Guest Column: Obama Got It Right on Keystone XL
Texans have never been afraid of a challenge, especially when it comes to energy. Since discovering oil at Spindletop early last century, Texans have used ingenuity and hard work to make the Lone Star state the energy capital of the world.
But after the oil price slump of the 1980s exposing our economy’s vulnerability to oil dependence, dangers to national security rising from our oil addiction, and growing concerns about pollution threatening the air we breathe and water we drink, Texas leaders set goals to diversify our energy portfolio to include clean energy.
And Texas businesses have responded, making ...
Comments (21)
visule
Hey, did you know that freezing in the dark can make you sick. The tar sand oil is going to be extracted, it is question of sending it to US markets or to China via a west coast port. We can still pursue the green inititives while increasing our energy security and supplies.
Michael Tex Duncan via Texas Tribune on Facebook
This column was little better than the Smitherman piece (see my comment there), simply poking a finger at big oil in the name of carbon-independence rather than focusing on the facts underlying the rejection of the pipeline on the accelerated deadline for consideration.
Darrel Mulloy via Texas Tribune on Facebook
One thing the author left out is the eminent domain issue. Keystone has applied in Texas declaring they are a "common carrier" which would giver them the ability to condemn land under eminent domain. A common carrier would be a facility that could be used by those who wanted to use it, in this case, other oil producers, but since there are no other sand tar oil producers in Texas, and the pipeline will only carry oil from tar sands, they can not possible be a common carrier in Texas. Even if such were the case, they should not be given eminent domain power because they are a private business, not a public conveyance of any kind, and as the article points out, the main goal is to get the oil to the gulf so it can be refined and sent to the market in China.
I would think it would be cheaper and less intrusive to build their own refineries in Canada and keep their tar sand oil there if it is only going to be sent out of the country anyway.
The increase in jobs is not worth the tradeoffs that will accompany them.
Tim Tukaram Spotswood via Texas Tribune on Facebook
How is this even going to the President? If an oil company wants to build a pipeline they buy the land from the legal owners and get permts from each state it goes through. It is in no way a federal issue.
David Lee Koontz via Texas Tribune on Facebook
This was one of the worst articles I have ever read. Glad you're a guest, Metzger.
Larry Hayles via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Tim.. Canada is not a state....
Michael Tex Duncan via Texas Tribune on Facebook
@Tim: It's called interstate commerce -- an in this case, international as well. And while the commerce clause clause (giving Congress the power " to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes") is often expanded to laughable dimensions, even the most narrow of readings would include this pipeline.
Mike Openshaw via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Absolutely laughable as green company after green company bellies up, taking billions of taxpayer subsides with them. A study in Spain shows every green job costs 2.2 other jobs- and a lot of those are being bankrupted out of existence. This pipeline is such a risk... like the HUNDREDS of other pipelines crisscrossing the same aquifer. Please, people; try some logic here. Canadian oil WILL be developed and burned; the Chinese will burn it with minimal safeguards, we will have the ones we have. ANd I'd rather give money to those who aren't handing it over to people who want to kill us.
Sierra Treanor via Texas Tribune on Facebook
China can suck our &@$"!!! .... Oil
Larry Hayles via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Mike that study in Spain has been repeatedly debunked.. it was never submitted for peer review and completely ignored the huge housing bubble that happened in Spain too.
What is going to flow through this pipeline is nothing like what flows through the other pipeline. It is more toxic and more corrosive. If built as well as the previous Keystone pipeline (promised to be safe - one spill every 7 yearrs but had 12 in it s first year of operation) there should be plenty of jobs from cleaning up the biweekly spills.What makes it through to Texas will be process and shipped out the Gulf tax free.
Dustin Taylor David IV via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Horrible article tribune, who posted this again lol? Was someone facebook hacked lol? Good joke article!
Jon Masters via Texas Tribune on Facebook
One way or another the oil is going to be harvested as long as there is a market for it. If the oil is in Texas it makes prices here cheaper, and provides more jobs for Texas refineries. It is arrogant to assume that because Obama blocked the oil from Texas that it will stop the oil from being used. When green energy gets to be cost efficient it will dominate, but not until then.
Debbie Spencer via Texas Tribune on Facebook
It is my understanding that the oil was never destined for any Texas refineries, or any US refineries for that matter. The current refineries would have to build new processing units to handle this product and they haven't been willing to build any new refineries in decades.
Joe Wilson via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Even 4,500 jobs would be reason to approve, but real argument against was that it would add to the price of gas as the gulf refineries planned on exporting it where they could get higher price.
Bill Eaves via Texas Tribune on Facebook
So that's more jobs, but it's a start in receiving oil from somebody other than the muslims
Mike Openshaw via Texas Tribune on Facebook
As opposed to shipping that SAME oil by TANKER across the Pacific. Makes a LOT of environmental sense; Duh! Hard to 'debunk' massive green company bankruptcies, costing the taxpayers billions (that lined the pockets of various 'one-percenters' on the left). Housing bubbles related to 'green' jobs??? Ok; your medication needs some work.
Donna Thomas Woolf via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Just 4,500?? Sounds alot better than none!
David Spratt
Grid connected solar runs $5 to $8 a watt , this is for larger systems 20 Kw and up, wind is slightly cheaper. Small home systems run $8 to $10 per watt for solar. This means you can spend $6,000 to $9,600 to run a 120 watt can opener using solar, on the cheap side. Most AC units are 12,000 watts and up, do your own calculations.The average family home would need a 20 Kw capacity to operate uninterrupted using solar/wind and battery backup. Who can afford $200,000 ? I have a wind turbine that produces around $50 a month worth of elect at a cost of $8,000 . It will take more than 13 years to pay for it and it is only of use coupled with a generator for use in case the whole world as we know it comes to an end. you could keep food frozen and that is it's main function. At best 2 thousand watts .
As far as all those green cars go , I wonder how many people ever consider the fact that most of them are actually coal fired cars, you personally just do not have to shovel the coal. A more practical approach would be for people to own Unicorns or maybe those flying horses to get around. They are very green, and you do not have to pay a Mexican to mow the yard.
JC DemocratofTejas
Thumbs up Luke!
John Burton via Texas Tribune on Facebook
1. This is tar sands oil, not refined oil. The pipes are made in India, and a whistle-blower from Keystone already said this was a disaster waiting to happen.
2. The "Jobs" included in the Keystone list included nonsense like "128 local strip-dancers". I'm not even kidding.
3. The "oil" was never destined to stay in the US. Why do you think the line goes to Port Arthur?
4. The strongest people against this pipeline were people like the Republican Governor of Nebraska. The pipeline runs through the Ogallala Aquifer - the water source for 8 states. It was those "liberal" ranchers, farmers, and Red-State Governors that were against this as much as the enviros.
5. Keystone was already threatening landowners with eminent domain if they didn't sell their property for a fraction of the value. And this was before the approval that never happened. Would you like your land taken by a Canadian Oil Company (or anybody else) using eminent domain?
raffaele cafagna
Luke Metzger i do not want to offend you but being an honest person and expressing my opinion I believe you are a kiss ass to the muslim.