark-diving, volcano-luging, bear-fighting, snake-wrangling, motocross-racing ba$tard die?

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Bunk

US has not really increased gas taxes, but their auto emissions standards are quite aggressive. They've put the burden on manufacturers, not consumers.

Which is the incorrect way to go about this if the goal is to induce a change in consumer behaviour (which it should be).

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Which is the incorrect way to go about this if the goal is to induce a change in consumer behaviour (which it should be).

True, but the correct way to get re-elected is to avoid unpopular new taxes

[DeluxeMoustache]

The technological advances that made it possible to significantly increase recover from shale contributed to the U.S. moving towards being energy self sufficient and moving towards being a net exporter, and also changing US foreign policy, which had been relatively consistent post WWII for about 5 decades.

The reality is economic, the posturing is political.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by peter12

You mean Tesla? That giant rent-seeking, loss-making, hyped up, wanna-be visionary company?

Apple, being one.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Eight years of farting around is hilarious and pathetic. Just like his Syria redline he's a spineless President who can't make a firm decision on anything.

Right, he should have sent troops into that shole.

[DuffMan]

What would have been hypocritical is if Obama had let it go through and then gone to Paris next month for a 190 country climate change conference.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Right, he should have sent troops into that shole.

Never said that he should. Don't make a redline and then do nothing when it's clearly been crossed. He's a dithering mess, has been this entire term.

I know he has fanboys here in Canada, but he's been awful for our interests in general. People love Democrats, but they're protectionist turds.

[Clarkey]

Novelty President. Next!

[2Stonedbirds]

The next president is going to be a novelty as well.