Trump Issues Executive Orders Greenlighting Oil Pipelines, Owns Stock In Company Building Dakota Pipeline

First, President Trump signed executive orders today that allow the controversial Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines to move forward:

President Trump signed two executive actions Tuesday that will advance construction of the controversial Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines. The actions follow months of protests by environmentalists and Native American groups in North Dakota against the Dakota Access project, a $3.8-billion pipeline that would bring crude oil from the state’s Bakken oil patch through the Midwest and into the U.S. Gulf Coast.

Construction on the project was halted in December after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers denied a permit for the pipeline to cross under a Missouri River reservoir in the area so it could explore alternate routes.

Now, with that in mind, from CBS News:

President-elect Donald Trump holds stock in the company building the disputed Dakota Access oil pipeline, and pipeline opponents warn that Trump’s investments could affect any decision he makes on the $3.8 billion project as president.

Trump’s 2016 federal disclosure forms show he owned between $15,000 and $50,000 in stock in Texas-based Energy Transfer Partners. That’s down from between $500,000 and $1 million a year earlier.

But remember: he "has no conflicts of interest..."

Obama Administration Says "No" To Keystone XL Pipeline

After years of research and consideration, the Obama administration said "no" to TransCanada's application to build the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to oil refineries in the southern region of the United States.

After seven years of reviewing the project, Obama announced his decision -- ending one of the biggest environmental question marks of his presidency -- from the Roosevelt Room in the White House.

"The State Department has decided that the Keystone XL pipeline would not serve the national interest of the United States," he said. "I agree with that decision."

Tensions over the proposed pipeline had been high for years, with Obama's environmental base pressuring him to reject the project -- citing its impact on emissions -- and Republicans in Congress voting repeatedly to force its approval, citing the economic boost it would provide.

The president's rejection rests on key points highlighted by the State Department: That the pipeline would not contribute significantly to the economy, and that it would not lower gas prices for American consumers. Over the last year gas prices have steadily dropped in the U.S., due to an oversupply in the market.

"Shipping dirtier crude oil into our country would not increase America's energy security," Obama said.

Many Americans were led to believe the pipeline would help make the US more energy-independent, but the fact of the matter is there was no guarantee that oil traveled via the pipeline would stay in this country once refined.

Hillary Clinton Opposes Keystone XL Pipeline

Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton has announced she opposes the long-debated Keystone XL pipeline.

From NBC News:

"I think it is imperative that we look at the Keystone XL pipeline as what I believe it is: A distraction from the important work we have to do to combat climate change, and, unfortunately from my perspective, one that interferes with our ability to move forward and deal with other issues," she said during a campaign event in Iowa Tuesday.

"Therefore, I oppose it. I oppose it because I don't think it's in the best interest of what we need to do to combat climate change."

Last week, while in New Hampshire, Clinton promised that her opinion would be forthcoming soon, saying her delay was out of respect for the current administration. "I have been waiting for the administration to make a decision. I thought I owed them that."

Fellow Democratic contender Sen. Bernie Sanders also opposes construction of the pipeline.

For what it's worth, so do I.

The pipeline would carry Canadian oil across the U.S. to refineries which oil companies would then be free to sell to any country in the world.

Supporters have erroneously claimed that the oil would specifically benefit the U.S. and help lead to energy independence. But there are no guarantees that would keep the oil in America.

Also, there's the issue of estimated 17% higher greenhouse gas emissions from the extraction of oil sands compared to extraction of conventional oil.

In addition, the project doesn't create a large number of permanent jobs. Studies show that once built, the pipeline would only require about 45 permanent employees.

I'd personally rather the effort focused on more renewable energy sources.

President Obama To Veto Keystone XL Pipeline Legislation

As promised, President Obama has officially notified Congress that he will veto the recent legislation that approved the Keystone XL Pipeline.

From NPR:

The House voted to approve the measure Jan. 9. The Senate approved another version of the bill on Jan. 29. The House voted Feb. 11 to endorse the Senate's changes — which added language saying climate change was real, and oil sands should not be exempt from a spill-cleanup tax — and sent the measure to the White House.

Politicians from both parties, some unions and energy companies support approving the pipeline; environmental groups, some Nebraska landowners and some liberal Democrats oppose it.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the Senate will vote no later than March 3 to override Obama's veto.

Republicans would need two-thirds of votes in each chamber to override Obama's veto. They do not appear to have enough votes to do that.

Republicans argue the pipeline would help America become more energy independent. However, nothing in the legislation guarantees that any oil that would travel from Canada to refineries in the US would STAY in the US. The oil, owned by oil companies, would be for sale to the highest bidder on the global market.

Republicans also claim the legislation "creates jobs." But studies show that after a two year building period utilizing temporary workers as the pipeline progressed acros the nation, the pipeline would create approximately 40 permanent jobs.

White House Announces President Will Veto Keystone Pipeline If Passed In Congress

As expected, the White House has announced that the President will veto Keystone Pipeline XL legislation should it pass in Congress.

While supporters claim the project will create "thousands" of jobs, the vast majority are very temporary during the construction phase. According to reports, the project will actually only create about 40 permanent jobs.

Also, the oil that the pipeline would carry to the Gulf of Mexico would be Canadian oil to be refined and then sold to the GLOBAL market. There is no guarantee that the oil would stay in the US. Thus, claims of the project helping make us "more energy independent" are false.

Also - the oil pumped through the pipeline is "tar sands oil" which is more damaging to remove from the ground and adds 20% more greenhouse gas emissions to the environment.

Keystone XL Pipeline Fails To Pass In US Senate

Vote to approve long-contested Keystone XL pipeline fails in the Senate. Supporters fell just shy of 60 votes needed. http://t.co/ehBIzvtsOC

— CNN Breaking News (@cnnbrk) November 18, 2014

US House Of Representatives Approves Keystone XL Pipeline

By a vote of 252-161 today, the House passed a bill to approve the Keystone XL pipeline.

The legislation now moves to the Senate where the project seems to have 59 senators onboard to pass the bill. Sixty votes are needed to overcome a filibuster.

President Obama has indicated in the past that he leans towards vetoing the bill.

Supporters say the project would create thousands of (temporary) jobs for the construction of the pipeline and would help lower gas prices in the US.

Detractors warn that the project will create massive CO2 emissions and that there are no guarantees that oil transported from Canada to US refineries would stay in the US.

President Obama had this to say today about the project:

(source)

Keystone XL Pipeline - Arguments For and Against

You're about to hear a lot about the Keystone XL Pipeline again.

What is it? And what are the arguments for and against?

Check the video below for the short version of the story in less than two minutes.