I am going to be calling Nebraska tomorrow. This gamesmanship needs to stop. Additionally TransCanada isn't a very viable company. They have a debt to income ratio over 1.0. In other words for every dollar they earn they are losing more than a dollar. It is a ridiculous company in many, many ways. I've had enough.
And for other environmentalist and/or conservationist, I am now including the fiscal viability of the parties intending to do damage.
For decades now the petroleum industry has accepted subsides because there are business interests that aren't profitable. Should a company receive subsidies and be drilling for oil or gas, especially offshore? The USA demands responsibility of the oil company to any damage they do; ie: The Deepwater Horizon. What if BP was flat broke and the oil spill occurred? That's TransCanada. They have NO VALUE that will cover pipeline failures as their garbage oil burps out of the soil and destroys our farm land.
Environmentalists have been doing the heavy lifting to stop as much degradation of Earth's biosphere as we can. HOWEVER. We never check the viability of the company. It will make a difference to courts. It is simply another few hours of Wall Street prospectus to add to public comment. Just get it on the record. If we find any dirt on the company put it on the record, too. Corruption should be known!
September 30, 2015
...TransCanada spokesman Mark Cooper (click here) said applying through the Nebraska Public Service Commission would likely be quicker than going through the courts.
"This process will likely be seven to 12 months for a decision, as opposed to one where we do not have an estimated timeline," Cooper said.
"Despite having route authority to construct Keystone XL, uncertainty in the courts around the constitutionality of how the route was approved was very likely to carry on once again to the Nebraska Supreme Court."
Opposition in Nebraska has been one of several major hurdles facing the Keystone XL project, which has been waiting more than six years for U.S. presidential approval....
Nebraska does not have state's rights to violate international borders.
Constitutional Analysis of a Nebraska Pipeline Routing Law (click here)
That analysis is of 2011 and there could be more legislature since then and/or pending.
There was a change in government in Alberta, but, the lousy new Prime Minister stated during his elections he favored Keystone. He may have said that because Alberta will fight it.
He stated he favored Keystone because he opposed a different pipeline that would be built inside Canada. So basically, the Canadians were able to stop two pipelines, Keystone and the other's name escapes me. But, there are two now that are pending and not making forward movement.
Northern Gate Pipeline. How could I forget that name?
The fate of the Northern Gateway pipeline project (click here) is now in the hands of a trio of Federal Appeal Court judges who reserved their decision on whether to uphold or quash the government’s approval of the controversial project.
And for other environmentalist and/or conservationist, I am now including the fiscal viability of the parties intending to do damage.
For decades now the petroleum industry has accepted subsides because there are business interests that aren't profitable. Should a company receive subsidies and be drilling for oil or gas, especially offshore? The USA demands responsibility of the oil company to any damage they do; ie: The Deepwater Horizon. What if BP was flat broke and the oil spill occurred? That's TransCanada. They have NO VALUE that will cover pipeline failures as their garbage oil burps out of the soil and destroys our farm land.
Environmentalists have been doing the heavy lifting to stop as much degradation of Earth's biosphere as we can. HOWEVER. We never check the viability of the company. It will make a difference to courts. It is simply another few hours of Wall Street prospectus to add to public comment. Just get it on the record. If we find any dirt on the company put it on the record, too. Corruption should be known!
September 30, 2015
...TransCanada spokesman Mark Cooper (click here) said applying through the Nebraska Public Service Commission would likely be quicker than going through the courts.
"This process will likely be seven to 12 months for a decision, as opposed to one where we do not have an estimated timeline," Cooper said.
"Despite having route authority to construct Keystone XL, uncertainty in the courts around the constitutionality of how the route was approved was very likely to carry on once again to the Nebraska Supreme Court."
Opposition in Nebraska has been one of several major hurdles facing the Keystone XL project, which has been waiting more than six years for U.S. presidential approval....
Nebraska does not have state's rights to violate international borders.
Constitutional Analysis of a Nebraska Pipeline Routing Law (click here)
That analysis is of 2011 and there could be more legislature since then and/or pending.
There was a change in government in Alberta, but, the lousy new Prime Minister stated during his elections he favored Keystone. He may have said that because Alberta will fight it.
He stated he favored Keystone because he opposed a different pipeline that would be built inside Canada. So basically, the Canadians were able to stop two pipelines, Keystone and the other's name escapes me. But, there are two now that are pending and not making forward movement.
Northern Gate Pipeline. How could I forget that name?
The fate of the Northern Gateway pipeline project (click here) is now in the hands of a trio of Federal Appeal Court judges who reserved their decision on whether to uphold or quash the government’s approval of the controversial project.
Over six days of legal arguments in Vancouver, the court heard the government didn’t get aboriginal consent or consider the impact on the environment when it approved the project, while proponents claimed a decision to overturn the pipeline approval would kill the project.
The government approved the $7-billion Enbridge Northern Gateway project in June, 2014, with 209 conditions, following the recommendations made by a review panel considering the environmental impacts of the interprovincial pipeline.
A collection of First Nations, environmental groups and a labour union launched the appeal, asserting that the panel tasked with reviewing the pipeline proposal didn’t adequately consult with aboriginal groups nor sufficiently consider the environmental impact....
