Bad News For the Keystone XL

[Howey]

Or wind farms. Ever see how wind farms fuck up birds and migration patterns? Not to mention the environmental cost of all the materials involved...

I never before heard this silliness. Did it come from Breitbart?

http://www.journalofappliedecology.o...choice492.html

[Howey]

Yes



1) Nothing is safe to the environment FOREVER, it has to be maintained

If the Pegasus pipeline wasn't maintained what guarantee do we have Keystone will be?

Yes




2) It does bring benefit to the US
3) It does create sustainable jobs at the US refineries in TX
4) Even if it were just temporary jobs, they would be temporary jobs at a time we desperately need jobs.
5) Almost all infrastructure development jobs are temporary...

Cite?

[Cancel 2016.2]

If the Pegasus pipeline wasn't maintained what guarantee do we have Keystone will be?

Well gee Howey, we have no guarantee that any of our infrastructure will be maintained. Pegasus was over 60 years old. Saying 'it wasn't maintained' is a bit of a stretch. There is only so much you can do to keep something together... eventually it has to be replaced. You know... like by building a new pipeline?

Cite?

Common sense.

1) Benefits to the US... revenues to the states for the pipelines, revenue to the refineries in TX, jobs at the refineries, jobs maintaining the pipelines

2) Jobs at the refineries are a given... the oil does not refine itself

3) Unemployment is still above 7.5%... so we do desperately need jobs, even if they only last a few years (in reality those are the perfect jobs for this environment)

4) Once a bridge/road etc... is built, the crews don't continue working on those projects... because they are done.

[Don Quixote]

lol... so because eventually (which can be anywhere from tomorrow-100 years in the future) it will have an accident, we shouldn't build it?

Planes eventually have accidents. So do auto's. So do buildings. Etc... nothing is meant to last forever. It is blatantly silly to pretend that because things eventually break down, we shouldn't build them to begin with.

in this case i think it will be sooner rather than later unless the pipe is coated with something to offset the corrosiveness of the 'oil'

[Don Quixote]

Yes



1) Nothing is safe to the environment FOREVER, it has to be maintained
2) It does bring benefit to the US
3) It does create sustainable jobs at the US refineries in TX
4) Even if it were just temporary jobs, they would be temporary jobs at a time we desperately need jobs.
5) Almost all infrastructure development jobs are temporary...

so jobs at any cost, i this is so, then why does not congress pass a jobs bill

oil companies have a bad reputation regarding maintenance of pipelines, come to think of it, they have a bad reputation period...their motto is 'trust us'

as for 1940's pipeline, maybe they built them better then, but documentation have you?

[Don Quixote]

Well gee Howey, we have no guarantee that any of our infrastructure will be maintained. Pegasus was over 60 years old. Saying 'it wasn't maintained' is a bit of a stretch. There is only so much you can do to keep something together... eventually it has to be replaced. You know... like by building a new pipeline?



Common sense.

1) Benefits to the US... revenues to the states for the pipelines, revenue to the refineries in TX, jobs at the refineries, jobs maintaining the pipelines

2) Jobs at the refineries are a given... the oil does not refine itself

3) Unemployment is still above 7.5%... so we do desperately need jobs, even if they only last a few years (in reality those are the perfect jobs for this environment)

4) Once a bridge/road etc... is built, the crews don't continue working on those projects... because they are done.

how can you cite common sense when it is so rare and profits so important...it is the bottom line each quarter that gives CEO's the big bucks

[Jarod]

The divelopment of alternative fuels have been dampered over a course of 75 years or so, by the oil industry. Once a system is in place... financial interests solidify and work to keep things are they are.

Slowly, those who stand to gain money by a change will build and push. Dont fool yourselves, in a Capitolist system, these things are not focused on whats in society's best interest, they are driven by who has the money to get things to be done the way they want them to be done.

[Cancel 2016.2]

in this case i think it will be sooner rather than later unless the pipe is coated with something to offset the corrosiveness of the 'oil'

Enlighten me on the corrosives of the oil and how fast that will occur. Also, do you think the oil companies have never transported such oil before?

[Cancel 2016.2]

so jobs at any cost, i this is so, then why does not congress pass a jobs bill

oil companies have a bad reputation regarding maintenance of pipelines, come to think of it, they have a bad reputation period...their motto is 'trust us'

as for 1940's pipeline, maybe they built them better then, but documentation have you?

Jobs at any cost? No.

Jobs that make sense, yes.

Given the amount of oil transported on an annual basis, I would say they have a done a damn good job with maintenance.

Documentation for what? When it was built?

[Cancel 2016.2]

how can you cite common sense when it is so rare and profits so important...it is the bottom line each quarter that gives CEO's the big bucks

How about you let me know which of the points you disagree with and why. Then we can discuss that.

[/MSG/]

in this case i think it will be sooner rather than later unless the pipe is coated with something to offset the corrosiveness of the 'oil'

Like chromium? A common alloy is modern steels?

?

[Phantasmal]

lol... so because eventually (which can be anywhere from tomorrow-100 years in the future) it will have an accident, we shouldn't build it?

Planes eventually have accidents. So do auto's. So do buildings. Etc... nothing is meant to last forever. It is blatantly silly to pretend that because things eventually break down, we shouldn't build them to begin with.

Build them, but choose the route that if there is a leak the least amount of damage will be incurred. You must also maintain them!

[Cancel 2016.2]

Build them, but choose the route that if there is a leak the least amount of damage will be incurred. You must also maintain them!

Agree with all of the above.

[Don Quixote]

Enlighten me on the corrosives of the oil and how fast that will occur. Also, do you think the oil companies have never transported such oil before?

i posted an article on the keystone pipeline on the app forum a week or two ago. it has the information that you want.

as for tar sand oil, no, to the best of my knowledge, it has not been used before. there is an extensive supply in Canada, but crude oil is what other petroleum companies deal with and it has a corrosiveness of its own (depending on the sulfur content). i think that Canada should refine the oil and ship the refinery output via pipelines or rail to the u s.

i do not know if the link to the article is still valid, however, i did a cut and paste and the information should still be there.

[Don Quixote]

How about you let me know which of the points you disagree with and why. Then we can discuss that.

let's start win #1, i think it should be refined in Canada and the refinery output shipped to the u s.