Senate rejects effort to ban Keystone XL-pipeline exports

[Eugene]

Source: Associated Press

Senate rejects effort to ban Keystone XL-pipeline exports

By DINA CAPPIELLO
Associated Press
Posted: Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2015

WASHINGTON The Republican-controlled Senate on Tuesday rejected Democrats' bids to ban exports from the Keystone XL oil pipeline and to require building the project with American-made steel.

In largely party-line votes, the Senate sidetracked the first two additions to a bill seeking to approve construction of the 1,179 pipeline. Sen. Edward Markey of Massachusetts and Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota argued that their additions would ensure that the pipeline, which will carry an estimated 800,000 barrels of oil from the Canadian tar sands to Gulf Coast refineries, will benefit Americans with fuel and jobs.

"Proponents of the Keystone XL pipeline have made promises that it would increase our energy security, but when they are given the chance to support keeping that oil in the United States, they actively oppose my amendment to do so," Markey said.

But Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said such restrictions on a privately-funded energy project amounted to a "slippery slope."

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]

Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2015/01/20/5459936/senate-rejects-effort-to-ban-keystone.html

[Fred Sanders]

1. The pipeline lies are all getting unravelled vote by vote.

How does exporting the oil and it refined products help energy security in America? Any journalist in America willing to ask the basic journalist type questions, or do we have to call in the Brits and French again to do your jobs?

[quadrature]

3. here is how ...

all crude oil is not the same.

many US refineries are set up to take
crappy crude-oil from Venezuela.
It is not that the refineries need crappy-oil,
it is because the low-grade-oil usually
costs 10 USD less per barrel

It is sometimes better to send the
top-shelf-crude to older refineries
(often offshore) that need the stuff

[Nihil]

2. Full marks to Franken & Markey for trying.

> their additions would ensure that the pipeline, which will carry an estimated 800,000 barrels
> of oil from the Canadian tar sands to Gulf Coast refineries, will benefit Americans with fuel and jobs.
>
> "Proponents of the Keystone XL pipeline have made promises that it would increase our
> energy security, but when they are given the chance to support keeping that oil in the
> United States, they actively oppose my amendment to do so," Markey said.

At least the KXL supporters are getting their names permanently on the record
as being liars and, effectively, traitors.

[Panich52]

4. Financial conflict of interest

Boehner has a personal financial intetest in seeing KXL go through:

http://www.politicususa.com/2012/01/22/john-boehner-keystone-xl.html

Wonder how many other Congressional supporters of a foriegn company exploiting eminent domaign over US citizens' private property have money invested in the toxic tar sands? Or just beholden to tar sands owners, the Koch (you sure we're pronouncing that right?) Brothers?