Wednesday, January 25, 2012

An Interesting Article

State: 'Serious' Questions on Pipeline GOP Bill

What I find most interesting is this little bit, right about in the middle of the article: TransCanada first applied to build the pipeline in 2008, under the Bush administration.

That's not interesting because it's states it was under the Bush administration. It's interesting because of the lady with the pasture in the sandhills who testified before the state legislature. She had a letter dated 2007 from TransCanada that they were going through her pasture to dig. She wrote back that no, they wouldn't. Perhaps it would be better to move it two miles the other way. They wrote one more time saying saying no, that's not a good idea. They would have to use eminent domain and she'd just have to sit and spin. Ok, not exact quotes, but basically that idea. She went to her state reps and no one even knew about it then.

Now, either the article is incorrect in the date or there is some foolery going on somewhere. 

And then there's this bit: Project supporters say U.S. rejection of the pipeline will not stop one from being built. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said Canada is serious about building a pipeline to its West Coast, where oil could be shipped to China and other Asian markets.

Hold the phone... what?! But I thought all that oil was America's! /sarcasm. So they went and admitted not a single drop of that bullshiz is supposed to be for the American economy. 

And the humor keeps on rolling: TransCanada says the pipeline could create as many as 20,000 jobs, a figure opponents say is inflated. A State Department report last summer said the pipeline would create up to 6,000 jobs during construction

*cough* 1, 500 *cough* That's what I take that to mean because we all now that the state dept. loves to exaggerate. I'm betting about 200 would be permanent. The rest temporary.

So, let's sum up questions drummed up by this article, shall we? When did TransCanada actually apply for the pipeline? How does it coincide with the date land owners were informed that they were going to be dug up? (Which is a dicey thing to do in the sandhills. It causes what they call blowouts. The dunes aren't anchored by the grass anymore and start blowing around taking over highways, fences and whatever else they feel like getting into. It's one reason why it's a bad idea to dig out there. ) Where is this oil going to? What economy will benefit from it? Chinese, Canadian, American? None, all three, only two? Are we talking permanent or temporary jobs? And what are the realistic numbers on how many of those jobs? 

No comments:

Post a Comment