Comment by kodah | Hacker News Reader

Comment by kodah | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I was curious about this so I looked around. From what I can tell it looks like what you're saying is part of a political disinformation campaign started by Kirsten Gillibrand.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2017/apr/16/kirsten-gi...

https://www.lsu.edu/hss/english/files/university_writing_fil... (Page 5)

If I understand these summaries correctly:

1. Countries in Latin America are developing and therefore using more oil so they have less to share with us.

2. We are consuming slightly more oil.

3. Oil obtained from hostile and unreliable regions should be replaced.

The effects would be that oil consumed from the pipeline would be cheaper, it would be more reliable, and while not being totally for domestic use would make a significant dent in our oil consumption in the right categories.

Edit:

Opposition to the Keystone XL likely would have been more effective if it focused on (potential) environmental impacts as well as the spill that occurred in 2017. I think that's what the Biden administration focused on when it cancelled the permits.

PolitiFact's article is foolishly splitting hairs. The concern about Keystone XL's exports was never about the oil but the refined products (gas, etc). The Texas refineries that would have been at the XL's terminus already export a majority of their refined products.

They're not the only refineries that handle heavy crude but they are the ones with the easiest access to the export markets of Central and South America.

> It is true that exports of petroleum products from Gulf Coast refineries have increased considerably in recent years. That’s part of why PolitiFact rated a similar statement by Obama Mostly False in 2014. While the trend adds a grain of truth to her claim, it does not mean all of the oil that will come from the Keystone XL pipeline will be immediately exported.

I don't think it's splitting hairs, that's the main point of the conclusion. What she said:

    The Keystone XL pipeline "doesn’t even have any oil for America."

is verifiably untrue.

So what percentage would you state would be destined for export?

Well, the Keystone XL doubles our capacity in the US but pales in comparison to overall demand. Based on what I read I'd expect that most of the pipeline would be used to replace hostile and unreliable sources at a minimum.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com