Keystone pipeline delayed by Obama until 2013
November 10th, 2011
04:42 PM ET
3 years ago

Keystone pipeline delayed by Obama until 2013

New York (CNNMoney) - Bowing to public pressure, the Obama administration said Thursday it will delay a decision on the controversial Keystone oil sands pipeline expansion until at least 2013.

Citing concern over the proposed route through Nebraska's Sand Hills region and over the Ogallala Aquifer, the State Department said it needs more time to study the issues and look at possible alternative routes.

FULL STORY

Filed under: Energy • President Obama
soundoff (14 Responses)
  1. Hap

    Obama is so weak he has to postpone it until after the election. He has to appeal to the the LOONS rather than take the couple of 100 thousand jobs that will fall out that deal. Until we get Obama out of office we are not going to grow the economy more than 3%.

    November 10, 2011 04:48 pm at 4:48 pm |
  2. The Greedy Old Pigs have gone insane!

    "He has to appeal to the the LOONS rather than take the couple of 100 thousand jobs that will fall out that deal."

    Stop posting Fakes News lies and disinformation. The pipeline company itself has stated that only about 13,000 jobs are at stake. Let me guess, you're also the guy who counted the millions of people who show up for Tea Party and Glenn Beck rallies, amiright?

    November 10, 2011 04:58 pm at 4:58 pm |
  3. Me

    "Citing concern over the proposed route through Nebraska's Sand Hills region and over the Ogallala Aquifer, the State Department said it needs more time to study the issues and look at possible alternative routes."

    Citing concern over further alienating left-wingers and jeopardizing his chances at getting re-elected....

    There. Fixed

    November 10, 2011 04:59 pm at 4:59 pm |
  4. Wes B.

    Don't delay it, cancel it completely. Sometimes you just have to do what's RIGHT.

    November 10, 2011 05:01 pm at 5:01 pm |
  5. Me

    Why can't they just build a refinery in Canada? It'd be cheaper and no pipeline would have to be built.

    November 10, 2011 05:02 pm at 5:02 pm |
  6. kdub

    Obama killing more jobs.

    November 10, 2011 05:06 pm at 5:06 pm |
  7. RandyIA

    hmmm enviromentalists, don't want it, unions do want it. Looks like he is delaying it, hoping to not upset either part of his base. Is it now our turn to go where are the jobs, jobs, jobs. Politics before policy, he will never learn to lead.

    November 10, 2011 05:18 pm at 5:18 pm |
  8. Rudy NYC

    The only reason for this pipeline is to shorten the trip for oil tankers making trips to Alaska. Currently, tankers in the Atlantic must go through the Panama Canal. This pipeline would allow them to simply go to the Gulf of Mexico and stop in TEXAS.

    Food for thought: How much of the oil coming out of Alaska is going to the Atlantic and points east? Apparently, enough oil to make it worth the cost savings to build a pipeline. Haven't conservatives been arguing that the oil in Alaska would help the U.S.? Apparently, the oil in Alaska helps the oil companies on the international market more than it does the U.S.

    November 10, 2011 06:30 pm at 6:30 pm |
  9. Emperor Norton

    If the Ogallala Aquifer takes a hit, that endangers the water supply for pretty much the entire central time zone, and it's not like oil-industry scientists have covered themselves in glory lately. Holding off to study it further is a smart call.

    November 10, 2011 06:45 pm at 6:45 pm |
  10. Rico

    Perhaps Canada will reroute their "dirty" oil through British Columbia to the coast so that Asian ships can pick it up.

    Great, now the USA will still rely on Middle Eastern oil–really smart

    Montgomery triangle is awesome!!

    November 10, 2011 06:57 pm at 6:57 pm |
  11. gg

    pipe line that many miles not good idea

    November 10, 2011 07:08 pm at 7:08 pm |
  12. Rowdy

    Why can't they just build a refinery in Canada? It'd be cheaper and no pipeline would have to be built.

    There are many refineries in Canada, but the carbon footprint to transport and the costs are not feesible and that is why the proposal is to transport it via pipeline.The US already buys most of it's oil from Canada, although Republicans will try and scare everyone and pretend it comes from the middle east. The jobs will go to Canadians for the most part but there would be some employment opportunities for Americans but it is mostly for Canadians.Obama is doing the right thing as there is some very serious issues involved in this pipeline and it is best that the entire picture is well studied and although it sucks, it is the right thing to do right now.

    November 10, 2011 07:16 pm at 7:16 pm |
  13. Kim

    Dirty dirty Alberta oil–Guess they will just ship it through BC to the West coast for Asian ships to pick up. Nyah Nyah!! We still have good Middle Eastern oil to use

    But wait, most of America ride bikes now, right??

    Montgomery triangle is awesome!

    November 10, 2011 07:26 pm at 7:26 pm |
  14. Dave C

    Why does this pipeline have to go to Houston? It runs right by the refineries in Billings! Better yet, build a new refinery up there for that oil AND North Dakota!!

    November 10, 2011 07:37 pm at 7:37 pm |