During my visit to Canada's oil sands region last week, I sensed the concern of energy company officials and others over misinformation that's being spread about oil sands. Ron Liepert, Alberta's energy minister, clearly was puzzled at the idea the United States might reject the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which would deliver millions of barrels of oil to U.S. refiners and eventually support more than 500,000 jobs.

Yet, it's possible. The State Department is weighing approval of the Keystone XL, with a final decision expected by year's end. In the meantime debate over the pipeline and oil sands continues - and with it the stream of misinformation from opponents of abundant, accessible oil from our neighbor and close ally. One post this week is fairly representative. Working our way thro... more »

It's good the administration seems to be refocusing on job creation - what with the current economic malaise yielding another blah employment report, Standard & Poor's downgrading of the country's credit rating and the stock market diving through the 11,000 floor.

The president said Monday creating jobs "is not rocket science" and "we know what to do" - and he is right. The question is, will we do it? Even the usually supportive New York Times thinks that recent economic leadership has fizzled: "Anyone hungering for a robust vision to invigorate the economy and increase employment is still hungry."

So, yeah - amid the churn of disappointing economic news, the administration looks to pivot to jobs. First, though, it might look at the pivot of jobs - as thus defined:

"A person or thing that... more »

Ron Liepert, energy minister of Canada's energy-rich Alberta province, sounded almost wistful talking about his country's energy partnership with the United States - which Liepert unhesitatingly said is the key to economic prosperity for both countries.

The wistfulness enters in when Liepert concedes that safe, abundant oil from Alberta's oil sands region and the Keystone XL pipeline that would deliver it - providing a powerful stimulus to the struggling U.S. economy - face determined opposition in America. It makes no sense to him that the U.S. might shun oil from a trusted ally. "We are so intertwined," he said.

Liepert spent time with our group of energy reporters and bloggers in Fort McMurray, the hub of Alberta's oil sands region. He warned that oil sands oil will have little trouble... more »

An illustration of the energy impasse in Washington - former U.S. Sen. Byron Dorgan, speaking last week during a "Conversations with Power" panel discussion at the Newseum:

"We are a country with 3 percent of the world's oil reserves, we're 5 percent of the population, we produce 10 percent of the world's oil and use over 20 percent of the world's oil. ... We need a new energy policy that makes us less vulnerable, less oil intensive. ... We're going to have to have a price on carbon. ... We're always going to need fossil energy and use fossil energy. We need to use it differently. We're too oil-centric. ... We could wake up some morning and discover that the energy with which we run our economy doesn't exist or the supply was interrupted and we'd be in big trouble."

Then there's the U.S. C... more »

Why not just wait? That's the administration's response to House legislation that would require a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline by Nov. 1. The administration says its Dec. 31 deadline is soon enough. But, considering the project's vast economic and energy benefits, here's a better question: Why wait any longer than necessary?

Why wait on jobs - 20,000 U.S. jobs during the 1,700-mile pipeline's construction phase alone? Why unnecessarily delay, by even a week, a $13 billion project the Canadian Energy Research Institute (CERI) says will help fully utilize Canada's oil sands - projected to support 600,000 new U.S. jobs by 2035 and more than $775 billion (Canadian dollars) in GDP from 2010 to 2035?

At the same time, why wait on bringing more oil from our No. 1 foreign supplier? Why unn... more »