Boss 302
Pursuit Driver
It cost $30 a barrel to have oil transported by rail compared to $10 a barrel to send it through the pipeline. I found online that a rail tanker can hold 550-725 barrels of oil. That's a shipping cost of $16,500 - $21,750 per rail tanker. Sending 725 barrels of crude down the pipeline would cost $7,250 saving the oil company $9,250 - $14,500 a barrel. What rail company gets the majority of business to transport oil from western Canada into the US? The pipeline starts in Hardisty, Alberta, Canada.
Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway transports oil from western Canada into the United States. BNSF is owned by Berkshire Hathaway. Warren Buffet is chairman and president of Berkshire Hathaway. Buffet who has provided tens of millions of dollars of late to Democratic Party candidates stands to lose billions of annual revenue once Keystone was operational.
Is this why the left supports the shutdown of the pipeline; because doing so profits their benefactor Warren Buffet? Granted there are some environmental risks involved in a pipeline, but those risk are not near as great shipping oil by rail. The left using the concerns of environmental risks with the pipeline is utter BS.
The cost savings of transporting oil through the pipeline would reduce the cost to consumers. We all know that Democrats don't give a damn about lower prices benefiting consumers.
When it comes down to the benefits of shipping oil via the pipeline v. rail, it's apparent the pipeline provides better benefits for people. Once again the Dems demonstrate the people don't matter, but their benefactors certainly do.
Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway transports oil from western Canada into the United States. BNSF is owned by Berkshire Hathaway. Warren Buffet is chairman and president of Berkshire Hathaway. Buffet who has provided tens of millions of dollars of late to Democratic Party candidates stands to lose billions of annual revenue once Keystone was operational.
Is this why the left supports the shutdown of the pipeline; because doing so profits their benefactor Warren Buffet? Granted there are some environmental risks involved in a pipeline, but those risk are not near as great shipping oil by rail. The left using the concerns of environmental risks with the pipeline is utter BS.
The cost savings of transporting oil through the pipeline would reduce the cost to consumers. We all know that Democrats don't give a damn about lower prices benefiting consumers.
When it comes down to the benefits of shipping oil via the pipeline v. rail, it's apparent the pipeline provides better benefits for people. Once again the Dems demonstrate the people don't matter, but their benefactors certainly do.
