- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How is revoking the permit for the Keystone Pipeline Expansion good for the environment?
Posted on 1/21/21 at 1:50 pm to TotalPotato
Posted on 1/21/21 at 1:50 pm to TotalPotato
You could post the rest of the article:
So the concern you raise was pretext (since tons of other pipelines cross that aquifer). And they changed the route anyway. So, what’s the concern again?
quote:
In 2011, after opposition for laying the pipeline in this area, TransCanada agreed to change the route and skip the Sandhills,[102] even though pipeline industry spokesmen had maintained that existing pipelines carrying crude oil and refined liquid hydrocarbons have crossed over the Ogallala Aquifer for years in southeast Wyoming, eastern Colorado and New Mexico, western Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas.[133] The Pioneer crude oil pipeline crosses east-west across Nebraska, and the Pony Express pipeline, which crosses the Ogallala Aquifer in Colorado, Nebraska, and Kansas, was being converted as of 2013 from natural gas to crude oil, under a permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.[134]
So the concern you raise was pretext (since tons of other pipelines cross that aquifer). And they changed the route anyway. So, what’s the concern again?
0
Posted on 1/21/21 at 2:02 pm to TotalPotato
quote:
quote:
Since 2010, there were concerns that a pipeline spill could threaten the Ogallala Aquifer, one of the world's largest fresh water reserves. The Ogallala Aquifer spans eight states, provides drinking water for two million people, and supports $20 billion in agriculture.[128] Critics say that a major leak could ruin drinking water and devastate the mid-western U.S. economy.
At last count I believe there were already, thats already at least half a dozen pipelines that cross over this aquifer, all of which are much older and much more susceptible to leaks.
Wonder why wiki left that part out???????
Posted on 1/21/21 at 2:08 pm to RoosterCogburn585
How is your giving up hamburgers going to lower the temperature of the planet? It's all for show. None of it is supposed to actually do anything.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 2:20 pm to pistolpete23
It's just one part of an existing pipeline. Keystone has bern running for about 6 years. The XL is a shortcut that ran through the Bakken. Said pipeline would have hurt Burlington Northern . In reality, at any one time maybe about 400 people were actively working on it.
Follow the money. always follow the money. Environmental is just a ruse.
Follow the money. always follow the money. Environmental is just a ruse.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 2:46 pm to RoosterCogburn585
it's not about energy usage right now
it's about a literal plan to eliminate individual cars, most personal travel, and change the world completely into smart-city control grid where we will be inside a literal Truman Show control bubble.
it's about a literal plan to eliminate individual cars, most personal travel, and change the world completely into smart-city control grid where we will be inside a literal Truman Show control bubble.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 3:39 pm to RoosterCogburn585
I have a degree in Supply Chain Management. Transporting oil and gas by pipeline is by far the cheapest, safest, and most reliable way to do it. The drawback of course is that building the pipeline is extremely costly and time consuming. Keystone has been used as a political football by both sides for a decade now and it's just so tired and played out at this point.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 3:42 pm to RoosterCogburn585
It will increase carbon emissions seeing as now we have to get more oil shipped into the states from OPEC countries.
Keystone was good when obama needed jobs created around 2010-2015
2016 phase 4?
nah cuz, shut that shite down
Keystone was good when obama needed jobs created around 2010-2015
2016 phase 4?
nah cuz, shut that shite down
This post was edited on 1/21/21 at 3:43 pm
Posted on 1/21/21 at 3:42 pm to RoosterCogburn585
It’s outstanding if your goal is to cripple big oil, hamper the economy, and eventually offer socialism as the answer.
Posted on 1/21/21 at 7:26 pm to TheHarahanian
just talked to a buddy that works for TransCanada. He said the big problem for Biden is the Province of Alberta was funding this project, not TCE. Alberta was counting on 10,000+ new jobs being generated by this pipeline project.
Now the Governor of the Province of Alberta is pissed, he reached out to Trudeau, Trudeau is pissed and backing Alberta of course. Alberta and the Canadien Govt are threatening lawsuits etc
Now the Governor of the Province of Alberta is pissed, he reached out to Trudeau, Trudeau is pissed and backing Alberta of course. Alberta and the Canadien Govt are threatening lawsuits etc
This post was edited on 1/21/21 at 7:28 pm
Posted on 1/22/21 at 4:16 pm to TheHarahanian
The oil companies won't feel a thing from this. The oil will still flow to the Gulf Coast
Posted on 1/22/21 at 4:27 pm to RoosterCogburn585
quote:
To all the new lefties on the board, can you explain to me how revoking the permit for the Keystone Pipeline Expansion is actually good for the environment? We went from a method of transport which needs only electrically driven booster pumps where necessary to a method of transport that uses hundreds of "dirty" railcars or semi trucks? I thought electrical power was the gold standard in clean energy? I'll hang up and listen...
It's all theatre for the greenies and it doesn't seriously impact oil prices in the US.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News