Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by dbob on March 5, 2012 at 14:49

Shelby - No - Extreme western Nacgodoches, Maybe - Rusk and Cherokee Counties are certainly in the path.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DrWAVeSport Cd1 on March 5, 2012 at 18:29

Sesport II,

Great find.  Thanks!

DrWAVeSport Cd1 3/5/2012

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Martin L. Lazarine, Jr. on March 7, 2012 at 5:23

Thank you for the information sesport II.

Martin Lazarine

Martin L. Lazarine, Jr.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joseph Cartwright on March 5, 2012 at 18:31

This report  lists Cherokee, Rusk, Nacogdoches, Angelina and Polk Counties as the ones impacted.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CCCR on March 7, 2012 at 5:41

 Martin,

 Google Keystone XL PIpeline, there is a large map listing the Texas counties with the current routing info. There are 3 pumping station locations in our area of East Texas. They are Smith (Lake Tyler PS-38, Angelina (PS-39 Lufkin), and Polk (PS-40 Corrigan).

It will be 435 miles of 36" pipe from Cushing, OK. to Pt. Arthur and Houston. As I understand it, this portion

will be built next.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dry Hole on March 7, 2012 at 6:42

Martin,

 This Pipeline Project is not really new, Universal Services (Contracted by TransCanada Keystone)  has been surveying and buying/taking ROW now for about 5 years ------ unless you are a brand new landowner in it's path then I would think that you would have already been contacted by now if it were going to impact your property ------ this project seems to be a high profile POLITICAL issue but that does not seem to bother Universal as the local papers have been full of condemnations and at the same time  news about the project being denied permit by the Feds. --------- not sure why our judges/courts/TRRC would be continuing to hear condemnation cases on a project that has not been approved  by the Feds ??? --------- If someone can explain that one please do

BTW ---- a pipeline company just LOST a BIG case in the Supreme Court that made them pay damages to the whole tract of land instead of just the ROW acreage.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hopeful About Natural Gas on November 6, 2015 at 9:03

It looks like the US is going to reject the Keystone pipeline to bring Canadian oil & gas down here.

I'd like to know member's thinking on if this is a good or a bad thing for Haynesville shale? Would it have been better for us in the long run if it had been approved?

It's been awhile since I've posted on GHS, but this is a big issue. I recall some debate on it both pro and con for Haynesville, but I'd like to hear what members now think.

HANG

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeanette M Moore on November 10, 2015 at 12:36

We live in South Dakota and it's NOT coming through our state.  Our Out of Touch congressmen/woman don't listen to the people of SD.  The majority of SD people DIDN'T WANT THE PIPELINE IN THE FIRST PLACE.  Our land is precious and part of it would have gone through Indian Country which is native land and across rivers and streams.  It is not American oil and has no benefit to any of us. Too much hype in Washington hurts the REAL people who live here.  We need to take care of our own oil and natural gas in this country. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by HELEN ODUM HARRELL on November 10, 2015 at 16:17

Thankfully, The pipeline has been rejected for the time being.  

My question is:  why should we bring gas/oil in from Canada when our present wells in eastern Texas counties are permitted to flow only a few days per month?

I have small fractional interest in a group of wells that have great potential, but they are allowed to flow only a few days per month.   My BP checks in 2014 were quite good.   So far in 2015 they have run about 40 per cent of what they were in 2014.  

Oh sure, I know that the price of natural gas is about as low as it can get,  but buying foreign product is what the World War II soldiers used to call a misuse of your mess kit.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dbob on November 10, 2015 at 16:29

Jeanette - I live and work in part of Texas/Louisiana that produces a lot of the countries oil and gas, and has for 100+ years.  Our land is precious too.  We want to keep the refineries in the southern part of this area running - over time, they have been converted to run on heavy crude coming from places like Venezuela.  They need heavy oils, like the tar sands, to run efficiently. Stopping this part of Keystone may cause a pause in development in some of the tar sands, but ultimately, market forces will lead to the development of the tar sands.  If it can't be transported to the south efficiently, its likely to go to China, and we will keep buying Venezuela oil.  

Frankly, I'd rather use the Canadian oil, produced by a country with western values and environmental law, than diverting it to China and using Venezuela oil.  Lack of national energy policy that is rational is causing the government to make short sighted and unintelligent decisions.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Max on November 12, 2015 at 5:22

"We want to keep the refineries in the southern part of this area running - over time, they have been converted to run on heavy crud"

If NG takes off and replaces oil as the base product in the things we produce, then we won't need those refineries.  We'll need to convert them to refine NG into the raw products used for fuel and industry.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeanette M Moore on November 12, 2015 at 5:41

I can see the difference between those who live in states that have refineries that create jobs and help their economy.  You all benefit from that process.  If the XL pipeline went through SD it wouldn't provide permanent jobs, it wouldn't provide income for South Dakota as the refineries do for you.  The only thing it would do for us is provide hazard material going through a pipeline, interrupting farmers and their land and providing great RISK for pollution and disaster if there was an "accident" with the pipeline.

Your refineries provide your states with income.  The pipeline for us provides us nothing.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page