Is TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline good for South Dakota and America?

Yesterday, while I was listening to the Twins post-game show on WNAX, I heard an ad about TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline. The ad’s narrator kept saying over and over that the pipeline would be good for South Dakota and America, and he spoke against background music that was so overtly patriotic as to border on ridiculous. The gist of the message was that the pipeline from Canada will help reduce our dependence on foreign oil and will bring lots of new property tax dollars to local governments.

Many of you are probably familiar with TransCanada’s Keystone pipeline which, as I understand it, is now under construction through eastern South Dakota. Keystone XL would go through western South Dakota.

As noted in a story in today’s Daily Republic, South Dakota’s Public Utilities Commission is taking public comment on the Keystone XL proposal at meetings today and tomorrow. Mitchell’s own Dusty Johnson, a PUC member, will have a central role in those hearings and in the fate of the proposal.

Do you think, as the TransCanada ad says, that the pipeline will be good for South Dakota and America?

5 thoughts on “Is TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline good for South Dakota and America?

  1. Property tax? Ha! I suspect we could generate more revenue for the state and landowners alike by popping one windmill every half-mile along the proposed pipeline route. And Canadian oil is still foreign, and it’s still oil. When you’re trying to break an addiction, you don’t line up a larger supply of your drug. You find alternatives. Canada’s oil will run out and make a heck of a mess in Alberta and wherever it spills along the way. South Dakota’s wind will always blow.

  2. “Foreign oil” was a bad choice of words on my part. I should have said “Middle Eastern oil.”

  3. I hope its so successfull that they add more pipelines all the way up to the north slope of Alaska so that we can start utilizing the natural gas that is currently being pumped back into the ground.

    We need more coal plants that utilize carbon injection. Those and nuclear power can be our baseline sources with wind, hydro and solar supplying power when those conditionans are present.

  4. I agree with caheidelberger. More wind power! It seems to present in South Dakota all the time, doesn’t it? 🙂

Comments are closed.