Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: A shift in attitudes

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    18,424

    Default A shift in attitudes

    We've had several threads on the KXL pipeline, and the controversies, but it's been awhile. Current prices seemingly conspire against any perceived 'need' (and not enough money in it, to encourage more bullying for the pipeline), but also interesting that, despite (or perhaps because of) Trumps push to okay the pipeline, there's much less support and enthusiasm, even from the usual suspects. Renewables seem to be gaining evermore support, too.

    http://journalstar.com/opinion/colum...b771d53bf.html
    There's a lot of things they didn't tell me when I signed on with this outfit....

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    18,424

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    An excerpt:

    Nebraska is a conservative state. We appreciate sound and fair business practices.


    That’s why I oppose the Keystone XL pipeline. It is a bad investment. It is like investing in typewriters in the age of computers. Fossil fuels, like typewriters, are technologies of the past. Renewable energy is the technology of the future.


    Can you imagine signing any contract in perpetuity? That’s what TransCanada wants landowners to agree to. Does TransCanada have to accept responsibility and pay for any spill that might occur? The answer is no; they pay some -- but far from all costs.

    What happens if TransCanada goes bankrupt, sells to another company or abandons the pipeline? Who gets the bill? The landowners would bear the burden of renegotiating or decommissioning the pipeline. What if TransCanada decided to pump water instead of tar sands oil? Where might they get that water to send? From our cherished aquifer? Certainly, this would not be in Nebraska’s best interest.

    There's a lot of things they didn't tell me when I signed on with this outfit....

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    31,541

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    The bituminous muck isn't hardly economic to refine at $50/barrel, particularly with alternatives coming in at increasingly low prices. The new government in BC is also going to do its level best to prevent the building of any more pipeline capacity to Canadian ports, and while their arguments will be based on environmental reasons, the actual death of the pipeline projects will probably for economic reasons, as here.

    That said, my prior arguments still stand. Pipelines truly are the least dangerous way to move this material, for all that every method of transport involves spillage and environmental cost. And the countries most capable of detecting, stopping, and cleaning up pipeline spills tend to be rich ones, like Canada and the US. If we are to burn and otherwise profit from the use of this muck - which we are for the foreseeable future - then IMO it is incumbent on us not to offshore the environmental costs onto Nigeria or Venezuela or etc., where there will be no meaningful cleanup. It's analogous to buying clothes made in sweatshops.

    Though Canada would suffer for it, I wish that we'd just leave the stuff in the ground - the global transition to a non-petroleum economy can't come too soon.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    ottawa, canada
    Posts
    3,290

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    The demise of Keystone can't come too soon as far as I am concerned. I would like the pipeline to the Canadian East coast go ahead though.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    huntsville, al, usa
    Posts
    874

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    i don't think you'll ever be totally rid of petroleum. sure, you can get rid of petro-cars, but what are you going to drive them on? what are you going to put in their wheel bearings?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    46,052

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    If we're going to move oil over a particular (overland) route, a pipeline is still the least bad way to do it.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    31,541

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    Quote Originally Posted by bob winter View Post
    The demise of Keystone can't come too soon as far as I am concerned. I would like the pipeline to the Canadian East coast go ahead though.
    So would I. Though Keystone (from the perspective of the integrated North American petroleum refinery and distribution network) makes more sense.

    I think that we have reached the point that any major new petroleum infrastructure may be impossible to build. Partly because of the economics, and partly because of Supreme Court rulings respecting First Nations rights. Probably the same would be true for building a new version of the Trans Canada Highway too, or a railroad.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Marietta, GA
    Posts
    8,364

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    Quote Originally Posted by AlanMc View Post
    i don't think you'll ever be totally rid of petroleum. sure, you can get rid of petro-cars, but what are you going to drive them on? what are you going to put in their wheel bearings?
    Very true. I can envision driving an electric car to the airport very soon. I cannot however imagine a 420knot 160 passenger electric plane that will fly 1800 miles nonstop.
    Now if we can figure out a way around gravity...
    Fight Entropy, build a wooden boat!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Central MA
    Posts
    6,235

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    Sure, pipelines are better than rail or road. But unnecessary pipelines are a waste of resources and money. And unnecessary pipelines that disrupt lives and cultures are even worse.

    Is the XL pipeline necessary? It doesn't look like it.

    What's so funny about peace love & understanding?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    31,541

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    Not if we're willing to let Nigeria pay the environmental cost, no.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Kitty Hawk, NC
    Posts
    5,685

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianY View Post
    Sure, pipelines are better than rail or road. But unnecessary pipelines are a waste of resources and money. And unnecessary pipelines that disrupt lives and cultures are even worse.

    Is the XL pipeline necessary? It doesn't look like it.
    I believe the pipeline is privately owned and funded. As such it is not my right to determine how the resources and money are spent. Disrupting lives is what government does all the time. We all like the roads we drive on. Few care about any particular disruption.
    Life is complex.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    25,281

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    Quote Originally Posted by Reynard38 View Post
    Very true. I can envision driving an electric car to the airport very soon. I cannot however imagine a 420knot 160 passenger electric plane that will fly 1800 miles nonstop.
    Now if we can figure out a way around gravity...
    All the aliens use the earth's magnetic force field.
    "Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." - Alice

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Central MA
    Posts
    6,235

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    Quote Originally Posted by Too Little Time View Post
    I believe the pipeline is privately owned and funded. As such it is not my right to determine how the resources and money are spent.
    True. And as a privately owned and funded project, no public resources (money or land, for example) should be used in the construction of the pipeline. If private entities want to spend private money on a private project that requires no public funds or resources and which has no adverse effect on the public, then sure, they're free to spend their money however they want.

    However, if any public resources are involved and/or if there is a potential negative effect on some portion of the public, then the public has every right to be involved.


    Quote Originally Posted by Too Little Time View Post
    Disrupting lives is what government does all the time. We all like the roads we drive on. Few care about any particular disruption.
    2 points:

    1) There are significant differences between roads and other government-funded projects and private enterprises like this pipeline and you're smart enough to know that so I won;t insult you but enumerating some of them.

    2) Few care about any particular disruption ...except of course, for the people whose lives are disrupted. It might not be a big deal to folks in Kansas if my commute to work is disrupted by your construction project here in Boston, but you better believe it's a big deal to me and folks like me.

    What's so funny about peace love & understanding?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    41,740

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    Oh darn! Build that Pipeline DOnald!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Kitty Hawk, NC
    Posts
    5,685

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianY View Post
    However, if any public resources are involved and/or if there is a potential negative effect on some portion of the public, then the public has every right to be involved.


    2 points:

    1) There are significant differences between roads and other government-funded projects and private enterprises like this pipeline and you're smart enough to know that so I won;t insult you but enumerating some of them.

    2) Few care about any particular disruption ...except of course, for the people whose lives are disrupted. It might not be a big deal to folks in Kansas if my commute to work is disrupted by your construction project here in Boston, but you better believe it's a big deal to me and folks like me.
    I thought the public was involved. I will admit some people did not like the result of the public involvement or the result.

    I think the significant difference you might enumerate would be different than those I would enumerate. I would be more interested in both public and private projects complying with the legal requirements.

    I am less of a NIMBY than most. I am willing to make accommodations as necessary. I have not always been that way.
    Life is complex.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Alameda, CA
    Posts
    8,368

    Default Re: A shift in attitudes

    I seem to have lost Dennis Miller. Does anyone know where he went?

    The world's big and I want to have a good look at it before it gets dark.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •