Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumConsumer Watchdog: Keystone XL to raise Midwestern gasoline prices $.20-.40 at the pump
"SANTA MONICA, CA The Keystone XL pipeline will raise gasoline prices in the United States, hiking prices at the pump 20 to 40 cents per gallon in the Midwest, with no long-term economic benefit to the U.S. economy, says a new report by Consumer Watchdog.
The report finds that:
Drivers, especially in the Midwest, would pay 20 cents to 40 cents more at the pump if the disputed pipeline were built, as the current discount of up to $30 a barrel for Canadian oil disappears.
The true goal of multinational oil companies and Canadian politicians backing the pipeline is to reach export outlets outside the U.S. for tar sands oil and refined fuels, which would drive up the oils price.
With U.S. oil production rising fast, any energy security benefit for the U.S. would vanish as American oil output exceeds that of Saudi Arabia in about 2020, according to the International Energy Agency."
http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/newsrelease/consumer-watchdog-report-shows-keystone-xl-raises-american-gas-prices
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)quadrature
(2,049 posts)for anyone.
NickB79
(19,276 posts)Do you have any evidence to suggest their conclusions are wrong?
happyslug
(14,779 posts)Right now, most of the oil from North Dakota and Canadian fields are bottle-necked in that HOW you can ship out the oil is limited. Thus they are limited to what one can ship, but not as to what one can produced. thus you have over production compared to users of the oil. i.e. Supply exceeds demand for oil in the area between Minnesota, Idaho and Colorado. That has kept prices DOWN in that area of the country compared to the rest of the US and the World.
The purpose of the Keystone pipeline is to open up a way to ship this oil to Texas, and thus the excess production would be used to satisfy world demand not just the upper Plains states.
Side Note: I hate the Term "Mid West" for it depends on who is talking to understand what that means. In this case it is the area between Minnesota, Idaho and Colorado. I have also seen it to mean the Area between Pittsburgh and Minnesota, centered around Chicago. I wish people would use terms more people understood AND I wish people would keep using a term as it has been used NOT as they would like it to mean. The term "Mid West" has became a term meaning NOT the east coast, but also not the West coast, but something in between.
Years ago, when the term was first invented usage of the term "Mid West" was restricted to the "Old Northwest" Territory that later became Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota. Pittsburgh was called a Mid Western City in an Eastern State for it is closer to Chicago then New York and large bulky cargo tend to come from New Orleans to Pittsburgh not over the Mountains from Philadelphia.
In recent decades I have read the term "Mid West" to mean Colorado to Minnesota to Idaho, i.e. the Northern Great Plains. The "West" had long ceased to include the West Coast, and is reserved for the Great Plains and the Western Mountains. Thus you have two different definitions of the same term, depending on who is using the term.
The only way out of this mess is to drop the term "Mid West" as becoming meaningless and use other terms. Thus I prefer to use the term the Great Plains for the area between the Rockies and the Mississippi River instead of the term "Mid West". The Northern Rockies for that area between the Great Plains and the Cascade Mountains. And the Term "Great Lakes Region" for that area between Pittsburgh, the Ohio River, the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River.
Just a comment on terms and that one should avoid using terms that may have different meanings to different people.