Tag Archives: Bakken shale

Will Keystone Make A Difference?

Posted on by

The Wall Street Journal (not linked–the article is subscribers only) posted an editorial in its weekend edition about President Obama’s recent remarks about the Keystone XL Pipeline.

When asked about the pipeline, President Obama responded, “Understand what this project is: It is providing the ability of Canada to pump their oil, send it through our land, down to the Gulf, where it will be sold everywhere else. It doesn’t have an impact on U.S. gas prices.”

Either the President is economically ignorant or he is attempting to take advantage of the lack of economic knowledge of the average American (the tactic used to sell ObamaCare).

The editorial at the Wall Street Journal points out:

Someone should tell the President that oil markets are global and adding to global supply might well reduce U.S. gas prices, other things being equal. A tutor could add that Keystone XL will also carry U.S. light oil from North Dakota‘s Bakken Shale. So even if he thinks that bilateral trade only helps Canada, he’s still wrong about Keystone.

…Mr. Obama routinely entreats Congress to spend taxpayer money on “infrastructure” to create jobs, yet he implies that the 1,179-mile Keystone infrastructure project won’t create jobs.

Chances are that President Obama will veto the bill that passed the House and Senate regarding the Keystone Pipeline. The only reason the Senate allowed the bill to be brought up was to help Senator Landrieu win re-election. I am not sure the bill would have been brought up if the Democrats were not sure the President would veto it. I doubt enough Democrats will actually support the bill to override that veto. It would be nice if they did. Keystone would be a wonderful way to boost the American economy without charging Americans more taxes.

 

Fracking?

Posted on by

Townhall.com posted an article today about Breitling Energy Corporation, a company recently awarded the Excellence in Corporate Responsibility for the Southwest Region by the Oil and Gas Awards.

The article reports:

Of particular note, the judges mentioned both Breitling Energy and Mr. Faulkner’s high public profile espousing the benefits of the shale oil revolution as one of the deciding criteria. Public education. Telling the other side of the story. Helping people obtain clear facts about what has been researched by academia, science, and the government.

In all those areas, not one single report has implicated fracking for any damage to the environment, water tables, or the air. In fact, a recent report by the unbiased American Lung Association, gave North Dakota exceptional marks for its air quality, in spite of the over 200 drilling rigs operating in the northwestern corner of the state in the now-infamous Bakken shale.

The scientific evidence seems to show that fracking is not harmful to the environment. Until someone can show scientific evidence that it is, I think it is a good idea for America to move toward energy independence. We have seen in the past month or so what a joy lower prices at the pump can be–I would love to continue in that direction. Also, the Middle East is not getting more peaceful as time goes on, and being energy independent would give America the freedom to make more intelligent choices in choosing how we deal with the various countries in the Middle East.