Comments on: Does the Keystone XL Still Matter?

By: Rafael Zambrana

Rafael Zambrana — Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:38:56 +0000

It took you a while to place my comment finally, but you CENSORED IT.
The fact you took your time I thought ii was because you were watching the EXCELLENT video I included COMPLETELY RELEVANT to the issue of ENERGY as in OIL PIPELINE!!! capice?

You’re blog is useless if your minds are blocked to the facts.

PUT THAT VIDEO LINK IN AND LET YOUR AUDIENCE DECIDE IF IT’S RELEVANT.

By: ETNIKS

ETNIKS — Wed, 12 Mar 2014 20:19:06 +0000

In order to truly solve the problem, we have to acknowledge there is a formidable enemy who cheats, kills and deceives in order to keep control of the markets they manipulate.

By: Alex B

Alex B — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:43:36 +0000

Instead of viewing the debate as "pipeline or nothing", why not view it as "pipeline or rail expansion" ?
That oil will be extracted from Canada is already an established fact. That refineries in the USA provide a ready market for this oil is also established. The remaining question then is: how to safely and economically transport it from production site to market?
A pipeline is single-purpose, with arguments for and against as outlined in the article. Rail is not without pro & con either, but one aspect not mentioned in the article is that expanding our rail network and capacity may have benefits beyond simply the transport of oil. Building additional rail lines should also satisfy the jobs-supply argument of pipeline proponents, and has the added benefit of immediately offering transport routes in both directions for other economically valuable cargo, a capability hard to match with a pipeline.