-
February 25th, 2015, 12:02 PM
#11
Good points there. I just hope it doesn't ruin habits and ecosystems as they are building it and hopefully there are never any leaks in the future.
Originally Posted by
terrym
Not at all. I see the alternaive of moving it by rail and truck as far more damaging to the environment. Pipelines once built don't emit carbon from diesel fumes. Pipelines aren't at the mercy of road conditions or incompetent drivers. Building replacement transport vehicles as they wear out also has an enormous footprint from mining for metals and other environmentally destructive parts. Once the trucks wear out not all is recycled and that has a footprint. Vehicles burn oil so if it isn't produced here that means it's imported from countries with barbaric human rights mostly. Any dollar we send to the middle East has a high likelihood of financing people who torture their own and want to destroy our way of life. Reducing the oil sands output will lessen supply and increase world prices as well as deprive us of tax money used to fund services like education and healthcare. I could keep going but I think you see where I stand on this.
-
February 25th, 2015 12:02 PM
# ADS
-
February 25th, 2015, 12:12 PM
#12
Originally Posted by
ryandir
Good points there. I just hope it doesn't ruin habits and ecosystems as they are building it and hopefully there are never any leaks in the future.
Never say never. Is it possible that there will be leaks? Absolutely. But the constant non stop incremental carbon footprint from other oil transport also impacts. It just does it silently and doesn't sell newspapers. But let's not kid ourselves it's still there. The research has proven that killing the pipeline won't help the environment at all. Opposition is based on emotion and ideology. Ironically those who hate the oil sands all consume it's product and benefit from it's tax revenue.
Last edited by terrym; February 25th, 2015 at 12:15 PM.
I’m suspicious of people who don't like dogs, but I trust a dog who doesn't like a person.
-
February 25th, 2015, 12:21 PM
#13
It is possible but the sensors in the pipeline will shut down the flow an instant a leak is detected to mitigate any damage.
-
February 25th, 2015, 01:45 PM
#14
Originally Posted by
ryandir
Good points there. I just hope it doesn't ruin habits and ecosystems as they are building it and hopefully there are never any leaks in the future.
http://www.timminspress.com/2015/02/...lment-says-tsb
pipes aren't the only thing that spills oil
You got one shot at life where are your sights aimed today ?
-
February 25th, 2015, 01:47 PM
#15
You got one shot at life where are your sights aimed today ?
-
February 25th, 2015, 01:50 PM
#16
I would call that derailment "an inconvenient truth". Interestingly it never really made much of a news story? Do you think if it was a pipeline it would have? Hhhmmm....
I’m suspicious of people who don't like dogs, but I trust a dog who doesn't like a person.
-
February 25th, 2015, 02:51 PM
#17
Funny how the left often likes to um….obscure... things 
Bascially for me it comes down to a few things.
1) Oil….Do we need it? Are you prepared to live without. If you answer no to the latter than……Cant have your cake an eat it to
2) Economics, logistics, transport options
3) etc
Start with oil and if you realize we are a long long long long way away from doing without...don't want oil being extracted here in Cda…"Nymbyism"…Not good here, better over seas?
And if your "really", really concerned about what we are doing to the planet. Put your $ where your procreative tools are. Don't have kids.
The more people = More urban sprawl
The more people = More electricity used
The More people = the more oil is needed
The more people = the more greenhouse gases and pollution
Probably do way more to reduce your individual footprint that way than any other...
Last edited by JBen; February 25th, 2015 at 03:05 PM.
-
February 25th, 2015, 03:03 PM
#18
One other add only because I know how important our streams are to some who are against…oil
Wilmot
http://www.citynews.ca/2014/12/16/ta...ear-newcastle/
-
February 25th, 2015, 03:29 PM
#19
Shall we bother bringing up the Lac Megantic disaster? I bet if you polled that town they would be in favor of pipelines.
I’m suspicious of people who don't like dogs, but I trust a dog who doesn't like a person.
-
February 25th, 2015, 04:32 PM
#20
Terry to me.
there are just no easy answers.
Oil is Oil and we are (who the foil knows) how long from reducing our dependency on it. So lets call spades spades and be ok with putting spades in the ground. All the teeth gnashing and hand wringing…won't change much.
Do I like the idea of a potential spill? No
But tankers do as much or more harm more often and to people.
Rail to…
Economically? Rail vs tankers vs pipelines
It's getting to the point we can't sneeze without segments throwing up barriers and noise.
Heres another thought. With the EU running out of space, water, maybe not now but in the not too distant future guess where they are coming?
Think wind farms are going to handle it?
Also, why is the same people who don't want to put spades in the ground have no problem tearing up huge footprints for wind farms?
And on
And on
And on
I am almost at the point where I'm simply going to ask those if they've gotten snipped and refused to have kids.Want to reduce your footprint today and tomorrow (their kids?)
How much laundry do kids require? Electricity? Oil? garbage and pollution?
Last edited by JBen; February 25th, 2015 at 04:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
