Oh man, really bummed to hear about this knowing how badly this kind of thing can harm an ecosystem.
These articles are excellent illustrations as to why it is important to cut our oil consumption (number one priority) and, as well, to work hard to create safer, cleaner sources of energy. And wherever and whenever possible, keep that energy localized. Any good, basic study of renewable energy will talk about the importance of localizing energy sources. Moving this toxic shit hundred and thousands of miles through a pipe is just not a wise move.
So what would be your best solution?
Several, PJFan:
Conserve. I wish I could say I were like Colin Beavan in his book No Impact Man. Beavan and his small family spent a year while living in NYC attempting to have as close to zero affect on the environment. This included having no trash, using no motorized vehicles (including elevators- his record for one day that year wash climbing 127 floors worth of stairs in order to go about his business), washable diapers for his baby, sustainable eating, etc. His point isn't that we should or can all do this, but he teaches us a lot about what we CAN do without. I work at this on a daily basis and make daily decisions with this question in mind: how can I get by on less? This covers a huge amount of the "what can we do to make a difference" question.
Eat locally: Non-local foods require far more energy than local fair.
Drive less/Ride share/ use public transportation. Walk or ride a horse, a bike or a Xootr Scooter.
Other ideas?
perhaps before we add more miles of pipeline, how about we take a comprehensive overhaul of the existing pipes for a start.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Ah, polling. You can get almost any result you want, you just need to structure the poll questions correctly. There is art as well as science involved in phrasing questions. I wish they had printed the entire list of questions, rather than just a couple. I'll look further and see if I can find the whole poll.
It's also important to keep in mind that the margin of error was close to 2% (1.8%). So that means 46% (actually, somewhere between 44 and 48%) "said they considered building energy infrastructure to be important to the economy, even if there was environmental impact", while 41% (actually, somewhere between 39% and 43%) felt the opposite, which means that the difference could be as small as 43% to 44% (or as large as 39% to 48%). In either case, no clear winner.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
A new internal government poll suggests a majority of Canadians believe the economic benefit of expanding the country's energy infrastructure trumps the potential environmental impact of such expansion.
Let me ask (because I love asking questions). "Internal government poll", exactly what is this? And who are they polling exactly? How many people? From what background?
That's the thing about polls. The media likes to use them to back up agendas and viewpoints of said media outlet because the reader tends to think that polls are more credible. Be wary whenever reading that "the polls" specify or choose anything. Because it's nothing but manipulation. Especially watch out for how often the media likes to use polls coming into the next presidential election. It's constant.
Here is an excellent article that clearly points how how the Keystone XL pipeline will not supply the US with oil, the fact that it is being pushed by TransCanada for their own profit, not America's interest and that, of course, this is a bad move for the environment. Some key points made here:
The reality is TransCanada needs to build this pipeline -- and a bunch of other pipelines to boot -- because only then will they be economically able to fully develop the tar sands. For TransCanada, the problem is simple: their product can't compete with the world oil market unless America gives them a way to move their product through our country.
TransCanada trumpeted the now commonly debunked promise that Keystone XL would create thousands of jobs for Americans. However, TransCanada's own consultant admitted this $8 billion dollar pipeline would only provide 35 permanent jobs. That's right -- 35 jobs in exchange for bearing all of the risk that a pipeline snaking across our communities would create.
It has been made abundantly clear by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that building the Keystone XL pipeline would significantly worsen carbon pollution -- failing the President's climate test.
Now is not the time for tired talking points and further misinformation. TransCanada can continue to make its empty promises and false arguments, but the facts remain the same: Keystone XL is a bad deal for America.
Instead of catering to their fossil fuel donors, our elected leaders in Congress should be focusing on the job-creating, clean energy policies that will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, strengthen our economy, and address climate change once and for all.
The next generation is counting on us to make the right decisions. Keystone XL is not one of them.
Tar sands activists in several states have been getting visits from the FBI, and no one knows yet exactly why.
Federal agents have been contacting activists who have participated in anti-Keystone XL and anti-tar sands protests, according to the Canadian Press. The visits have been happening to activists in Oregon, Washington state, and Idaho, and a lawyer working with the activists told the Canadian Press that he has advised them not to talk to the agents.
“It’s always the same line: ‘We’re not doing criminal investigations, you’re not accused of any crime. But we’re trying to learn more about the movement,'” he said.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
US is a police state.... Run by the Illuminati.
Bankers want the pipeline. The Shadow Government....OR
It was a Newfie in Fort Mac, John Parsons, who sicked the FBI on them. Only he was confused when he thought it was the "fucking big Indians".
"Lord tunderin jeezuz bye!" He said, "I wuz just tryin to scare dem a lil tis all!"
Asked for why he would do such a thing he responded....
"Who da fuck bye! Dis is our livelihood! We workin up here in FortMac and dem sons a bitches are talkin all that shit about us!"
not about keystone but its related to the overall conversation. At this very moment there is a rail car fire in Charleston West Virginia. Crude has spilled in the Kanawha River and several cars are on fire out of 109.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
this is one I want to follow. the how and why it happened. Seems to me that limiting the speeds of the trains can help. OR limit the number of cars. But I cant really say what idf anything needs to happen without knowing details.
With trucks and liquid carrying trailers there is a surge effect when slowing rapidly, or curves taken too fast. I expect it can be worse with 100+ tank rail cars unless the individual tanks are baffled inside with several bulkheads to limit the amount of motion inside.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
What's mostly sad about this is that it happened at all. But what's also sad about this is that XL pipeline backers will probably start screaming about how much safer pipelines are than rail. The irony here is that,besides walking, bicycles and pack animals, railroads are the most efficient method of transporting people and good. And add to the the fact that we have allowed our rail system to fall into ruin. It's also true that the tank cars that contain oil are themselves unsafe and/or poorly constructed. Back in 1991 federal rail officials stated that two-thirds of the tank cars used to carry crude oil were considered a "substantial danger to life, property, and the environment".*
For several reasons, we would be very, very wise to upgrade and restore our rail system. But beyond that we would be even more wise to end this outdated, dangerous and foolish addiction to oil.
The Lac-Mégantic rail disaster occurred in the town of Lac-Mégantic, located in the Eastern Townships of the Canadian province of Quebec, at approximately 01:15 EDT on July 6, 2013, when an unattended 74-car freight train carrying Bakken formation crude oil ran away and derailed, resulting in the fire and explosion of multiple tank cars. Forty-two people were confirmed dead, with five more missing and presumed dead. More than 30 buildings in the town's centre, roughly half of the downtown area, were destroyed and all but three of the thirty-nine remaining downtown buildings are to be demolished due to petroleum contamination of the townsite.[9] Initial newspaper reports described a 1-kilometre blast radius.
Has a pipeline explosion of crude oil ever killed 47 people?
The Lac-Mégantic rail disaster occurred in the town of Lac-Mégantic, located in the Eastern Townships of the Canadian province of Quebec, at approximately 01:15 EDT on July 6, 2013, when an unattended 74-car freight train carrying Bakken formation crude oil ran away and derailed, resulting in the fire and explosion of multiple tank cars. Forty-two people were confirmed dead, with five more missing and presumed dead. More than 30 buildings in the town's centre, roughly half of the downtown area, were destroyed and all but three of the thirty-nine remaining downtown buildings are to be demolished due to petroleum contamination of the townsite.[9] Initial newspaper reports described a 1-kilometre blast radius.
Has a pipeline explosion of crude oil ever killed 47 people?
No. But that does not change a thing about what I said above.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
If you understood some of the fallout, the PTSD some of the survivors are living through, you would be a realist and admit, oil is not going away. The safest way to transport it is through pipeline because nothing, nothing is more sacred and important than human life. Someday Brian, oil will be obsolete, until then we must move this commodity in the safest way possible. Please read about Lac Megantic. The railways are a disaster here as well. Once the government privatized our railways and they became property of (mostly) American investors, the number of derailments is on average one per day in Canada. Research Lac Megantic, see how human error and the rail companies saving a few dollars changed the lives of everyone in a small town in an instant. I am pretty sure you would rethink your rather abrupt and callous response. Does it change what you said? Maybe not. Perhaps it should make you stop and think if that happened to your town, or your family, would you be so quick to be anti-pipeline?
If you understood some of the fallout, the PTSD some of the survivors are living through, you would be a realist and admit, oil is not going away. The safest way to transport it is through pipeline because nothing, nothing is more sacred and important than human life. Someday Brian, oil will be obsolete, until then we must move this commodity in the safest way possible. Please read about Lac Megantic. The railways are a disaster here as well. Once the government privatized our railways and they became property of (mostly) American investors, the number of derailments is on average one per day in Canada. Research Lac Megantic, see how human error and the rail companies saving a few dollars changed the lives of everyone in a small town in an instant. I am pretty sure you would rethink your rather abrupt and callous response. Does it change what you said? Maybe not. Perhaps it should make you stop and think if that happened to your town, or your family, would you be so quick to be anti-pipeline?
Food for thought.
I'm sorry for coming across as abrupt and callous, 1ThoughtKnown. I admit I don't have much patience with this issue. I'm certainly not callous or uncaring about the loss of life.
It's true we all use oil but arguing about how to transport seems futile to me. We need to lessen out dependence on oil- not "someday". We need to do it now. We need to ask questions like, How many no-drive days do you take? How often do you car pool? Do you use public transit? Have you reduced your consumption and do you strive to buy the most durable goods you can when you do consume? Do you share goods? Are you driving an SUV when an economy car meets your needs just as well? Do you minimize your use of plastic? Do you take cloth bags to the grocery store? Do you rinse and reuse plastic bags over and over as often as possible? etc., etc. We consume-- and thus transport-- way more oil than we need to. And there are alternatives that are much safer (see the "Welcome to the New Hemp Era" thread).
Neither pipelines not train transport of oil is the answer. Building further infrastructure to keep us in the oil loop will only lead to more problems. If we remain addicted to oil much longer the deaths you mentioned from that explosion will seem trivial and relatively insignificant compared to the massive loss of human and other species life that is and will continue as a result of our consumption of oil. That's the issue as far as I see it and my feeling on this are anything but un-compassionate. Why should I care? I'll be dead before this shit hits the fan. But my kids and yours will not be so let's get busy and fix this mess.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I was taught growing up that things are never as bad as they seem, nor are they ever as good.
The former co-founder of Greenpeace himself removed himself from the enviro looney bin because it became a business, no better than oil. You maybe eating up the left wing propaganda about the environment but I am not. There is no way I can trust anything with a political agenda. And yes this is al, political. Climate change is its own industry. Perpetuating this story is a billion dollar indistry
Again, climate change is its own political agenda because we let it be one. Let's be civil here. I am 100% against a pipeline and don't enjoy seeing anyone berate anyone else for being against it as well. So knock it off, 1thought. Keep in mind that the right wing, the Conservatives, were all about conserving the environment, until GW Bush got into office. It's what republicans were about until they made global warming political because they were in bed with the fossil fuel industry. And you can argue it forever, but that's what this is all about. Appeasing lobbyists.
I was taught growing up that things are never as bad as they seem, nor are they ever as good.
The former co-founder of Greenpeace himself removed himself from the enviro looney bin because it became a business, no better than oil. You maybe eating up the left wing propaganda about the environment but I am not. There is no way I can trust anything with a political agenda. And yes this is al, political. Climate change is its own industry. Perpetuating this story is a billion dollar indistry
A billion dollar industry lol. That isn't much of an industry. Payday lending is a billion dollar industry. Adult diapers is a billion dollar industry. It's obvious who stands to profit billions from protecting fossil fuels, please enlighten us who stands to profit billions from "perpetuating this story"? I have seen this claim again and again, and yet, I have never seen the money trail that would make it a legitimate claim.
Since there is so much info of fatalities and injuries on this page, I can't copy and paste because it's over the word limit. 47 people is laughable, compared to the real numbers...
1 event in Nigeria: 1998: At Jesse in the Niger Delta in Nigeria, a petroleum pipeline exploded killing about 1200 villagers, some of whom were scavenging gasoline. The worst of several similar incidents in this country.[15] (October 17, 1998)
I was taught growing up that things are never as bad as they seem, nor are they ever as good.
The former co-founder of Greenpeace himself removed himself from the enviro looney bin because it became a business, no better than oil. You maybe eating up the left wing propaganda about the environment but I am not. There is no way I can trust anything with a political agenda. And yes this is al, political. Climate change is its own industry. Perpetuating this story is a billion dollar indistry
1T, interesting that you bring up Greenpeace and the co-founder who left that organization because it became a business. Are you referring to Greenpeace co-founder Paul Watson? If so, allow me to clarify: Watson did not leave Greenpeace because that organization became "a business, no better than oil". He left Greenpeace because it became a bureaucracy . You can read about that in his book, Sea Shepherd, My Fight for Whales & Seals. While you're at it, you might want to check out his other excellent book, Earthforce! An Earth Warrior's Guide to Strategy, 2nd Edition in which Captain Watson explains very clearly how we work to save ecosystems and biodiversity. Call that political if you like. I call it activism.
By the way, I followed Captain Watson away from Greenpeace myself this year by terminating my Greenpeace membership and opting instead to focus on being an earth warrior, forsaking bureaucracy for action. THAT is what I'm eating up.
But I don't know if any of this means a hill of beans to you 1T. I get the sense you come here to argue rather than discuss. If the that's the case, have the last word and then let's just say, "adios amigo!"
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I wrote a whole big thing and deleted it. All of your closed mindedness is starting to bore me anyways. So you are all "better" than me. LOL. None of you really know me, but in a free society I am entitled to my own view. If you don't want push back, dont put it in a public forum. I've been through this before, if you aren't left you aren't right. If you aren't an environmentalist you are a denier. If you don't believe in climate change you are ignorant. I am a realist, part of my work is the environment. It is realy amazing to me that instead of just enjoying how GREAT your life is with all of the luxuries afforded us in modern society, you can lay blame at the oil companies for everything WRONG with the world. I wish the developing nations could have what we have, that is my dream. Yours is an oil free world, so be it
BTW Keystone Phases I, II, III are already complete. Phase IV is simply a bigger pipe on a shorter distance from Hardisty AB to Steele City. Oil is already going there, this is all about efficiency and the need for heavy crude in the refineries of the Gulf Coast. I leave you with this, as I will not disturb your little party anymore:
As the UN-sponsored climate change conference in Lima, Peru drew to a close in mid-December, a poll by the United Nations and associated organizations showed millions of respondents around the world had little interest in action to address climate change.
Of the 16 priorities from which respondents could choose, “Action Taken on Climate Change” finished dead last.
The poll was conducted by My World, a United Nation global survey unit. “Working with partners,” My World’s website explained, “we aim to capture people’s voices, priorities and views, so world leaders can be informed as they begin the process of defining the next set of global goals to end poverty.” In addition to UN funding, My World is supported by the Overseas Development Institute and Ipsos MORI, a leading market research company in the UK.
Priority Rankings
As of Dec. 25, the survey had received opinions of more than 7 million respondents from 195 countries. The respondents’ top priority was “a good education,”
The rankings in terms of highest priority to lowest were: A Good Education (4,695,890); Better Healthcare (3,955,748); Better Job Opportunities (3,806,014); An Honest and Responsive Government (3,219,620); Affordable and Nutritious Food (2,846,323); Protection Against Crime and Violence (2,735,432); Access to Clean Water and Sanitation (2,608,928); Support for People Who Can’t Work (2,339,940); Better Transport and Roads (2,246,193); Equality Between Men and Women (2,229,670); Reliable Energy at Home (2,124,244); Freedom from Discrimination and Persecution (1,975,007); Political Freedom (1,962,912); Protecting Forests, Rivers, and Oceans (1,779,040); Phone and Internet Access (1,730,721); and, in last place, Action Taken on Climate Change (1,416,167)
Action Taken on Climate Change received more than 300,000 fewer votes than Access to Telephone and Internet. Because most of the 195 countries represented in the survey are economically underdeveloped, it is arguably unsurprising that priorities such as better job opportunities and access to clean water and reliable energy at home were seen as more important than dealing with climate change.
Commenting on the rankings, Paul Driessen, a senior policy advisor with the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow in Washington, DC, said, “It’s last on the list because people know climate-change programs will undermine all the other imperatives. They would keep people trapped in poverty, misery, disease, and early death because the only way out requires hydrocarbons for reliable, affordable electricity and motor fuels. Decent education, healthcare, jobs, food, clean water, and sanitation would be out of reach if people are forced to rely on wind, solar, and biofuels. Even environmental quality would suffer, because bans on fossil fuels would force people to turn more wildlife habitats into fuel.
“In a nutshell,” Driessen said, “'climate action’ would give UN and rich-country bureaucrats the power to tell the world’s poor, ‘Sorry, you can’t have the living standards we enjoy, because that would hurt the climate.’
I wrote a whole big thing and deleted it. All of your closed mindedness is starting to bore me anyways. So you are all "better" than me. LOL. None of you really know me, but in a free society I am entitled to my own view. If you don't want push back, dont put it in a public forum. I've been through this before, if you aren't left you aren't right. If you aren't an environmentalist you are a denier. If you don't believe in climate change you are ignorant. I am a realist, part of my work is the environment. It is realy amazing to me that instead of just enjoying how GREAT your life is with all of the luxuries afforded us in modern society, you can lay blame at the oil companies for everything WRONG with the world. I wish the developing nations could have what we have, that is my dream. Yours is an oil free world, so be it
BTW Keystone Phases I, II, III are already complete. Phase IV is simply a bigger pipe on a shorter distance from Hardisty AB to Steele City. Oil is already going there, this is all about efficiency and the need for heavy crude in the refineries of the Gulf Coast. I leave you with this, as I will not disturb your little party anymore:
As the UN-sponsored climate change conference in Lima, Peru drew to a close in mid-December, a poll by the United Nations and associated organizations showed millions of respondents around the world had little interest in action to address climate change.
Of the 16 priorities from which respondents could choose, “Action Taken on Climate Change” finished dead last.
The poll was conducted by My World, a United Nation global survey unit. “Working with partners,” My World’s website explained, “we aim to capture people’s voices, priorities and views, so world leaders can be informed as they begin the process of defining the next set of global goals to end poverty.” In addition to UN funding, My World is supported by the Overseas Development Institute and Ipsos MORI, a leading market research company in the UK.
Priority Rankings
As of Dec. 25, the survey had received opinions of more than 7 million respondents from 195 countries. The respondents’ top priority was “a good education,”
The rankings in terms of highest priority to lowest were: A Good Education (4,695,890); Better Healthcare (3,955,748); Better Job Opportunities (3,806,014); An Honest and Responsive Government (3,219,620); Affordable and Nutritious Food (2,846,323); Protection Against Crime and Violence (2,735,432); Access to Clean Water and Sanitation (2,608,928); Support for People Who Can’t Work (2,339,940); Better Transport and Roads (2,246,193); Equality Between Men and Women (2,229,670); Reliable Energy at Home (2,124,244); Freedom from Discrimination and Persecution (1,975,007); Political Freedom (1,962,912); Protecting Forests, Rivers, and Oceans (1,779,040); Phone and Internet Access (1,730,721); and, in last place, Action Taken on Climate Change (1,416,167)
Action Taken on Climate Change received more than 300,000 fewer votes than Access to Telephone and Internet. Because most of the 195 countries represented in the survey are economically underdeveloped, it is arguably unsurprising that priorities such as better job opportunities and access to clean water and reliable energy at home were seen as more important than dealing with climate change.
Commenting on the rankings, Paul Driessen, a senior policy advisor with the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow in Washington, DC, said, “It’s last on the list because people know climate-change programs will undermine all the other imperatives. They would keep people trapped in poverty, misery, disease, and early death because the only way out requires hydrocarbons for reliable, affordable electricity and motor fuels. Decent education, healthcare, jobs, food, clean water, and sanitation would be out of reach if people are forced to rely on wind, solar, and biofuels. Even environmental quality would suffer, because bans on fossil fuels would force people to turn more wildlife habitats into fuel.
“In a nutshell,” Driessen said, “'climate action’ would give UN and rich-country bureaucrats the power to tell the world’s poor, ‘Sorry, you can’t have the living standards we enjoy, because that would hurt the climate.’
THAT IS A CRIME.
Humanity as we know it is on a short timer!
"I wish the developing nations could have what we have, that is my dream." That is so impossible it's almost funny. It is us having such excess that keeps them from having the basic necessities.
"I wish the developing nations could have what we have, that is my dream." That is so impossible it's almost funny. It is us having such excess that keeps them from having the basic necessities.
I think... no, I know you're absolutely right, Mr. Gambs. There's no way 7 plus billion people can live the way we do in the developed countries. That being the case, I'm thinking the near future choices really come down to a) having a Soylant Green scenario where a few people of the 7 plus billion live in great wealth and every body else lives a short life in super-poverty or b) all 7 plus billion of us live a very simple near-poverty line life or c) the population is reduced quickly enough such that a few to several million people live like the average American does now or d) we all die.
We'll either choose or lose.
1T-- Sorry to bore you. Adios Amigo!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
"I wish the developing nations could have what we have, that is my dream."
I wish those in developing nations had clean water to drink and aid for those in poverty as well as decent medical treatment. That's my dream.
That's an excellent dream, bsL.
Looking back at the four scenarios I sketched out a couple of posts above, I wish someone would counter that with a solution that would allow 7 or 8 billion people to live comfortably and be happy. I really am not a prophet of doom. Imagine 7 or 8 happy, well fed, clothed and sheltered humans! The possibilities for new friendships and new music and great sharing would be almost endless! I would love that. Wouldn't we all? But the Keystone XL pipeline is completely the wrong ass-backwards way to get there.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
From reading the American news I gather that because a lame duck can do what it wants it will. The Republican majority congress expected this veto as part of the gears to grind.
Comments
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
It's also important to keep in mind that the margin of error was close to 2% (1.8%). So that means 46% (actually, somewhere between 44 and 48%) "said they considered building energy infrastructure to be important to the economy, even if there was environmental impact", while 41% (actually, somewhere between 39% and 43%) felt the opposite, which means that the difference could be as small as 43% to 44% (or as large as 39% to 48%). In either case, no clear winner.
Let me ask (because I love asking questions). "Internal government poll", exactly what is this? And who are they polling exactly? How many people? From what background?
That's the thing about polls. The media likes to use them to back up agendas and viewpoints of said media outlet because the reader tends to think that polls are more credible. Be wary whenever reading that "the polls" specify or choose anything. Because it's nothing but manipulation. Especially watch out for how often the media likes to use polls coming into the next presidential election. It's constant.
The reality is TransCanada needs to build this pipeline -- and a bunch of other pipelines to boot -- because only then will they be economically able to fully develop the tar sands. For TransCanada, the problem is simple: their product can't compete with the world oil market unless America gives them a way to move their product through our country.
TransCanada trumpeted the now commonly debunked promise that Keystone XL would create thousands of jobs for Americans. However, TransCanada's own consultant admitted this $8 billion dollar pipeline would only provide 35 permanent jobs. That's right -- 35 jobs in exchange for bearing all of the risk that a pipeline snaking across our communities would create.
It has been made abundantly clear by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that building the Keystone XL pipeline would significantly worsen carbon pollution -- failing the President's climate test.
Now is not the time for tired talking points and further misinformation. TransCanada can continue to make its empty promises and false arguments, but the facts remain the same: Keystone XL is a bad deal for America.
Instead of catering to their fossil fuel donors, our elected leaders in Congress should be focusing on the job-creating, clean energy policies that will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, strengthen our economy, and address climate change once and for all.
The next generation is counting on us to make the right decisions. Keystone XL is not one of them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-steyer/transcanada-cant-change-facts-about-keystone-xl_b_6626340.html
Hahaha! Excellent!!
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/02/09/3620703/tar-sands-fbi-visits/
Tar sands activists in several states have been getting visits from the FBI, and no one knows yet exactly why.
Federal agents have been contacting activists who have participated in anti-Keystone XL and anti-tar sands protests, according to the Canadian Press. The visits have been happening to activists in Oregon, Washington state, and Idaho, and a lawyer working with the activists told the Canadian Press that he has advised them not to talk to the agents.
“It’s always the same line: ‘We’re not doing criminal investigations, you’re not accused of any crime. But we’re trying to learn more about the movement,'” he said.
Bankers want the pipeline. The Shadow Government....OR
It was a Newfie in Fort Mac, John Parsons, who sicked the FBI on them. Only he was confused when he thought it was the "fucking big Indians".
"Lord tunderin jeezuz bye!" He said, "I wuz just tryin to scare dem a lil tis all!"
Asked for why he would do such a thing he responded....
"Who da fuck bye! Dis is our livelihood! We workin up here in FortMac and dem sons a bitches are talkin all that shit about us!"
http://news.yahoo.com/csx-oil-train-derails-west-virginia-14-cars-202837645--finance.html
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
With trucks and liquid carrying trailers there is a surge effect when slowing rapidly, or curves taken too fast. I expect it can be worse with 100+ tank rail cars unless the individual tanks are baffled inside with several bulkheads to limit the amount of motion inside.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
For several reasons, we would be very, very wise to upgrade and restore our rail system. But beyond that we would be even more wise to end this outdated, dangerous and foolish addiction to oil.
*http://cleanharbor.blogspot.com/2014/12/oil-trains-unsafe-unnecessary-and.html
Has a pipeline explosion of crude oil ever killed 47 people?
Someday Brian, oil will be obsolete, until then we must move this commodity in the safest way possible.
Please read about Lac Megantic. The railways are a disaster here as well. Once the government privatized our railways and they became property of (mostly) American investors, the number of derailments is on average one per day in Canada.
Research Lac Megantic, see how human error and the rail companies saving a few dollars changed the lives of everyone in a small town in an instant.
I am pretty sure you would rethink your rather abrupt and callous response. Does it change what you said? Maybe not. Perhaps it should make you stop and think if that happened to your town, or your family, would you be so quick to be anti-pipeline?
Food for thought.
It's true we all use oil but arguing about how to transport seems futile to me. We need to lessen out dependence on oil- not "someday". We need to do it now. We need to ask questions like, How many no-drive days do you take? How often do you car pool? Do you use public transit? Have you reduced your consumption and do you strive to buy the most durable goods you can when you do consume? Do you share goods? Are you driving an SUV when an economy car meets your needs just as well? Do you minimize your use of plastic? Do you take cloth bags to the grocery store? Do you rinse and reuse plastic bags over and over as often as possible? etc., etc. We consume-- and thus transport-- way more oil than we need to. And there are alternatives that are much safer (see the "Welcome to the New Hemp Era" thread).
Neither pipelines not train transport of oil is the answer. Building further infrastructure to keep us in the oil loop will only lead to more problems. If we remain addicted to oil much longer the deaths you mentioned from that explosion will seem trivial and relatively insignificant compared to the massive loss of human and other species life that is and will continue as a result of our consumption of oil. That's the issue as far as I see it and my feeling on this are anything but un-compassionate. Why should I care? I'll be dead before this shit hits the fan. But my kids and yours will not be so let's get busy and fix this mess.
The former co-founder of Greenpeace himself removed himself from the enviro looney bin because it became a business, no better than oil.
You maybe eating up the left wing propaganda about the environment but I am not. There is no way I can trust anything with a political agenda. And yes this is al, political.
Climate change is its own industry. Perpetuating this story is a billion dollar indistry
It's obvious who stands to profit billions from protecting fossil fuels, please enlighten us who stands to profit billions from "perpetuating this story"?
I have seen this claim again and again, and yet, I have never seen the money trail that would make it a legitimate claim.
Since there is so much info of fatalities and injuries on this page, I can't copy and paste because it's over the word limit. 47 people is laughable, compared to the real numbers...
1 event in Nigeria: 1998: At Jesse in the Niger Delta in Nigeria, a petroleum pipeline exploded killing about 1200 villagers, some of whom were scavenging gasoline. The worst of several similar incidents in this country.[15] (October 17, 1998)
By the way, I followed Captain Watson away from Greenpeace myself this year by terminating my Greenpeace membership and opting instead to focus on being an earth warrior, forsaking bureaucracy for action. THAT is what I'm eating up.
But I don't know if any of this means a hill of beans to you 1T. I get the sense you come here to argue rather than discuss. If the that's the case, have the last word and then let's just say, "adios amigo!"
I've been through this before, if you aren't left you aren't right. If you aren't an environmentalist you are a denier. If you don't believe in climate change you are ignorant.
I am a realist, part of my work is the environment. It is realy amazing to me that instead of just enjoying how GREAT your life is with all of the luxuries afforded us in modern society, you can lay blame at the oil companies for everything WRONG with the world.
I wish the developing nations could have what we have, that is my dream. Yours is an oil free world, so be it
BTW Keystone Phases I, II, III are already complete. Phase IV is simply a bigger pipe on a shorter distance from Hardisty AB to Steele City. Oil is already going there, this is all about efficiency and the need for heavy crude in the refineries of the Gulf Coast. I leave you with this, as I will not disturb your little party anymore:
As the UN-sponsored climate change conference in Lima, Peru drew to a close in mid-December, a poll by the United Nations and associated organizations showed millions of respondents around the world had little interest in action to address climate change.
Of the 16 priorities from which respondents could choose, “Action Taken on Climate Change” finished dead last.
The poll was conducted by My World, a United Nation global survey unit. “Working with partners,” My World’s website explained, “we aim to capture people’s voices, priorities and views, so world leaders can be informed as they begin the process of defining the next set of global goals to end poverty.” In addition to UN funding, My World is supported by the Overseas Development Institute and Ipsos MORI, a leading market research company in the UK.
Priority Rankings
As of Dec. 25, the survey had received opinions of more than 7 million respondents from 195 countries. The respondents’ top priority was “a good education,”
The rankings in terms of highest priority to lowest were: A Good Education (4,695,890); Better Healthcare (3,955,748); Better Job Opportunities (3,806,014); An Honest and Responsive Government (3,219,620); Affordable and Nutritious Food (2,846,323); Protection Against Crime and Violence (2,735,432); Access to Clean Water and Sanitation (2,608,928); Support for People Who Can’t Work (2,339,940); Better Transport and Roads (2,246,193); Equality Between Men and Women (2,229,670); Reliable Energy at Home (2,124,244); Freedom from Discrimination and Persecution (1,975,007); Political Freedom (1,962,912); Protecting Forests, Rivers, and Oceans (1,779,040); Phone and Internet Access (1,730,721); and, in last place, Action Taken on Climate Change (1,416,167)
Action Taken on Climate Change received more than 300,000 fewer votes than Access to Telephone and Internet. Because most of the 195 countries represented in the survey are economically underdeveloped, it is arguably unsurprising that priorities such as better job opportunities and access to clean water and reliable energy at home were seen as more important than dealing with climate change.
Commenting on the rankings, Paul Driessen, a senior policy advisor with the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow in Washington, DC, said, “It’s last on the list because people know climate-change programs will undermine all the other imperatives. They would keep people trapped in poverty, misery, disease, and early death because the only way out requires hydrocarbons for reliable, affordable electricity and motor fuels. Decent education, healthcare, jobs, food, clean water, and sanitation would be out of reach if people are forced to rely on wind, solar, and biofuels. Even environmental quality would suffer, because bans on fossil fuels would force people to turn more wildlife habitats into fuel.
“In a nutshell,” Driessen said, “'climate action’ would give UN and rich-country bureaucrats the power to tell the world’s poor, ‘Sorry, you can’t have the living standards we enjoy, because that would hurt the climate.’
THAT IS A CRIME.
"I wish the developing nations could have what we have, that is my dream."
That is so impossible it's almost funny. It is us having such excess that keeps them from having the basic necessities.
We'll either choose or lose.
1T-- Sorry to bore you. Adios Amigo!
I wish those in developing nations had clean water to drink and aid for those in poverty as well as decent medical treatment. That's my dream.
Looking back at the four scenarios I sketched out a couple of posts above, I wish someone would counter that with a solution that would allow 7 or 8 billion people to live comfortably and be happy. I really am not a prophet of doom. Imagine 7 or 8 happy, well fed, clothed and sheltered humans! The possibilities for new friendships and new music and great sharing would be almost endless! I would love that. Wouldn't we all? But the Keystone XL pipeline is completely the wrong ass-backwards way to get there.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
The Republican majority congress expected this veto as part of the gears to grind.