George W. Bush explained recently that the Keystone pipeline would be a “no brainer”.
Insert snark here.
Former President George W. Bush has been reluctant to criticize the policies of his successor, but last week, he jumped in and spoke out against President Barack Obama’s inaction on building the Keystone XL oil pipeline.
“If private sector growth is the goal and Keystone pipeline creates 20,000 new private sector jobs, build the damn thing,” Bush, a former oil company executive, said at the shale gas industry’s DUG East conference Thursday in Pittsburgh, according to DeSmogBlog. The comment drew a round of applause from the approximately 2,500 attendees.
The Keystone XL pipeline would transport 800,000 barrels of oil per day from Alberta, across the U.S.-Canada border and south to Gulf Coast refineries. But it first requires State Department approval, which the Obama administration has continually put off. A State Department decision is unlikely before 2014.
Environmentalists contend that the pipeline would have enormous impacts — from increases in greenhouse gas emissions to the threat of oil spills.
Those concerns haven’t tempered the enthusiasm of many, though, including the former president.
“I think the goal of the country ought to be ‘how do we grow the private sector?'” Bush said. “That ought to be the laser-focus of any administration. And therefore, once that’s the goal, an issue like Keystone pipeline becomes a no-brainer.”
DeSmogBlog reported that Bush explained his support for oil and gas as the product of where he’s from. “I think it’s mostly because I’m from Midland, Texas,” Bush said. “And we don’t like government, we don’t like Wall Street, we don’t like much. We like oil and gas.”
…takes one to know one.
The simple fact is that the oil is already flowing south. Whether or not a pipeline is built won’t change that. It’s only a question of what’s the best way to move it to refineries; by rail, or by pipeline
Right now if you climb aboard Amtrak’s ‘Empire builder’ you’ll notice many thousands of brand spankin’ new tank cars as you ride across North Dakota. And it shouldn’t take a brain surgeon to figure out that they represent a significant investment in rolling stock by the railroads.
The billion or so in investment those new tankers represent is the real reason so much money is being spent lobbying against the construction of a pipeline, and delaying it as long as possible. The real truth has nothing to do with environmental concerns. The simple fact is that if a pipeline goes into service today before the railroads can recoup some of the money they’ve invested in new rolling stock, those railroads will be taking a major hit.
So if we remove all obstacles to building Keystone today it won’t be the environment that takes a hit, It’ll be the big railroads. And the next thing we’ll hear about it from the politicos in Washington is whether or not the American Taxpayers should bail them out.
And a pipeline is a much easier and more humane target for the up-and-coming brand of environmental activism that involves high-energy explosives.
By way of background—-Rode the Empire Builder north into WI this past summer. Found out to my dismay that it was consistently 4 to 6 hours late (for something like 55 straight days at that time) arriving back in Chicago because of the heavy traffic in the oil fields of MT and ND (on top of the already heavy coal traffic). I had to take different trains than planned to get back to Chicago and then from Chicago to the east coast because of that. Those who ride the train regularly told me that the freight traffic out there has gone from 8-10 trains a day to 100-110 since the fossil fuels boom, and that many of the freight trains are so long that the passenger trains must take the sidings when they meet—that enforced sitting and waiting adds to the delay.
Dennis confuses the issue when he says “the oil is already flowing south”. Yes, there are many pipelines crisscrossing the area, but the Keystone XL is specifically intended to carry tar sands “oil” from Alberta to Texas, where it will be processed and then shipped overseas. Let the Canadians (who will get rich from that trade) bear the burden of sending that “oil” to their own west or east coasts for export.
Don’t worry about the railroads “taking a hit”—Warren Buffet isn’t, and that’s why he invested heavily in BNSF. Their is plenty of oil out there to be transported by pipeline or trains, at least until it runs out, and then we will ALL take a hit if we haven’t gone to renewables.
And Dennis’s statement: “The billion or so in investment those new tankers represent is the real reason so much money is being spent lobbying against the construction of a pipeline, and delaying it as long as possible. The real truth has nothing to do with environmental concerns” is an interesting OPINION, but needs to be backed up with some facts. Otherwise, it just sounds like more unsubstantiated “conspiracy FUD” from the deniers.
An excellent photo of the “What, me worry?“ face of the former president, suitable for framing.
“If private sector growth is the goal and Keystone pipeline creates 20,000 new private sector jobs, (then) build the damn thing,” Bush said? Big IF there.
Although the 20,000 jobs figure is way closer to the truth than the 80,000 and 100,000 figures that had been thrown around in the past, it is still way high (at least two to three times the number of construction and operation jobs that many have posited).
Therefore, may we conclude that Bush is saying DO NOT build the Keystone XL because it does not reach the 20,000 job level, and is therefore “not worth it”?
“I think the goal of the country ought to be ‘how do we grow the private sector?’” Bush said. “That ought to be the laser-focus of any administration.”
Did he actually just say that? That’s chutzpah coming from the guy who laser-focused the American Economy into Great Depression II.
“we don’t like much. We like oil and gas.”
Midland is one of the ugliest places on Earth. The entire Midland-Odessa region is one large industrial site surrounded by blowing sand and sprinkled with burger joints and strip clubs:
http://www.emilywinck.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/midland-tx.jpg
Water quantity and quality there is a constant issue:
http://www.claimsjournal.com/news/southcentral/2009/07/13/102174.htm
I’ve heard stories of golf courses there having to tear up the turf and plant new lawns. It occurs when their water purification systems go down and the unfiltered water kills the grass.
Two more links:
http://www.wfaa.com/news/texas-news/sewage-drinking-water-midland-west-texas-big-spring-206665861.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500202_162-5076625.html
“we like oil and gas”
Yes but don’t the rich Texans like the Bush family also like to holiday up on the New England coast. I wonder why they don’t do this down in Texas….?
“I think it’s mostly because I’m from Midland, Texas,” Bush said. “And we don’t like government, we don’t like Wall Street, we don’t like much. We like oil and gas.”
Just because you’re proud of something doesn’t mean you’re right about it, or that pride is a good quality. Isn’t pride one of the 7 deadly sins?
However, this statement does get right to the root of the problem. And why it’s difficult to make our society change as it needs to.
It is a no-brainer. If Keystone goes through the US will be paying MORE for the same syncrude it gets now. How can paying MORE for oil help the US economy?
The kicker is that instead of being refined in the Northwest US where there’s a glut right now and turned into gasoline that goes into Americans’ gas tanks, it will be turned into diesel at the Gulf and much of that will be exported.
Before you even consider the environment, the answer’s no.
If Keystone goes through, the oil will be trans-shipped a lot cheaper than if it goes by railroad tank cars.
The southern part of Keystone XL is already being built, to get Bakken oil to refineries.
I don’t think Canadians will be getting rich from this. It seems most of the money made will go to foreign investors. Likely we won’t even see any difference at the gas pumps if history is any guide.
It doesn’t appear that TransCanada is particularly heavily owned by “foreign investors” (unless you consider several U.S. Congressman to be “foreign”). Much of its stock is held by Canadian institutions.
And the Koch brothers are up to their eyeballs in the whole thing—from developing the tar sands, to the pipelines and refineries that will carry and refine it—they stand to profit hugely if Keystone XL is approved. But we already knew that, didn’t we?
(and we don’t need “history” to see that gas prices will go up and down whenever they are manipulated to benefit certain interests—they’ve gone up a dime a gallon in two weeks in my area)
Did Bush really say this? I mean I know when they were handing out brain cells he was outside getting wasted, but this is worse than his usual, maybe he’s fallen off the wagon again.
“We don’t like government” – Wasn’t he President a couple of years back? He can pay back his 8 years of salary and give up his pension if he dislikes “the guv’mint” that much.
“We don’t like Wall street” – i.e. the people he gave a $100 billion bailout too, aka the most blatant act of socialism (well, the kind that benefits the super-rich!) in the history of the US has G. W. Bush’s signature on it.
On the plus side, anyone who wants to complain about Obama, think back a few years….