(from huffingtonpost.com source Robert Redford:)
“RBC Capital Markets may have said it best: ‘Should Keystone XL be rejected, Canadian oil sands producers will need to rethink expansion plans, timelines and export pipe solutions.'”
Well, they may, and they may make a terminal in Alaska and sell to China, but that is not the ‘real’ point, the issue is if it is prudent to rely on blowing rigs in the gulf of Mexico, rely on supertankers from remote regions only two torpedoes away from the bottom of the Atlantic or the Indian ocean, rely on and instable countries where the capacity could go to zero overnight in one of the “green revolutions” we keep causing around the globe with the stupid bio-fuel policy introduced by his godly brightness, the latest grandson of Hitler banker.
There would be a way, to do without both/either, just banning all non-hybrid cars and pickups in the US overnight, sending them and the “superior designers” of Detroit gas guzzlers to the junk yard, or in alternative with a gas tax of another 4 bucks per gallon, then making “mandatory” in the US overnight non physical presence for all the administrative jobs, public services, and education classes in the country, to be conducted over the Internet. One way or another, maybe people may start ordering on-line from Amazon, Walmart, Safeway and ebay instead than going on shopping frenzies, logistic delivery saves fuel too. I would not be as optimistic over peak as the USGS is, one of the problems is not prices but peak capacity.
And if all the answers are “can do without Keystone,” go ahead, but make sure people don’t know where you folks live, because one month (actually way less,) after a fuel crises, if nothing changes on US gas consumption and driving habits, when the supermarket shelves are empty and the people are hungry (and armed,) somebody may start searching for whoever was responsible of such failure, and who to barbecue to put food on the table, allelujah.