House Democrats: We can’t build Keystone XL ’cause we need to keep 80 percent of our resources below ground

posted at 4:01 pm on March 14, 2014 by Erika Johnsen

I can at least appreciate the semi-honesty about their real goals here. Via The Hill:

A letter sent to Kerry on Friday, signed by 27 House Democrats, details what they said would be the climate impacts of approving the $5.4 billion project, which would run from oil sands in Alberta to Gulf refineries.

“The math doesn’t add up. In order to meet our commitment to fight climate change, we need to keep at least 80 percent of carbon reserves below ground,” the letter, spearheaded by Reps. Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), Mike Quigley (Ill.), Rush Holt (N.J.) and Raúl Grijalva (Ariz.), states.

“If the United States is truly committed to avoiding a 2 degree temperature increase, we have to start by resisting this pipeline. We urge you to reject the pipeline and keep tar sands oil in the ground where it belongs.”

The representatives were joined by the National Wildlife Federation and activist group 350.org on Friday.

As ever, the eco-radicals’ real goal here is to use big government to try and force the world to quickly and quixotically abandon fossil fuels en masse and instead only use the impractical, unsustainably expensive, and so-called renewable energies (read: wind and solar) that they have deemed appropriate for fighting climate change (as well a few select, ahem, alternate methods). As has already been established a million times over, however, their rationale that “we have to start by resisting this pipeline” is a total farce:

The number of carloads of crude oil U.S. railroads delivered last year surged 83 percent over 2012 as concerns about the shipments grow.

The Association of American Railroads said Thursday the major U.S. railroads delivered 434,042 carloads of crude oil in 2013.

That’s well above the 236,556 carloads of crude oil railroads delivered in 2012. Crude oil shipments remain a relatively small part of rail traffic, but they have grown significantly since 2008 when 9,344 carloads were delivered.

Dear self-proclaimed environmentalists: Your preposterous, absolutist, and anti-growth schemes to try to coerce the world’s population into self-impoverishment are not helping your cause. The Hill piece above calls the lately especially vocal anti-Keystone crusading a “growing campaign” to pressure the Obama administration, which of course is total baloney, since the overwhelming majority of Americans approve of the pipeline. The only thing that’s “growing” about the stubbornly obtuse campaign is the decibel level of the involved parties’ irrational screeching.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

These people are nutjobs.

tyketto on March 14, 2014 at 4:07 PM

House Democrats: We can’t build Keystone XL ’cause we need to keep 80 percent of our resources below ground…

… and 100% of their heads lodged firmly up their tailpipe.

Flange on March 14, 2014 at 4:09 PM

Uh folks, that oil is coming out of the ground and soon, one way or another. Either it comes to the US or it goes to Asia/China via another pipeline through Canada. The Dems are being seriously dishonest with this statement and they know it. It is just election year Political Theater and pandering to their base.

Johnnyreb on March 14, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Thats fine, I’m retired and my wife and I have bikes. Oh crap, I forgot about heat. But wait-we’ve got global warming.

jmtham156 on March 14, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Religious zealots.

John the Libertarian on March 14, 2014 at 4:12 PM

A letter sent to Kerry on Friday, signed by 27 House Democrats, details what they said would be the climate impacts of approving the $5.4 billion project, which would run from oil sands in Alberta to Gulf refineries.

“The math doesn’t add up. In order to meet our commitment to fight climate change, we need to keep at least 80 percent of carbon reserves below ground,” the letter, spearheaded by Reps. Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), Mike Quigley (Ill.), Rush Holt (N.J.) and Raúl Grijalva (Ariz.), states.
“If the United States is truly committed to avoiding a 2 degree temperature increase, we have to start by resisting this pipeline. We urge you to reject the pipeline and keep tar sands oil in the ground where it belongs.”

Laura Barron-Lopez, thehill.com on March 14, 2014 at 12:42 PM

.
Translation :

Stop resisting our attempts to turn the United States over to the “one worlders”.

listens2glenn on March 14, 2014 at 4:16 PM

Ahem…a little reminder to those dimwits.

Those reserves are coming out of OUR land, whether you like it not.

can_con on March 14, 2014 at 4:17 PM

Obama has spent six years “making up his mind” about the pipeline. Even Mrs. Nomad doesn’t take that long.

This is about slow rolling and delaying something that there is no justification other than his interests are being paid to deny the pipeline even though it makes sense, has passed environmental review, and will create jobs.

Happy Nomad on March 14, 2014 at 4:18 PM

In order to meet our commitment to fight climate change, we need to keep at least 80 percent of carbon reserves below ground

They forgot to add “…where all the people belong.” These are very sick people.

Rocks on March 14, 2014 at 4:19 PM

We need to keep 80% of the eco-nuts below ground. They’d feel more at home there, anyway.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 14, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Modern day Luddites.

myiq2xu on March 14, 2014 at 4:19 PM

MeanWhile, …………..:

John Kerry
1d
US Secretary of State Kerry says he’s approaching upcoming Keystone XL pipeline decision ‘tabula rasa’ – @thehill
read more on thehill.com
========================

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/200697-kerry-tabula-rasa-on-keystone

canopfor on March 14, 2014 at 4:19 PM

BTW, I thought these people love nature? They do realize that the tar sands are the equivalent of a natural oil spill. Nothing can grow in them. The only way to make them habitable to nature is to get the tar out.

Rocks on March 14, 2014 at 4:21 PM

I keep praying for the day I read that Harper has signed a partnership with Koch Industries to build a refinery north of the border. That would probably signal the end times for Democrats.

can_con on March 14, 2014 at 4:24 PM

BTW, I thought these people love nature? They do realize that the tar sands are the equivalent of a natural oil spill. Nothing can grow in them. The only way to make them habitable to nature is to get the tar out.

Rocks on March 14, 2014 at 4:21 PM

There you go using logic. I’m pretty sure you must hate Mother Earth and children…..and probably are a racist to boot

Ditkaca on March 14, 2014 at 4:24 PM

OT-

I’ve reached the limit of my patience with the technical glitches at HA. Checking out for the remainder of the weekend with the hope that you guys will get your act together.

Happy Nomad on March 14, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Ahem…a little reminder to those dimwits.

Those reserves are coming out of OUR land, whether you like it not.

can_con on March 14, 2014 at 4:17 PM

can_con: Lmao,..um ya,..correct!!:)

canopfor on March 14, 2014 at 4:34 PM

OT-

I’ve reached the limit of my patience with the technical glitches at HA. Checking out for the remainder of the weekend with the hope that you guys will get your act together.

Happy Nomad on March 14, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Happy Nomad:

And here all this time,….I thought it was my computer,
with the refresh thingy, in a NeverEnding spinning Loopy!!:)

canopfor on March 14, 2014 at 4:36 PM

We urge you to reject the pipeline and keep tar sands oil in the ground where it belongs.

Dear Dem Reps,

It’s pathetic that you need to be told this but what Alberta does – or does not – with its oil sands is none of your damn business.

Kindly stick to ruining your own country and leave mine the hell alone.

Regards,

Robin Banks on March 14, 2014 at 4:38 PM

We urge you to reject the pipeline and keep tar sands oil in the ground where it belongs.”

Um, did Hank Johnson write this? That oil is in Canada and John Kerry does not have any say over whether or not Canada extracts oil out of its ground. The only debate is whether it comes to the US or goes to China.

Occams Stubble on March 14, 2014 at 4:40 PM

Erika, you forgot the most blindingly stupid part…

Canning the Keystone XL pipeline will not keep a single drop of tar sands oil underground. It only changes where that oil ends up.

Madcap_Magician on March 14, 2014 at 4:41 PM

There are 150,000 miles of oil and gas pipelines already in the USA.

Keystone is a political weapon.

HopeHeFails on March 14, 2014 at 4:42 PM

We need to keep 80% of the eco-nuts below ground. They’d feel more at home there, anyway.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 14, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Morlocks or Eloi? Could be argued either way…

de rigueur on March 14, 2014 at 4:42 PM

That’s well above the 236,556 carloads of crude oil railroads delivered in 2012. Crude oil shipments remain a relatively small part of rail traffic, but they have grown significantly since 2008 when 9,344 carloads were delivered.

…making some money…huh?

KOOLAID2 on March 14, 2014 at 4:43 PM

They want an executive action to “force” another country to keep its carbon reserves below ground? Good luck with that.

jdpaz on March 14, 2014 at 4:45 PM

OT-

I’ve reached the limit of my patience with the technical glitches at HA. Checking out for the remainder of the weekend with the hope that you guys will get your act together.

Happy Nomad on March 14, 2014 at 4:28 PM

For those inclined, if you use noscript for Firefox, you can select to allow hotair.com only and forbid all the other dreck from attempting to run scripts. At least until the glitches are sorted out.

can_con on March 14, 2014 at 4:46 PM

How am I going to heat my house if the resources are underground? Should I start digging a underground cave?

Wade on March 14, 2014 at 4:47 PM

House Democrats: We can’t build Keystone XL ’cause we need to keep 80 percent of our resources below ground

FINE: Let’s bury the stupid and costly windmills, the even more stupid and more costly solar cells, and the twisty poison light bulbs!!! Put ‘em in a ditch, cover them with ethanol, and light ‘em up!!!

landlines on March 14, 2014 at 4:49 PM

Except for one small problem for the watermelons: Canada will sell the oil to the US, or it will sell the oil elsewhere. The Oilsands that will be transported by the Keystone XL pipeline will still be pumped — Oh, and they are NOT ‘our’ resources at all.

HBowmanMD on March 14, 2014 at 4:50 PM

Let’s get hold of Bill Ayers he is the expert in Weather Underground Bombings, maybe he can help.

Wade on March 14, 2014 at 4:52 PM

This is nothing more than Mr. Warren Buffet’s reward for supporting Obama. His railroad hauls what would be piped. It’s a twofer for Obama war on wealth and friend of eco-radicals. Unfortunately, the unions and every other American pays more in jobs, gas and oil.

Connecticut on March 14, 2014 at 4:58 PM

The Association of American Railroads said Thursday the major U.S. railroads delivered 434,042 carloads of crude oil in 2013.

At about 550 barrels (23,100 gallons) per railcar, that’s a total of 239 million barrels per year, or an average of 654,000 barrels per day of crude delivered by rail. The Keystone XL pipeline would be rated for about 800,000 barrels per day.

Not building the pipeline doesn’t keep Alberta’s oil underground. It spreads the same oil which could flow through one pipeline among thousands of trains, each of which has the possibility of derailing or spilling its contents from human error.

By the way, if the pipeline were built, oil would flow in only one direction, from Alberta to Nebraska. If crude oil is shipped by railcars, empty oil tank cars have to be hauled back to Alberta for refilling, which requires burning lots of fuel in locomotives for no real freight value. Have the greenies thought about all the CO2 emitted by locomotives hauling empty tank cars to Canada?

Steve Z on March 14, 2014 at 4:59 PM

As soon as we get rid of oil, pray for the forests – because we’ll be tearing them down to replace a lot of our oil based products.

These dodos better think long and hard about what has plastic in it (they can start with their undies and move up to the computer keyboard they use to type up some of this nonsense).

Ruckus_Tom on March 14, 2014 at 5:00 PM

The Congress knows sh*t about oil or methane yet they’ll tell us all about it.

mixplix on March 14, 2014 at 5:03 PM

As soon as we get rid of oil, pray for the forests

Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do.” — Ronald Reagan, 1981

“A tree is a tree. How many more do you have to look at?” — Ronald Reagan, 1966, opposing expansion of Redwood National Park as governor of California

Wade on March 14, 2014 at 5:08 PM

Raúl Grijalva (AZ) appears to want to challenge the CBC for the Big Stupid title.

slickwillie2001 on March 14, 2014 at 5:15 PM

Dear Dems…

In order to meet your commitments to stopping climate change, you will now receive on 20% of your salaries. The other 80% needs to be kept to fight climate change.

sadatoni on March 14, 2014 at 5:17 PM

TWO DEGREES, OMGZ!11eleventy!

Midas on March 14, 2014 at 5:17 PM

This is nothing more than Mr. Warren Buffet’s reward for supporting Obama. His railroad hauls what would be piped. It’s a twofer for Obama war on wealth and friend of eco-radicals. Unfortunately, the unions and every other American pays more in jobs, gas and oil.

Connecticut on March 14, 2014 at 4:58 PM

Ding, ding, we have a winner.

Look no further than this for your answer as to why we are where we are on this topic.

Midas on March 14, 2014 at 5:19 PM

The REAL goal is to destroy the middle class. Then Utopian socialist heaven comes about.

jukin3 on March 14, 2014 at 5:26 PM

“We urge you to reject the pipeline and keep tar sands oil in the ground where it belongs.”

Even democRATs cannot be stupid enough to believe that, if the US does not buy the oil, it will ‘stay in the ground’.
One way or another, in one direction or another, that oil will be drilled, pumped and piped.
Either we buy it from our best trading partner and use it here…or the Chinese will get it. But that oil is not going to stay in the ground.

On second thought, all evidence to date would indicate that, yes, the democRATs are that stupid.

Solaratov on March 14, 2014 at 5:57 PM

If the United States is truly committed to avoiding a 2 degree temperature increase

Who in the hell do they think they are that they can unilaterally dictate what the temperature will be in 5, 10, 50 or 100 years from now? Can they cite actual evidence that the Earth’s temperature is static and any change up or down is due to humans? No.. they can’t.

Wendya on March 14, 2014 at 6:38 PM

Many Democrats need to get their affairs in order by November. Blue state Democrats are safe because their constituents are either stupid or collecting government checks.

cajunpatriot on March 14, 2014 at 6:57 PM

We’ll start by keeping 80% of the Environmentalists there.

Another Drew on March 14, 2014 at 8:13 PM

To the environmentalists,

We will abandon oil and gas when you discover unicorn farts and rainbows that will allow me to drive my car to my job so that I can help in supporting my household.

Thanks.

PS GFY

Leopard1996 on March 14, 2014 at 11:14 PM

Ya know, after the freakishly cold winter we had I’d rather have 2 more degrees and energy than colder temperatures and no gas for heat.

By the way, do these Eco-nazis know that crops grow larger and better in warmer climates, right? For all their talk of “food deserts” they really are pushing for literal ones.

ptcamn on March 14, 2014 at 11:27 PM

Gee I wonder what those poutiness, er I mean French Fried quebecois would say about this.

Oh, I am sooooo sorry.

WryTrvllr on March 15, 2014 at 1:21 AM

Too bad Buffet isn’t in the pipeline business. We’d be reading a different letter from those reps.

Kissmygrits on March 15, 2014 at 9:22 AM

We urge you to reject the pipeline and keep tar sands oil in the ground where it belongs.”


First of all, it’s not our tar sands and no matter what we do it’s not staying in the ground. It’s Canadian tar sands and it’s either going into the pipeline, going on trucks/train cars or going to China. Those are the alternatives facing people in the real world. Although I don’t really know which world some of these people think they are living in. Furthermore, the CO2 levels emitted by the US having been dropping as we have been switching from coal to natural gas, and in order for them to drop even further more gas has to come out of the ground to replace more coal. So even in their own terms and not discussing any beliefs that AGW is the ravings of a religious cult in the least, their whole argument doesn’t make sense in their own terms. But then the same can be send of most of their other arguments too.

Fred 2 on March 15, 2014 at 9:30 AM

Lord, why do you tolerate these insults to intelligent human beings? The fruits of progressive liberalism and out of control government. The feds should pound sand…… oil sands to be specific.

ultracon on March 15, 2014 at 11:19 AM

Hang them from a lamppost

Slow

TexasJew on March 15, 2014 at 11:37 AM

FINE: Let’s bury the stupid and costly windmills, the even more stupid and more costly solar cells, and the twisty poison light bulbs!!! Put ‘em in a ditch, cover them with ethanol, and light ‘em up!!!

landlines on March 14, 2014 at 4:49 PM

Never a fan of CFL bulbs, but growing to like LED’s. Just installed a BR-30 LED flood light… awesome. I hope they last as long as they claim. CFL’s don’t really cut it on life. Also got my first 60W equivalent LED for my computer location, this one is a ‘daylight’ color temp. Perfect for my little work station.

Dasher on March 15, 2014 at 12:03 PM

Do the following have any meaning to you? Burlington Northern? Warren Buffett? Contributions?

Here is the formula if not.. BN + WB + Thanks For The Support + BHO = 0XL.

philoise65 on March 15, 2014 at 12:36 PM

We all will see many plays this summer in the political theater so keep your head on straight and take some notes.

mixplix on March 15, 2014 at 3:54 PM

“The math doesn’t add up. In order to meet our commitment to fight climate change, we need to keep at least 80 percent of carbon reserves below ground,”

From the impressions I get, if the ‘true believers’ in the whole Green movement were really honest in their public statements, they would make it clear that those ‘carbon reserves’ includes human bodies.

Although I am not sure they would be satisfied with 80% below ground.

s1im on March 15, 2014 at 9:57 PM