April 18, 2014

Since I published “Oil By Train Or Pipe”inspired by an email from the U.S. Energy Administration, some times identified by the acronym EIA, a slew of Nobel Laureates that included former president Carter was reported to have admonished Mr. Obama, the current U.S president not to exceed to Canada’s and some of his fellow Democrat’s pressure to permit the building of the Keystone pipeline that would carry Tar sands products from Canada’s western provinces into the United States. I have learned from these EIA emails that Canada which today is the U.S.’s foremost supplier of imported oil even ahead of Saudi Arabia, the land ruled by the famed royal house of Saad. From this presumed EIA presented fact one must infer that whether or not the pipeline is built should have no effect on whether or not Americans use Tar sands products which they have been consuming ever since Colorado bred Mr. R. George formerly of Sun Oil made Tar sands oil a viable source of mined energy. Threats by Canadians therefor to sell Tar sands oil to China if Mr. Obama does not give the Tar sands pipeline to America his O.K. seem, pardon my lingo, “untransparent”.

Well then what is it that concerns these Nobelists about a possible Tar sands pipeline? It can’t be the environmentally unfriendly mining process itself,condemned by a pop artist interviewed on BNN as representing Canada’s selling its integrity whether it ships the Tar sands products to the U.S. or China, because Canada currently number one supplier of foreign oil to the U.S is already sending Tar sands oil to the U.S. by railroad tank cars .

Some of these laureates suggest that not okaying the Keystone pipeline would be a symbol signalling that the era of polluting the environment and raising world temperatures for future generations by burning fossil fuels was over. Though this goal in itself does not seem unreasonable, Tar sands oil will continue journeying into the U.S. if not by pipe surely as it travels now by rail.