Skip to main content

View Diary: The State Department's analysis of the oil market and KXL is outdated (10 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Can we hold Canada to a higher standard? (0+ / 0-)

    The natural resource belongs to Canada and is theirs to produce, sell (exploit) to whom ever they choose. I choose the United States over China. China adheres so no standards of environmental concern such as coal fired electric generation facilities with somewhere between zero and none pollution scrubbers. At least  we (United States) are willing to impose some controls over the production, transportation and refining of the Canadian natural resource which can assist North America (Canada, United States & Mexico) in being energy independent from the rest of the world. No more involvement in  wars in the Middle East over oil.

    •  Read our report(s) (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I encourage you to read the report I've linked to above, as well as many other reports that are out there (you can find a lot of them here: that essentially debunk all of the arguments you've made regarding the Keystone pipeline.

      First: Keystone XL is vital to expansion of the tar sands. Canada won't be able to develop the tar sands at the levels they'd like, without Keystone XL.

      Second: Keystone XL is an export pipeline. It won't increase energy security, independence, or whatever other term you want to use for increased domestic oil supply. We can't drill our way to energy security, and we certainly can't drill our way to a safe climate.

      If you want to ensure that China doesn't get this oil, you might consider opposing Keystone XL, not supporting it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site