Keystone Pipeline-Thoughts ?

harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3360
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Keystone Pipeline-Thoughts ?

There was much brewing about this issue on the news prior to the Paris attack. Thoughts on this one ? 

 

 www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30737766

 

 

US House passes controversial Keystone pipeline bill

The US House has passed a bill approving the construction of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline.

The Senate is expected to pass a similar bill soon, which President Barack Obama has said he will veto.

Earlier in the day, a court in Nebraska dismissed a case that would have stalled construction of the pipeline.

The project has been one of the most contentious issues between Mr Obama and Republicans who now lead Congress.

It is 1,179-mile (1,897km) extension of an existing pipeline that would bring additional oil from the tar sands of Alberta, Canada, to refining facilities near the Gulf of Mexico.

The bill was the first piece of major legislation to be introduced by the newly Republican-controlled Congress. It passed the House by a vote of 266-153, with 28 Democrats supporting the measure.

The Senate will consider a similar bill on Monday, which it will likely pass in the coming weeks.

The $5.4bn (£3.6bn) project was first introduced in 2008.

The bill is controversial because the tar sand oil that the pipeline will transport is said to be more polluting than other types of oil.

But an official environmental review released last year raised no major environmental objections to the pipeline's construction.

Many Republicans and some trade unions support the bill because they say it will generate jobs.

Because the pipeline would cross an international border, the state department has to grant a permit for its construction.

But in voting today, Congressional Republicans have set the stage to bypass this review process and allow construction to begin immediately.

Earlier in the week, the Obama administration said it opposes the bill because it "prevents the thorough consideration of complex issues that could bear on US national interests," and because of "uncertainty due to ongoing litigation in Nebraska."

On Friday morning, the Supreme Court in Nebraska dismissed the lawsuit on which Mr Obama's veto threat was party based.

"Today's ruling provides the perfect opportunity for the president to change his unproductive posture on this jobs project and reverse his veto threat," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said following the court's decision.

"The president now has every reason to sign it."

Despite passing, the bill failed to garner the two-thirds majority in the House that it would need in the future to override a presidential veto.

 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15494
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
 I have said it before,

 I have said it before, scientists are sounding the alarm bells and we even knew about the dangers of too much CO2 almost a century ago. I really do not give one fuck about any short term gains we might get out of it, and even if it was not simply burning more fuel, without causing polution it still is using rotary phone technology in an age of cell phones.

 

Oil does not want new tehcnology to replace it. On top of these fucks not giving a shit about what they do to the planet.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
I'm Canadian!!!!!!!!

So maybe I'm shooting my country in the foot with this comment. But Obama should VETO the bill. It's a great deal for Canada, our tarsands oil gets transported to refinery's at very little cost to Canada, there will be very little refining done in Texas, it's far cheaper to ship crude to China and let them refine it. None of the XL pipeline oil is destined for the USA market but American oil will make billions in trans shipping fees all for the cost of 40 to 50 permanent new jobs. The GOP will get more campaign money. Obama's VETO will be best for America.

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3696
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Oil does not

Brian37 wrote:

Oil does not want new tehcnology to replace it. On top of these fucks not giving a shit about what they do to the planet.

If gas is $10/gallon who is going to be hurt by this? The Koch brothers or the minimum wage workers you claim to care so much about?

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5402
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: I have said

Brian37 wrote:

 I have said it before, scientists are sounding the alarm bells and we even knew about the dangers of too much CO2 almost a century ago. I really do not give one fuck about any short term gains we might get out of it, and even if it was not simply burning more fuel, without causing polution it still is using rotary phone technology in an age of cell phones.

 

Oil does not want new tehcnology to replace it. On top of these fucks not giving a shit about what they do to the planet.

With or without the pipeline, the oil is still being produced and shipped using other means. A pipeline is very low impact transportation compared to semi trucks, trains and shipping tankers.

Although it is probably a moot point because many of the private investors are no longer interested due to the collapse in oil prices, thanks to American oil we get despite luddites like you. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out environmental impact is lower getting oil locally compared to shipping it around the world and paying terrorist funding thugs, who are now shitting their thwabs. 

Funny about how you rage over the 'little guy' while supporting the most oppressive and evil scumbags on the face of the planet by forcing high gas prices which hurt the poor the most. Your specific policy stands are completely opposite what your stated goals are. About time the women bashing, human trafficing, atheist killing, terrorist funding pieces of shit have their financial power stripped away from them. And about time we have oil at market prices instead of controlled by the cartel ran by said thugs.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 12919
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
As Beyond says, this oil is

As Beyond says, this oil is being produced regardless of who buys it. There's no logical reason for the US or Canada to prevent the pipeline from being constructed. The pipeline is much safer than rail, boat, or truck transportation, for communities and for the environment.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5402
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 The other problem is that

 The other problem is that no one has invented a viable alternative to gasoline for vehicles yet. Ethanol has turned out to actually cause more overall pollution. Electric relies on electricity, which is currently mostly coal in the US, plus the problems with having enough heavy metals to build the batteries required if everyone had one. For a small portion of the population using them might help a little, but if everyone in the country were to have one it would be very problematic.

Hybrids seem to be a viable solution to reduce gas consumption, but they still require gas. Natural gas, cooking oil, propane are all possibilities that one can use at the personal level, but if everyone in the country used the same source you start running into supply problems that can only be fixed with extensive environmental damage.

I consider myself an environmentalist, I spend more time in actual nature than 99.99% of the people I've ever met, it is where all of my hobbies are outside of gambling, drinking and the internet. I have an invested personal interest in it being as clean as possible. But the environmental movement today doesn't seem to have any actual regard for solutions. It is a kneejerk response to the big bad of today, without sitting down to develop any practical solutions. And you can't have a solution if it isn't practical AND cost effective.

The result is that they shoot down solutions that help a little because they aren't perfect and we end up using higher polluting methods because at the end of the day, Americans are going to drive their cars, turn on their lights, leave their computers on etc. (Even Brian) If it is a choice between high polluting energy and no energy, they will choose high polluting every time. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


RatDog
atheist
Posts: 571
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
Let me describe my dream EV

Let me describe my dream EV system. Electrify the railways. Nuclear powered ships. For roads I really like the eHighway idea (except with batteries).

http://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility/global/en/interurban-mobility/road-solutions/electric-powered-hgv-traffic-ehighway/the-ehighway-concept/pages/the-ehighway-concept.aspx

Convert all the major highways-ways  in populated areas to electric. Convert enough other highways so people and freight can travel between major population centers.  Have two classes of vehicles. One class would be large vehicles including freight. The right most lane would be reserved for this class. The other class would be smaller vehicles. All the other lanes would be for this class. In order to pay for it make them all toll roads. Vehicles will need RFID to identify them at various places and charge their account automatically. With this cars can have smaller batteries. Maybe only enough to get between ten and twenty miles. Slow charging stations all over the place would help as well.  All of this powered by nuclear.

 


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5402
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
RatDog wrote:Let me describe

RatDog wrote:

Let me describe my dream EV system. Electrify the railways. Nuclear powered ships. For roads I really like the eHighway idea (except with batteries).

http://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility/global/en/interurban-mobility/road-solutions/electric-powered-hgv-traffic-ehighway/the-ehighway-concept/pages/the-ehighway-concept.aspx

Convert all the major highways-ways  in populated areas to electric. Convert enough other highways so people and freight can travel between major population centers.  Have two classes of vehicles. One class would be large vehicles including freight. The right most lane would be reserved for this class. The other class would be smaller vehicles. All the other lanes would be for this class. In order to pay for it make them all toll roads. Vehicles will need RFID to identify them at various places and charge their account automatically. With this cars can have smaller batteries. Maybe only enough to get between ten and twenty miles. Slow charging stations all over the place would help as well.  All of this powered by nuclear.

 

Good luck building a single nuclear plant in the US.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


RatDog
atheist
Posts: 571
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Good

Beyond Saving wrote:

Good luck building a single nuclear plant in the US.

True, but I can still at least dream.


Jabberwocky
atheist
Posts: 411
Joined: 2012-04-21
User is offlineOffline
RatDog wrote:Let me describe

RatDog wrote:

Let me describe my dream EV system. Electrify the railways. Nuclear powered ships. For roads I really like the eHighway idea (except with batteries).

http://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility/global/en/interurban-mobility/road-solutions/electric-powered-hgv-traffic-ehighway/the-ehighway-concept/pages/the-ehighway-concept.aspx

Convert all the major highways-ways  in populated areas to electric. Convert enough other highways so people and freight can travel between major population centers.  Have two classes of vehicles. One class would be large vehicles including freight. The right most lane would be reserved for this class. The other class would be smaller vehicles. All the other lanes would be for this class. In order to pay for it make them all toll roads. Vehicles will need RFID to identify them at various places and charge their account automatically. With this cars can have smaller batteries. Maybe only enough to get between ten and twenty miles. Slow charging stations all over the place would help as well.  All of this powered by nuclear.

 

It would be great. I can't see why nobody has thought long term enough to do the railways yet.

 

As far as mass transit, it's too bad that "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" was loosely based on a true story (where the Judge won). While nobody can possibly predict what the result would have been otherwise, the fact remains that a large number of North American cities had some (mostly privately owned I understand) transit systems including streetcars, trams, etc., and they were systematically bought by a conglomerate owned in part by, among others, GM, Firestone, and Standard Oil (now known as Chevron) in order to dismantle them, and sell large amounts of GM diesel buses. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_City_Lines[/url] The company in question [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_New_Look_bus[/url] and the bus that everyone over the age of 5 has undoubtedly seen in virtually every city on the continent, made by (of course) GM. The city in which I live only retired their last GM new look in 2014 (although before the year was out, they retired all buses that required a set of stairs to enter, so good stuff I suppose!) 

While this didn't spell the end, it was responsible for what was probably a considerable loss of useable infrastructure for where we ultimately need to go. 

That said, I love driving cars. I'll hate the self-driving car, but I also don't even like the automatic transmission. My first non-manual car will almost certainly be electric motor driven (while I'll miss shifting, I won't miss torque peaking and dropping off). Whether I'm driving it or not...oh well. 

Theists - If your god is omnipotent, remember the following: He (or she) has the cure for cancer, but won't tell us what it is.


atomicdogg34
atheist
atomicdogg34's picture
Posts: 367
Joined: 2009-12-26
User is offlineOffline
Eh

The government shouldn't be involved either way. I don't want them to ban or subsidize it.

What gets me is that none of the anti-oil folks have come up with any system to really address the demands for justice in a situation involving pollution nor have they come up with a system that would actually cut pollution in any meaningful way.

On top of all that they fail to realize that if they banned oil and the like, or even cut it by a significant amount, hundreds of millions of people would more than likely be dead.