iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Jack Gerard, Oil Industry Chief, Warns Obama On Canada Pipeline

First Posted: 01/04/12 03:46 PM ET Updated: 01/05/12 04:20 AM ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — The oil industry's top lobbyist warned the Obama administration Wednesday to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline or face "huge political consequences" in an election year.

Jack Gerard, president of the American Petroleum Institute, said it would be a "huge mistake" for President Barack Obama to reject the 1,700-mile, Canada-to-Texas pipeline. Obama faces a Feb. 21 deadline to decide whether the $7 billion pipeline is in the national interest.

"Clearly, the Keystone XL pipeline is in the national interest," Gerard said at the trade association's annual "State of American Energy" event. "A determination to decide anything less than that I believe will have huge political consequences."

Gerard said the oil group has teamed up with at least 15 unions to support the pipeline, which would create thousands of jobs.

"We will stand shoulder to shoulder" with labor unions that have backed the pipeline, including the Teamsters and the AFL-CIO's Building and Construction Trades Department, Gerard said.

"Over the next 60 days, they will not be silent," he said.

Gerard repeatedly referred to the Keystone pipeline at his annual speech assessing the energy industry, calling it the business group's top near-term priority.

While the pipeline has not been a focus of the GOP race for president, Gerard said the issue has the potential to become a major factor in the general election.

"It's already an election issue" in the presidential race and is likely to be a focus of several U.S. Senate races, Gerard said, calling the pipeline the largest "shovel-ready" project in the country.

The pipeline, proposed by Calgary-based TransCanada, would carry oil derived from tar sands in western Canada to refineries in Texas, passing through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma.

TransCanada says the pipeline could create as many as 20,000 jobs over two years, a figure opponents say is inflated. A State Department report last summer said the pipeline would create up to 6,000 jobs during construction.

The pipeline proposal has forced the White House to make a politically risky choice between two key Democratic constituencies. Many unions back the project as a job creator in a down economy, while environmental groups fear it could lead to an oil spill disaster.

A payroll tax law signed by Obama just before Christmas includes a Republican-sponsored provision that sets a Feb. 21 deadline for Obama to decide on the pipeline. The administration is warning it would rather say no than rush a decision in an election year.

Environmental advocates, already disappointed with Obama's failure to achieve climate change legislation and his decision to delay new smog standards, have made it clear that approval of the pipeline would dampen their enthusiasm in his bid for re-election.

Some liberal donors even threatened to cut off funds to Obama's re-election campaign to protest the project, which opponents say would transport "dirty oil" that requires huge amounts of energy to extract.

If he rejects the pipeline, Obama risks losing support from organized labor, a key part of the Democratic base, for thwarting jobs.

Obama appeared to have skirted what some dubbed the "Keystone conundrum" in November when the State Department announced it was postponing a decision on the pipeline until after this year's election. Officials said they needed extra time to study routes that avoid an environmentally sensitive area of Nebraska that supplies water to eight states.

The affected area stretches just 65 miles through the Sandhills region of northern Nebraska, but the concerns were serious enough that the state's governor and senators opposed the project until the pipeline was moved.

Republican Gov. Dave Heineman, who opposed the initial route, says he supports efforts to accelerate the project, noting that provisions in the payroll tax bill allow the project developer to find a new route avoiding the Sandhills.

There was no immediate response from the White House.

___

Matthew Daly can be followed on Twitter: http://twitter.com/MatthewDalyWDC

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

WASHINGTON (AP) — The oil industry's top lobbyist warned the Obama administration Wednesday to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline or face "huge political consequences" in an election year. ...
WASHINGTON (AP) — The oil industry's top lobbyist warned the Obama administration Wednesday to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline or face "huge political consequences" in an election year. ...
Filed by James Gerken  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 91
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
03:02 PM on 02/21/2012
O.K. GREEDY FAT CAT, what are going to do, shoot Him?
Bottlered
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZeraLee
A Citizen's View from Main Street
01:48 AM on 01/09/2012
Beyond a few workers, mostly in Canada, Keystone XL benefits no one except the oil industry.
It certainly would not benefit the people who live along the route, who face the certainty of contamination from oil spills. The first Keystone had twelve spills in the first year of operation.

They want to pipe the oil to the Gulf so they can export the refined products from a tax-free haven.

The people who face the risks of the pipeline are completely separate from the people who stand to benefit. Since the final products are not intended for the US market, and there would be no federal revenue generated, and people would have to be forced off their land through eminent domain, this is a project that is not in the nation's interest.

This project is really a test of sovereignty, whether this country is dedicated to the benefit of the people, or the corporations.
11:56 AM on 01/13/2012
People in the States don't understand the basics. Canada via Keystone wants to access the gulf coast refinery market to feed those refineries. Its a big market. So rather than tankers coming in from Saudi and South America etc the pipeline will feed those refineries. We'd need XL2 to completely feed those refineries. Yes because demand in the US is low those refineries export product. But that is going to happen you get oil from Saudi or Canada or your friend Chaze.

Its not Canadian oil to US OR China its Canadian oil to both. The US imports 8 to 9 million barrels a day. Canada only produces 3 million a day. So we have a long way to go to fill the US. But Canada has the second highest reserves in the world and at current production has 100 of years of production. One company has billions of barrels of reserves so at current production would last 750 years!! Yes of course they want to increase production by 10 by 2020.

AS for diry oil, well it does take big plants and energy to produce it but its the same type of oil that comes out of Bakerfield CA.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Lee Harrington
I'd Love To Change The World..
10:51 AM on 01/06/2012
Gasoline prices start the year at a high — and rising
Gas prices are the highest ever for this time of year, and analysts predict that motorists will be digging deep in 2012 to fuel their vehicles.

"...This year's gasoline prices could be significantly higher than in previous years, said Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst for the Oil Price Information Service....

...U.S. refiners have been exporting record amounts of diesel fuel as they pursue profits from foreign buyers, causing an increase in diesel production at the expense of gasoline production. Tighter gasoline supplies mean higher prices..."

Keystone XL sends tar sand to Texas to be refined into diesel and exported tax free to Europe and Latin America.....

Keystone XL WILL RAISE GAS PRICES 20-30 CENTS A GALLON!





http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-gas-prices-20120106,0,2326955.story
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:08 AM on 01/06/2012
break the 120 year old monopoly the fossil fuel fas*cists have had on energy in this country...it's the only thing that will save us....
05:10 PM on 01/05/2012
Oh, don't be naive. Obama showed he prefers big oil the moment he hired Ken Salazar. He is probably buddies with this oil tycoon. Fine, wait until people hear about Jill Stein. There goes his lead and many votes. Ready to take that chance, Mr. President? Ignore endangered species and now you will lose the vote.
04:43 PM on 01/05/2012
How about ending all oil subsidies first.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:17 AM on 01/06/2012
They did that today!!!!!!!!
04:40 PM on 01/05/2012
I thought blackmail was usually done out of the public's eye.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ttigerlilyx2
04:11 PM on 01/05/2012
What arrogance! They have had things their way for so long, the very idea of finally being told 'no' is incomprehensible to them.
FINALLY even the biggest dummy is waking up to the fact that we are being lied to and manipulated by these meglomaniacs. First its the 'Patriotic' thing to drill baby, drill. Energy independence for Americans with American oil!
Then its 'for our own good, to lower prices at the pump'. And they even had the nerve to try the ol 'cant blind'em with brilliance, baffle'em with b.s.' by stating that boycotting them would only lead to even higher prices because blah blah blah, when the 70's clearly proved boycotting at the pump was the financial equvilent of a kick to their 'nads! Right now, prices keep hopping up and down, trying to baffle us, but when we get fed up and drop demand, watch those puppies faaalll....
02:31 PM on 01/05/2012
I don't think Environmentalist are worry about spills, the serious Environmentalist at least, are worry about the World temperature exceeding the 2 degree limit in temperature consensus reached by the UN Climate Change Summit in Cancun, Mexico. The consequences of exceeding this limit have been predicted to be catastrophic. According to some scientist we have a very short window of time to act. If we don't, the temperature rise catastrophy will be here for our children and grandchildren. Our government has an opportunity to show leadership to the World by reaching bipartisan support to a balanced approach solution to this important issue. We will continue to use oil in the near term, but, there is no reason why we can't do it by doing a better job of controlling Carbon Emissions.
01:12 PM on 01/05/2012
Dear Jack,
Take off eh!
01:10 PM on 01/05/2012
Um, and it will exacerbate global warming threatening human civilization. Yeah, let's not forget about that insignificant piece of the puzzle.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ttigerlilyx2
06:06 PM on 01/05/2012
Theres been such a thorough snow job done there, with even our scientists selling their souls to the highest bidder that I dont think enough people will even listen to anything said.
Its going to take new wording, new evidence, a solid consensus from reputable scientists and an in your face disaster like the BP spill to get any attention.
Some peoples hearts are not moved by watching a Polar Bear struggle and drown trying to reach land or ice floe. Or penguins starving to death.
Animals today, people tomorrow.
Perhaps theres a dollar sign where their hearts should be, and air where their brains ought to be.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LudeDude714
01:06 PM on 01/05/2012
The most influential political moment of 2010, as well as one of the most overlooked moments, came at the beginning of the year, but it is still far from over. Last January, the Supreme Court unleashed the influence of special interests in its ruling of Citizen’s United v. Federal Election Commission. This ruling effectively removed the contribution limits that special interests have been subject to for over a century. The fact that special interests have more influence in the democratic process than ever before is not a key issue for either party – it is a key issue for both parties. In order to protect the democratic process from undue influence, lawmakers must act to prevent another election cycle of limitless and anonymous spending. Without Congress passing a statute, you can be sure history will remember 2010 for the transforming decision of Citizen’s United. Both liberal and conservative groups are drooling at the mouth over this ruling, buying a candidate has just become much easier.
12:56 PM on 01/05/2012
With fuel our largest export now, this is not in our national interest. America does not need it if we already have more than enough to be exporters. The pollution from refining would be our burden while exporters benefit.
12:02 PM on 01/13/2012
Sory but you have it wrong. Those refineries have extra capacity because demand in the States is low. So they export. All the Keystone pipeline does means that the crude oil is imported from Canada rather than Saudi or Venezuela. That oil will end up somewhere else.

Or those refineries could reduce production and put people in States out of work.

On the jobs front. The investment in the plants to fill the pipeline is massive. to fill that pipeline 700,000 barrels per day, 20 plants at $1 billion each have to be built. Each of those plants will buy at least 10% -20% of equipment from States. One company I deal with in Tulsa is selling 20 boilers a year to the Oil Sands , thats 100 million a year and could increase to 150 million. Thats a lot of work for welders in Tulsa and that is just one company. We could use 5000 construction workers from the States for the oil sands for the next 20 years as we don't have enough.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hunted
12:50 PM on 01/05/2012
Being a Canadian we should also be looking at alternatives which are in our national interest.
The protectionism which is sufacing in the USA should spure us on to build the pipeline to the west coast and explore emerging markets in Asia
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ttigerlilyx2
06:08 PM on 01/05/2012
Yes because when we have ruined our Country, we might all come flooding into yours if it hasnt been destroyed as well.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hunted
07:19 PM on 01/05/2012
Make no mistake I am the last person to stand on the side of big oil, the industry here is destroying the Mackenzie River watershed in Northern Alberta and Saskatchewan. If it going to be exported and it is lets (canadians) sell it to whom ever we want and at a fair price. This is not happening now. With the revenue generated perhaps they can fix their mess properly.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RCnDC
If U Dont Live Ur Life Being Born, U Live It Dying
12:50 PM on 01/05/2012
It's like a bank robber warning banks not to install security doors because it will create a fire hazard...