Lawrence,
   The same "greenies" that are crying about the pipeline would scream "Not in my back yard!" over a refinery as well. Plus, there's the issue of how to distribute and deal with the finished product. There's storage, shipping facilities, distribution pipelines and so on already in place.

A pipeline only has to deal with the potential for leaks and the rare possiblilty of an explosion. The refinery has to deal with leaks, fumes, explosions, watersheds, ect. ect.

Cost is a consideration as well. A pipeline would not be as costly.

In short, if the "Green Police" are having fit's over a pipeline, just think of the storm a refinery or two would cause.

jrw159

They have not built a refinery in the USA since 1979.  Environmentalist would rather have the old, worn out refineries than allow for a new state-of-the-art facility to be built.

Never heard of a pipeline being so controversial.  Only in 0ba's AmeriKa I guess.

EPA and about triple the cost is the reason Lawrence. There has not been a new refinery in the US since the 70's if my memory serves me right.

Giovanni,

I saw it on the news this morning. Somewhere around Oklahoma I believe, maybe northern Oklahoma and across the state there is a very large watershed, perhaps underground(?) that the pipeline would run thru. This is what the green weenies are crying about. For me it seemed simple, change the angle a bit out of Canada missing this watershed then head south to Texas. Bit more money involved I'd say plus they'd probably have to run across the pond in a farmers field that would be home to some rare bug that the greenies would then cry about "destroying their habitat" again. I'm surprised we can still take a dump in our own homes without the green pains in the arse raising heck about the methane generated!!!

So far that is two very large pipelines killed this year by the green wankers and President Obama....who the heck are they supposed to be putting to work anyhow? I keep hearing about "job plans" and b.s. but all I keep seeing is more folks out of work. Wish I could help and hire folks but not doing that good yet.

Giovanni,
I know all about this.
As a matter of fact my Mother went to Ogallala HS,and my Father went to Banner HS.
And both my Mother's parent's are buried in Brule, Ne.
All on the Aquifer.
I will leave my ego aside.
I could have the best people on here build this pipeline.
I am all for it.
But sabotage could destroy so much.
And I mean after it is finished.
Put a hole in a pipeline is not that tough.
In these days you never know
BTW the aquifer is under wy, co, ne, ks.
not in Ok, sd or tx.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Kent

Giovanni,
What you hit upon here is the politics of the whole thing. There will be no definitive explanations of why (though there will be some very pretty words that make it sound definitive) because that is not the point. It is irrelevent why. The point is to rally the extreme environmental left into believing they have some sort of victory that they can take to the polls, while organized labor is lead to believe there is still a chance for the jobs involved so that they can take that to the polls. Do not be surprised when the discussion of the whole issue in the media is burdened with lies, distraction, and ambiguity. Its called voting present. And the man we currently have in the White House is the best I've ever seen at it.
And never, NEVER underestimate the ability of American democrats to dance in subterfuge the conflicting interests of such staunch political supporters as environmentalism and organized labor. It is absolutely astonishing how polished and accomplished they are in convincing these diametrically opposed constituencies (essentially opposed on virtually ever single issue of interest to them whether it is pipelines, highways, dams, housing projects, or any development) that they look out for their interests. It is one of the most disturbing marvels of American politics.

So far, political concerns of individual posters have outweighed most of the facts in this thread. Here are a few points to clarify.

First, Canadians would like to have refineries built in Canada, rather than ship jobs south with the oil, but Big Oil (Exxon, Shell, BP, etc) control the oil industry here (as they do in the US), as well  as much of the government policy, and they don't want a surplus of refining capacity driving down the price of gas.

Second, TransCanada already has a longer pipeline right-of-way skirting the Ogalala aquifer, and the pipeline would have been building long ago if they had chosen to follow that route. The short-cut they proposed across sensitive environmental areas, for economic reasons, is what has caused most of this dispute, along with some very poor pipeline maintenance which has resulted in some disastrous recent spills.

Third, everybody should read this or something similar.
http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Oc-Po/Ogallala-Aquifer.html