They? are already building the KeyStone Pipeline. Started from both ends. They are planning on an early completion, but still have some wrinkles to work out with land owners.
The oil they are going to ship to OUR refineries takes less energy to turn to fuel.
They have completed the new Refineries in AZ, TX and await product.
Not good for America. The only reason for the pipeline is to sell it off-shore. Anyone else notice that despite an "oil revolution" in this country, the price of gasoline is near all time highs? Usually, countries with high oil production have lowest gasoline prices in the world. Why aren't we enjoying low gasoline prices?!?
You have it correct, the US biggest export is gasoline and diesel, the gulf oil companies are in a tax free zone, the average American will get little out of the Keystone Pipeline,
"For example, the largest refinery at the end of the pipeline, Valero, owned by Koch Industries, is located in Port Arthur, Texas, which is designated as a Foreign Trade Zone.
This means, by importing to and exporting from Port Arthur, refiners can avoid paying taxes on both ends. Valero has committed to refining 20 percent of Keystone XL's capacity, or 100,000 barrels a day, until 2030."
Raw excess oil from the XL Pipeline will be exported to China
The pipeline will be approved this summer. Gas will be $4.00 and Obama has four years so he can say yes. The issue in KS was resolved. The delays just got Keystone to promise alot more then they would have in writting. The effects for PGH will be dramatic. With the div affirmed, strong 4QRT financials, and the possible much higher prices for oil in Alberta and a much smaller difference with WTC. I see PHG over 8.00 before Sept 2013. I doubt we move past NAV with your better pricing on crude/NG or a heck alot more production. Still 8.85 is doube from where we are. ( My basis is 3.94 here)
In its long-awaited draft environmental review of the Keystone XL, the State Department said the pipeline won't make much of a difference to climate change because the tar sands will likely be developed anyway. "Approval or denial of the proposed project is unlikely to have a substantial impact on the rate of development in the oil sands, or on the amount of heavy crude oil refined in the Gulf Coast area," the nearly 2,000-page document says.
Todays New York Times:
WASHINGTON — The State Department issued a revised environmental impact statement for the 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline on Friday, which makes no recommendation about whether the project should be built but presents no conclusive environmental reason it should not be.
The lengthy document also draws no conclusions on whether the pipeline is in the United States’s economic and energy interests, a determination to be made later this year by President Obama. But it will certainly add a new element to the already robust climate change and energy debate around the $7 billion proposed project.
No conclusion = scared to alienate the boss? Let's build out infrastructure to handle our growing oil and gas production and maximize our economic gain (Brent pricing) complete with jobs and less dependence on those Middle East tyrants! I'm no hug a tree environmentalist (is it global warming or cooling this time? or is the latest 'climate change'? ridiculous :)) or pro-government (big government is not the solution) but a sprinkle of light regulation may be in order to mitigate irresponsible behavior.
Maybe I shouldn't play Rage Against the Machine when I post on Yahoo...:)
Sentiment: Strong Buy