Majority of senators back Keystone XL pipeline

Comments (5)
Burns0011 wrote:

Why are these Senators so interested in expanding foreign oil company profits?

Jan 23, 2013 3:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
SanPa wrote:

A straight line between the source and European markets … higher US gasoline prices will follow.

Jan 23, 2013 4:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sylvan wrote:

Say no to Canadian tar sands, the dirtiest energy on the planet. We don’t want Canadians’ trashy oil when we have huge excess of natural gas, which is so much cleaner than tar sands. These Senators have to be the recipients of lobbyists’ cash to be for this nasty project.

Jan 23, 2013 4:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bixbysbigsur wrote:

Instead of subsidizing the bloated profits of the oil companies for yet more profit, maybe this pipeline should carry water for emergency drought relief when needed. You know, from the heartland where our food comes frome? Now there is an idea that everyone can get behind (well, except the oil companies).

Jan 23, 2013 5:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
pl1224 wrote:

Good Lord! You’d think that U.S. Senators would at least manage to get their facts straight. All of the product transported from Canada through the keystone pipeline will be going to Port Arthur, Texas, a port designated as a tax-free foreign-trade port. The “energy benefit” will be to foreign countries and the financial benefit will primarily accrue to the Trans-Canada energy company and to Enbridge co.(in which Koch Industries has a significant interest).

And, given the increased production of domestic natural gas, the U.S. is becoming a net energy exporter, we no longer need “help” with our energy supply. The senators advocating for the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline are representing the narrow interests of their corporate donors, not the interests of their country as a whole.

Jan 24, 2013 6:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.