KEYSTONE XL DIRECTOR: REPUBLICAN TACTIC DELAYED PIPLINE

  

Keystone XL director: Republican tactic delayed pipeline

 

Posted on October 2, 2013 at 4:50 pm

by Zain Shauk

in Keystone XL

 

 

 

     

Les Cherwenuk (left), TransCanada's project director for the Keystone XL pipeline, spoke at Hart Energy’s Executive Energy Club event on Oct. 2, 2013, at the Petroleum Club of Houston. Michael Warren, Hart Energy’s senior vice president of upstream research sits next to him. (Hart Energy Research & Consulting)

 

A Republican mandate that President Obama make a decision on Keystone XL in 2012 unnecessarily delayed the pipeline, the director of the project said Wednesday.

And while the southern leg of the pipeline is nearly complete, the northern segment of the line that would allow more oil to move from Canada to the Texas coast is still awaiting approval as competing projects pick up steam, said Les Cherwenuk, director of TransCanada’s Keystone XL project.

Cherwenuk, who spoke at a Hart Energy Executive Energy Club event in downtown Houston, said the 485-mile southern leg of Keystone XL is 95 percent complete and will begin moving oil from Cushing, Okla. to the Gulf Coast by the end of the year.

Asked about concerns that the southern leg had fallen behind schedule, Cherwenuk said construction on that portion of Keystone XL has encountered delays, mostly related to weather in Oklahoma.

“The storms that traveled through Oklahoma this year were tremendous,” he said. “The schedule has slipped. There’s no doubt about that.”

Political maneuvering

TransCanada submitted its application in 2008 for the northern portion of the pipeline, which requires presidential approval since it crosses an international border. The company was anticipating approval early last year, he said.

“But, as you recall, 2012 was an election year and politics began to weigh heavily into that process and some political maneuvering occurred,” Cherwenuk said.

Republicans then pushed a mandate through Congress requiring that Obama make a decision on the pipeline.

But all of the materials Obama needed to consider were not yet complete because of environmental concerns from Nebraska that required changes to the route, Cherwenuk said.

Uncertainty: Keystone delays disappoint Houston refining CEO

“He couldn’t [approve the project] fundamentally , since the work had not been completed and he had no choice but to deny the permit,” he said.

Obama rejected the plan and TransCanada had to submit its application again and restart the process, resulting in a further delay of its approval.

Cherwenuk credited regulators for thoroughly reviewing comments from supporters and opponents of the pipeline.

“There are thousands and thousands of those,” he said. “So the process, I guess, is taking the time it needs.”

Growing competition

While the nearly $8 billion Keystone XL project will help move more of the huge amounts of oil sands crude expected to be produced in Canada in the coming years, other projects are also in the works to move that oil without crossing international borders, said Laura Atkins, Hart Energy’s executive director of upstream research.

TransCanada itself is working on a line that would move up to 1.1 million barrels per day from the oil sands and other Canadian and northern United States fields to Canada’s east coast. If approved, the pipeline would have a higher capacity than Keystone XL, which could potentially reach 830,000 barrels per day.

Construction: When a multibillion-dollar pipeline runs through your backyard

Others are working on pipelines that will move oil from oil sands fields in Alberta to refineries along Canada’s west coast, with the potential to export products to Asia, Atkins said.

“The pipeline to Vancouver will probably go forward,” Atkins said.
TransCanada’s Canadian rival Enbridge, in partnership with Houston-based Enterprise Products Partners, has successfully reversed a 400,000 barrel-per-day line that is already bringing more than 100,000 barrels per day of oil sands crude to Texas. Enbridge and Enterprise are currently working on expanding that line, which already crosses the Canadian-U.S. border, to 850,000 barrels per day by adding another pipeline parallel to the companies’ existing one.

Moving by rail

Oil companies also are pursuing an option to move oil sands crude by rail, which could end up being relatively competitive with pipeline transportation of crude, she said.

That’s because oil sands crude is primarily made up of bitumen, a solid, hydrocarbon-bearing substance. To move bitumen in pipelines, it has to be diluted, at a cost of about $30 per barrel, she said.

But companies are finding ways to move undiluted bitumen in rail cars, saving money on the cost of diluent altogether, Atkins said.

“It might make up for the additional cost of transporting Canadian crude by rail,” she said.

Cherwenuk said the transportation options are all needed, since Canadian oil sands crude production is expected to grow rapidly.
Atkins said dozens of oil sands projects are in development or planned, with exports to the United States expected to nearly triple to more than 3 million barrels per day by 2020.

Opponents of Keystone XL have argued that it would encourage oil sands crude production, which emits more carbon into the atmosphere than conventional oil production. They also argue that it raises the possibility of a damaging spill of diluted bitumen, which is more challenging to clean than conventional crude.
A 2010 spill of about 20,000 barrels of diluted bitumen into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River has taken more than three years and $800 million to clean.

A KEY DRIVER - UNEMPLOYMENT - CANADA

A key driver of unemployment is the failure of our education system to prepare individuals for the digital age.

Our best jobs require the ability to process complex knowledge and information - in real time.

The newspaper print industry is an excellent example of this shortfall.

The more serious deficit is our cultural economic bias to consume.

We need to move to a culture of personal growth through innovative curiosity which leads to productivity.

As long as "What I own is who I am" prevails as a motivator unemployment will remain debilitating.

A final note.

The top down control pyramid in which our organizations operate is no longer relevant as an organizational structure for a knowledge based economy.

A collaborative team based platform is a solution.

We are a long way from having this transition take place.

Respectfully,

Dan Zwicker
Toronto.

BEYOND RISK - FINANCIAL INTEGRITY THROUGH FINANCIAL LITERACY

Beyond Risk is about people and their views on money....borne of over 30 years of front line experience and engagement in the arena of exponential corporate growth through financial practice building under 'fire' in a lifetime passion......the assuring of the financial value of our time.....to allow for the completion of our personal and business financial objectives. It is about character, integrity, people and their often complex and conflicting attitudes towards money.....its accumulation.....its preservation and its utility. It is about the leadership of high performance professionals who are committed to managing the capital risk and the lifetime financial well being of their families, business associates and clients. It is about coaching 'Olympian' class high performance empowerment. Above all it is about ethical choice in every facet of decision making and execution. It is remarkable that of all the basic life skill related subjects that we include in our children's early curriculum financial literacy is not one of them.......given that we live in a money economy. It is said that we each have a "Money Personality". Nothing could be more accurate and more life defining.

Dan Zwicker
Toronto

SO WHAT IS IMPORTANT - TO YOU? 'RAISING THE BAR' - A PERSONAL COMMENT

Our value systems are the basis of our perceptions and decisions – both about people and inanimate objects.

Our value systems frequently lead to significant misunderstandings

The environment and culture in which we grew up are key factors in our outlook

Our natural intelligence and physical well being are equally keys to our views.

This note is prompted by my 50 years of experience with a unique segment of our society – Professional Engineers.

As a group they are simply ‘Straight Arrows’ – what you see is what you get

Their performance standards includes ‘Raising The Bar’ very high.

Their purpose is to solve problems which make the lives of society better.

There is nothing we use, see or own that has not had a Professional Engineer’s input.

In short, they are highly reliable and productive members of our society.

Their character and integrity are typically impeccable.

Generally they are not ‘touchy’ ‘feely’ individuals.

If you want to get to know them ‘Listen to Their Heart’.

5 BEST REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS - A TEMPLATE FOR THE CURRENT GOP CANDIDATE

5 Best Republican Presidents

Known widely as the greatest leaders of their eras, these 5 best Republican presidents served their country not only in the Oval Office. Some were military, some were governors and politicians. All 5 of the best Republican Presidents have one thing in common: respect.

1. Abraham Lincoln Still beloved by many to this day, Abraham Lincoln, the 16^th President, was the first official Republican president, elected into office in 1860. He bravely led the country through the Civil War and abolished slavery with the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863. He also passed the 13^th Amendment to the Constitution, which legally abolished slavery in the country. Lincoln gave one of the most famous speeches in history, the Gettysburg Address (in 1863). He was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth while attending the Ford’s Theatre on April 14, 1865. Historians widely agree that Lincoln was one of the best Republican presidents in our history, if not the best.
2. Ulysses S. Grant The 18^th President of the United States served his country well before taking the highest office in the land. He led the North to victory in the Civil War as the General-in-Chief, an aggressive leader who took no prisoners. President Lincoln appointed him Lieutenant General in 1864. He was appointed by President Andrew Johnson to the brand-new rank (at the time) of General of the Army of the United States. After his Civil War victory, his popular standing with many Americans elevated him to the presidency in 1869, where he served two terms. As one of the best Republican presidents, he fought hard against KKK violence and riots, helped rebuild the Republican Party in the South, and presided over the Reconstruction era.
3. Theodore Roosevelt This two-term 26^th President of the United States was a man’s man: macho, energetic and a bit of a cowboy. He loved to hunt, write, box and explore. Roosevelt attended Harvard University, where he became interested in the Navy. He was elected Governor of New York and only two years later was elected Vice President. In 1901, when President McKinley was assassinated, Roosevelt, at the age of 42, became the new president. His philosophy was progressive by nature, and he believed it was necessary to regulate business heavily. He was popular and well-spoken with the press, even giving them their own room inside the White House during a rainstorm. This essentially started the modern-day presidential press briefing. He won the Nobel Peace Prize for his part in ending the Russo-Japanese War.
4. Dwight D. Eisenhower The 34^th President of the United States, this Army 5-star General served two terms between 1953 and 1961. Before his presidency, he is credited with planning and supervising the invasion of France and Germany during World War II. In 1951, he became the very first Supreme Commander of NATO, an extremely high honor. During his time as one of the best Republican presidents, he expanded Social Security and even helped create the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. His most familiar achievement was authorizing the Interstate Highway System in 1956. He believed it was necessary both for military usage as well as continued country growth. Eisenhower was the first President in history to be “forced” out of office by serving two terms, the maximum allowed by the U.S. Constitution.
5. Ronald Reagan Known for his charisma and endearing charm, Reagan served two terms as the 40^th Pr esident of the United States from 1981-1989. Before his rise to the Oval Office, he served as Governor of California from 1967 to 1975. Before his political career, he was an actor both on the big screen and on television; at the age of 69, he was the oldest man ever elected President. Known for his “Reaganomics,” Reagan stimulated the economy, suffering from the 1970s inflation, by implementing large tax cuts. He was known as a firm but fair leader who increased defense spending, including bringing back the B-1 bomber program as part of the U.S. buildup during the Cold War. During his second term, he vowed to fight for drug-free schools and workplaces with his War on Drugs. He also helped negotiate the end of the Cold War, declaring “Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” These accomplishments firmly place him among the five best Republican presidents.

By: KJ Constance
Break Studios Contributing Writer
Mar. 25, 2010







http://beyondrisk.wordpress.com/2012/08/27/5-best-republican-presidents-a-template-for-the-current-gop-candiate/

TO SMILE OR NOT TO SMILE?

 

Want to be powerful?

Study says don't smile

Smile and the world smiles with you, goes the familiar phrase. It's a lovely idea. And perhaps it's true. But it may be that the world isn’t smiling with you as much as it's laughing at you for being such a softie.

A handful of new studies (via The Vancouver Sun) suggest that smiles are for low-status individuals. If you want to appear powerful, confident and successful, don’t smile.

Researchers reviewed four studies that examined the power of facial expression. All of the studies asked people to look at images of various faces, from models to football players, who were either smiling or not smiling, and then to rate their expressions.

One study asked people to look at head shots of football players and, from those limited views, guess the man's size and personality. The players who didn’t smile were consistently rated as being bigger physically, less social and more hostile. In contrast, the smiling players were viewed as being less dominant and more social.

Study co-author Timothy Ketelaar, associate professor of psychology at New Mexico State University, explained the findings in a statement. Said Ketelaar: "Smiles can put you in a positive light by signalling that you're friendly and trustworthy, and that you aren't a threat to others. But higher-status individuals often want to appear in charge and as a threat, and they lose some of that power by smiling."

The researchers argue that less dominant human beings have relied on smiles to appease stronger, more hostile individuals for as long as we have been able to lift the corners of our mouths.
"Across the few animal species that smile, [the smiles] seem to be advertising that the displayer is not a threat to more dominant individuals. In the case of social prestige, smiles seem to be providing a similar function, provoking strategic deference," Ketelaar explained.

So when you nervously smile at your boss when you're late for the third time in a row, you're duplicating an action that your forebears relied on to get out of a sticky situation. And when she gives you a stony look in return, she's mentally high-fiving her hostile, high-status ancestors.

Chatelaine
Flannery Dean
Aug 21 2012

THE 2ND 30 – 40 YEARS – LIFETIME RETIREMENT (55 – 95) - HOW WE GOT FROM THERE (THE 1ST 30 - 40 YEARS) TO HERE (THE 2ND 30 - 40 YEARS)

FROM 1960 - 1990.......

.................FINANCIAL PLANNING WAS DONE 

BY THE CORPORATION - NOT THE EMPLOYEE.

EMPLOYEES BUDGETED INCOME - EXPENSES.

THAT'S IT! 

THE EMPLOYEE TRADED HIS OR HER FINANCIAL TIME FOR A GUARANTEED LIFETIME AT RETIREMENT.

Large corporations began to dismantle defined benefit pension plans over 20 years ago.

The first demographic group who were targeted were those in their mid 50's. Why? Because it is costly to fund a lifetime retirement with 10 years left (i.e. 55 - 65). This left those affected with only one choice - do it on your own. A $100,000 / year retirement income requires $2,000,000 in capital assuming a 5% rate of return on the capital - that's $200,000 / year in retirement funding. That sum speaks for itself. Most corporations did not start the retirement funding early..

Once a corporation removes a guaranteed pension for all intents and purposes an employee becomes self employed. The only advantage anyone has financially in a large institution is the opportunity to receive a pension and retire with peace of mind. Once you are on your own you are acting as an independent entrepreneur and not an employee. Loyalty cuts both ways.


That's the background that has resulted today in 60% of all working Canadians not having a defined benefit pension plan which would allow them to sleep soundly throughout the 30 - 40 years of their retirement (from as early as 55 to as late as 95. - look around you in your own family.)


Ask public servants why they work for the government from a financial point of view - their defined benefit pension.


Financial planning was done by the corporation - not the employee. Employees budgeted – income – expenses – that’s it. The employee traded his or her financial time for a guaranteed lifetime income at retirement.


Employees bought financial products for their individual accumulation purposes but had very little certainty whether they would be able to transition their accumulated savings capital into a sufficient and sustainable lifetime retirement income.


That brings us to 2016 where 14,000,000 + boomers in Canada are preparing to retire and are inadequately aware of which professional financial practitioner can replace the corporate financial management team who once upon a time designed and implemented their defined benefit retirement plans…….


That's where we are today.