CONNECT
Otherwords / Op-Ed
Published: Monday 9 April 2012
“The people and companies pushing the tar-sands pipeline don’t want you to know that most of this oil won’t be made into gasoline for our vehicles.”
Keystone XL’s Dirty Little Secret
"It's certainly true," declared Energy Secretary Stephen Chu, "that having Canada as a supplier for our oil is much more comforting than to have other countries supply our oil."
He was referring to the Canadian tar sands oil that TransCanada Corporation intends to move through the Keystone XL pipeline it wants to build from Alberta to refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast. He and lobbyists for the pipeline assert that filling America's gas tanks with fuel derived from Canadian crude will cut U.S. dependency on the oil we get from unstable and unfriendly nations.
Good point! If it were true. However, ask yourself this question: why go to the expense of piping this stuff 2,000 miles through six states, endangering water supplies and residents with inevitable toxic spills, when there are oil refineries much closer to Canada in the Midwest? What's the advantage of sending Canadian crude to refineries way down in Port Arthur, Texas? Aha — because it's a port!
What the pushers of Keystone want to keep secret from you and me is that this oil will not be made into gasoline for our vehicles. Most of it will be refined into diesel and jet fuel and exported to Europe, China, and Latin America.
The claim that the pipeline will reduce our reliance on OPEC is an outright lie. Such oil giants as Valero, Motiva, and Total have already rejiggered their Port Arthur refineries specifically to make diesel and jet fuel, nearly all of which will then be piped into tanker ships at the port and sent abroad. In presentations to investors, Valero openly touts its export strategy, even showing world maps with convenient arrows pointing from Port Arthur to its foreign customers.
You'd think our energy secretary would know this dirty little secret and come clean with the American people.
Get Email Alerts from NationofChange
ABOUT Jim Hightower
National radio commentator, writer, public speaker, and author of the book, Swim Against The Current: Even A Dead Fish Can Go With The Flow, Jim Hightower has spent three decades battling the Powers That Be on behalf of the Powers That Ought To Be - consumers, working families, environmentalists, small businesses, and just-plain-folks.
20 comments on "Keystone XL’s Dirty Little Secret"
April 14, 2012 9:22pm
The part of the pipeline that has already been built from Canada to some small refineries in a couple of states has already had several leaks - one large one into the Yellowstone River. How safe will our environment and water sources be if they are allowed to continue this debacle?
As for oil companies being prepared for spills, one only has to look at the fact that the Exxon-Valdez spill was never adequately cleaned up and still contaminates wetlands and shorelines. Some has seeped into the sand out of sight, but if you dig down a couple of inches there is plenty of evidence of this. And no matter what BP says in their ads, they have not done a decent job of cleaning up the spill or compensating people who lost their livelihoods. C'mon Down! - and eat the contaminated seafood. While they are extolling the great news, we have relatives still seeing tar balls wash up on the beaches.
Now, why would sane people expect this project - with the worst form of thick 'oil' heated to a high degree so it will pass through the pipe under enormous pressure - to have a better outcome?
April 10, 2012 9:55am
keep on whining. that is all liberals seem 2 do.
April 10, 2012 6:15am
Well A few Questions, These Tar sands need solvents to make them thin enough to flow in the pipe line, 1) Where does all that stuff end up? 2) Re: The Left over sand, Is this stuff going to be clean or toxic?3) why not just refine in where it is and use the existing distribution system to send this oil to port for global sale?4) why do the Cons keep telling the American people the Oil will lwer our dependance?5) Why do the Cons keep implying that this will lower oil prices, when it will not stop speculation?6) Why do we keep seeing commercials on the idiot box telling us the tar sands and XL hype-line will bring 100,000 jobs, when even the Canadians have said it will only bring about 4000?7) why does our news agrigators not tell both sides of this story in any depth, or even try to not look like balanaced sources?
April 09, 2012 9:17pm
So, I'll start off by saying, I'm for the pipeline and full disclosure here, I make my living buying right of way for among other things, pipelines, tho not this one. You are right, these are temporary jobs, from the engineers that design the lines, the environmental companies that perform surveys, the surveyors that lay out the line, the construction workers that build the lines, the inspectors that make sure the line is built to spec and the roach coach that feeds them all, temporary jobs everyone of them. But, almost everyone on the project will get a good two to three years of employment out of a project this size. All project driven jobs are temporary, but when you finish one, thereusually is another one to get started on so together, they keep thousands of us working throughout our lifetimes. There are literally hundreds of thousands of pipelines in existence under America and many of them have been there for at least fifty to a hundred years. Many that carry toxic and, explosive liquids and gases but people don't usually protest about those. By the way Adrienne, I like your play on eminent domain as imminent domain, very clever. President Obama expedited the southern half of the line because it will be carrying crude from Wyoming and North Dakota to the refineries in Port Arthur. Eventually, the Canadian and American crudes will mix. I like your idea that we should process at least 25% of that oil into gasoline, diesel and jet fuel solely for our consumption and I suppose Canada should keep 25% for their own consumption, that's only fair. However, we live in a global economy and of course, the companies are in it for a buck so selling the product on the open market is to be expected.
April 13, 2012 10:35am
"I like your idea that we should process at least 25% of that oil into gasoline, diesel and jet fuel solely for our consumption and I suppose Canada should keep 25% for their own consumption, that's only fair."
I've read, and believe, that this oil CAN'T be refined for use for fuel in US or Canada?
We should apply an hefty export tariff to any oil exported from US ports. Use it to reduce the deficit!
April 09, 2012 2:46pm
before highdip writes an article he should ask some in oil biz i did answer canada tar oil is heavy crude and most of refinery that best at handling it is in tx but by having the oil shipped to china will make the demoncrat maoist happy 3 ways [1] make USA more depended on countries that do not like us [2] reduce jobs [3] raise fuel cost [narrow wti / brent spread]
April 09, 2012 2:31pm
What are the tax considerations for this fiasco? Something tells me that there are some definite tax benefits for the producers. refiners, etc. because of crossing the CDN - US border as dictated by NAFTA. Are there any tax type people reading this?
April 09, 2012 2:03pm
PS Energy Secretary Stephen Chu is a primo example of what the beltway is preaching from the TC KoolAid Play Book. He's on crack along with the rest of D.C. about this.
April 09, 2012 1:58pm
Yes Jim - and all the "jobs creation" will amount to about 20 permanent jobs. The company has been threatening U.S. citizens to get them to sell them their land for the pipeline - threatening them with invoking imminent domain if they don't roll over and sell, and they've shafted the Indian group who leased them their lands in Canada for drilling. The damage to the boreal forest is incredible; it's more than strip mining causes. Transcanada's contract calls for them to give the tribe $1.5M for them to work on land reclamation. TC refused to pay up and now the tribe is having to sue them for it. Yet EVERY TIME I write one of my congressional delegation, I get an answer that's straight from the TC Kool-Aid Playbook: "It'll reduce our dependence on foreign oil" (ummm, they don't seem to get that CANADA IS A FOREIGN COMPANY - while totally ignoring that activists forced TC to admit the truth - no oil for us. "It'll help with job creation." - Right. Temporary jobs. TC has been running a scam by having had miles of pipeline built and currently stored in expectation of approval for this travesty; now local newspapers carry stories about all the 'jobs that'll be lost' if the company doesn't continue to build pipeline. -Ummm, once most of it's built, they're won't BE those jobs, since the demand will only be for replacement pipelines - so that's a complete fallicy too. Then there's the fact that they're running it to Port Arthur - A DUTY FREE PORT - for shipping to China and other points east. Thus, the U.S. gets no oil, very few real/long term jobs and no duty monies collected. Hmmmm. Oh - but the pay off is that we run the risk of a huge pipeline going thru our landscape, carrying THE MOST CAUSTIC FORM OF OIL THERE IS - and Obama's just saved them more millions by 'expediting' the approval for the southern part of the pipeline. Apparently he fully trusts that TC has a great safety-net set up in case of a spill - after all, they're so trust worthy and all - never mind that pesky failure to fulfill the terms of their contract. Basically, the Canadian government has been bought and paid for and our own is close behind. And just DON'T MENTION that silly little factor about the BP oilspill where they DIDN'T HAVE A SAFETY PLAN IN PLACE - BUT WENT AHEAD WITH AN EXTREMELY RISKY PROCEDURE TO TRY TO SEAL OFF THE WELL HEAD - RESULTING IN BARRELS AND BARRELS OF OIL FLOWING INTO THE GULF. Oh, sure, their ads are just wonderful - look at all the clean beaches!!! Just don't look too closely at the wetlands that have a thick layer of oil in them that's not getting removed, if it even can be. Never mind destroying and not yet replacing all the wild areas for wildlife. who needs birds? All this happened while BP and Haliburton spent precious time blaming each other - and the BP folks just couldn't see what our problem was. I'm sorry - but replacing that CEO may have been their solution to some terrible PR, but I suspect his comments were reflective of a culture of not caring - and we have no way of knowing that those who came behind have any different view that he did. Yet D.C. pushes forward with cramming this horrible project down our throats. THE VERY PEOPLE THAT SHOULD BE PROTECTING US FROM THIS CRAP ARE POURING HEART AND SOUL INTO GETTING IT DONE. THANKS OBAMA. WHAT NUMBER PROMISE WAS THIS ONE THAT YOU BROKE? How can he tell us that he's opposed to "tax rebates" for big business when he hand TC millions of dollars in savings - savings that mean they don't have to get the proper eco impact reports. And as a final thought, Texas has been in a drought; just how much of a spill do you think will get sucked up by parched earth if there's a spill there? I'm thinking might be about the size of the Gulf of Mexico.
April 09, 2012 2:35pm
Thanks, Adrienne, for pointing out the lack of tax consequence of shipping from Port Arthur. Between that and the NAFTA exercise of not having to pay tax to bring the product into the US from Canada, none of us, Canadians, or US citizens, will see any benefit in the form of taxes on the product.
April 09, 2012 1:27pm
They get the profits, the Chinese fuel their industry and war machine, and we get the environmental clean-up--everyone wins.
April 09, 2012 1:26pm
They get the profits, the Chinese fuel their industry and war machine, and we get the environmental clean-up--everyone wins.
April 09, 2012 1:25pm
The conservative, authoritarian, right-wing programmable idiots (rethugs and teabaggers) are looking forward to $2.50/gallon gasoline because of the Kochroaches' Keystone XL pipeline, and when it doesn't happen, they'll blame Obama (because Fox Noise's claims) despite the fact that it has absolutely nothing to do with Obama.
Right-wing NeoNazi authoritarians are conveniently impervious to facts and TRUTH.
April 10, 2012 9:56am
keep whining. that seems 2 b the only thing the democrats can do right
April 09, 2012 1:10pm
What bothers me more than a little is that the XL pipeline is a Pennsylvania project. What that means to me is that most of the revenue is going to be headed somewhere other than where the risk is. I'd love to see the State Department put a caveat on the agreement that a minimum percentage of the crude must be refined for domestic consumption. Even a token amount like 25% would make me feel better. On a positive note, exporting fuel refined in the U.S. from Canadian crude could alleviate pollution in countries without the environmental controls that we have, while getting some of our Walmart dollars back...
April 10, 2012 5:11am
This crude can not be refined for use in the states! There is no intention of a drop of this heading to a gas station near you. This oil being refined will not bring down the crude price a cent.
April 09, 2012 12:59pm
This is Chief WhoopAss Jr. from a secure top secret location because the Truth ‘may’ set you free, but it will get you killed.
How to build a fusion reactor:
Boron and Deuterium are suspended and compressed in a sphere of liquid using frequency modulated sound waves. The inside of the containment sphere is a mirror surface to reflect radiation back to the reaction to increase compression. The sphere is symmetrically wrapped in pulsed/modulated electromagnets to create a multiple mag-bubble effect inside the sphere for containment and compression. When the fuel is maximally sonically compressed symmetrically intersecting lasers are used to ignite the mixture. The laser beams are conduited thru the mag-bubble convergences. The laser wavelengths are such that the fuels are accelerated and conveyed to the plasma core by the beams. Non-imaging concentrating lenses are used to increase the compression the fuel/light beams. The suspension liquid also serves as the heat exchange medium. Output = heat, light & helium. Zero harmful radiation.
The Oil Age is over.
April 09, 2012 10:19am
If we could get the American oil companies to build carts with Tesla technology, we could SHUT DOWN BIG OIL in as little as 2-3 years. You want real truth? Let's get real here. At $4.00 per gallon, it REALLY IS time for us to break free not just from Middle Eastrn oil, but ALL oil period! Do your homework, America.
April 09, 2012 10:00am
Thanks for your comments Mr. Hightower. I agree America’s number one exports are petroleum products. The XL pipeline will do nothing to lower the cost of gasoline or benefit the economy. Not to mention the environmental hazards of building such a pipeline. Just think back, have the oil producers every assured America that they are ready for any environmental "situation" that arises and were found later to be lying about their safety measures?
Stop the XL pipeline.