Obama to block Keystone Pipeline

leftysergeant said:
Dude, we're down-stream from Alberta.
Click to expand...



Nope. Alberta drainage is East and North

leftysergeant said:
Non sequitur.
Click to expand...

No, just inconvenient for you

leftysergeant said:
There is a refinery in Michigan that can process the Canadian sludge.
Click to expand...

The product of oils sands is called Synthetic crude, and it's more or less equivalent to light sweet crude, which is why it's desirable to ship it to gulf coast refineries many of which can't handle much else.

leftysergeant said:
There is no excuse for shipping it across our water supply.
Click to expand...

There are already 10 thousand + of miles of pipeline over that water supply (it renews very very slowly so it's not exactly a sustainable supply to begin with). A few hundred more from a company with better that average safety record isn't likely to make much difference
 
NoahFence said:
The talking point's aren't "Look at the money we'll make" - it's "Look at the money we'll save" - by using this oil. Trouble is, the oil isn't meant for the US.
Click to expand...
Where are you seeing this talking point?
 
NoahFence said:
Roll your eyes all you want. I'm not privvy to internal memo's from my wife's company. I'm only privvy to her relaying them to me. I would think it's abundantly clear by now I'm no conspiracy theorist.
Click to expand...
Your wife's company covers up oil spills?
 
BenBurch said:
There are a lot of spills that make no press. We had a 40 gallon barrel of waste oil leak out and that required a full remediation, but it did not make the papers.
Click to expand...
OMG, we need to ban oil containers! They can leak!
 
WildCat said:
bikerdruid thinks oil production in Alberta will come to a halt if the pipeline isn't built.

Why did I have to explain this to you? You can't follow a conversation? :confused:
Click to expand...

You seem to believe that the pipeline will bring "free" oil to the USA.
 
BobTheDonkey said:
Here's a more general rundown of some oil pipeline spills in just the past year:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/10/b...safeguard-pipeline-system.html?pagewanted=all
Click to expand...
"While investigators have yet to determine the cause of either accident, the spills have drawn attention to oversight of the 167,000-mile system of hazardous liquid pipelines crisscrossing the country"

We already have 167,000 miles of pipelines, and this one is going to destroy the environment?

None of the spills cited were the aquifer-destroying events claimed by the hand-wringers. The Keystone pipeline doesn't add significantly more risk, and pipelines are far safer than transport by truck or train.
 
BobTheDonkey said:
Why is the plan to transport the crude instead of build a refinery in the North? Is there a particular reason that a new refinery couldn't be built?
Click to expand...
And then build dozens of pipelines (instead of one) to transport the refined petroleum products to market?

You're not thinking this through.
 
HoverBoarder said:
However, until we get serious about developing other viable alternatives to oil (like algae based fuels), than we will need oil, and it will just hurt us more to not have the Keystone pipeline.
Click to expand...
Then you will need a pipeline to transport the algae-based fuels.

What problem does this solve?
 
thaiboxerken said:
Well then, exactly why do you think we should have the pipeline?
Click to expand...
It's good for the economy and provides a reliable supply of oil from a friendly stable country that doesn't use oil profits to fund terrorism and build fundy Islamic schools all over the place that inspires more terrorists.
 
WildCat said:
It's good for the economy and provides a reliable supply of oil from a friendly stable country that doesn't use oil profits to fund terrorism and build fundy Islamic schools all over the place that inspires more terrorists.
Click to expand...

Since the oil that would be refined would be sold on the world market, can you explain how it's good for the USA economy and provides a reliable supply of oil?
 
thaiboxerken said:
And why would algae-based fuels need pipelines in the magnitude as oil pipelines?
Click to expand...
Because we'd need the same volume of them to replace oil? Or did you plan on running just a few dozen vehicles from this fuel?
 
WildCat said:
Because we'd need the same volume of them to replace oil? Or did you plan on running just a few dozen vehicles from this fuel?
Click to expand...

Seeing as how algae can be grown virtually anywhere, I don't see a need for long pipelines. The fuel can be made very close to the locality of where it's sold.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom