Rejecting the Keystone pipeline is an act of insanity

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by DonGlock26, Jan 20, 2012.

  1. Never Left

    Never Left Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    30,220
    Likes Received:
    410
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I prefer stupidity because it is more factual and easier to substantiate. But insanity works too.
     
  2. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And I keep asking you when did the unemployment problem go away so that the pipeline opponents can afford to turn down any honest jobs for Americans who want to work?

    But of course Obama will give them government handouts which for most Obama voters is even better than work.
     
  3. JamesDF

    JamesDF Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Overall the pipeline has negative impact on GDP and employment
     
  4. theunbubba

    theunbubba Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    Messages:
    17,892
    Likes Received:
    307
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It's not just insanity. It's treason.
     
  5. BroncoBilly

    BroncoBilly Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    Messages:
    29,824
    Likes Received:
    355
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Please post your evidence of that?
     
  6. theunbubba

    theunbubba Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    Messages:
    17,892
    Likes Received:
    307
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Back that assertion up with real proof.
     
  7. BroncoBilly

    BroncoBilly Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    Messages:
    29,824
    Likes Received:
    355
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I guess $7 billion is just chump change to guys like James.
     
  8. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Don't be silly James.

    No one is going to believe that nonsense.
     
  9. fiddlerdave

    fiddlerdave Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    19,083
    Likes Received:
    2,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sadly, the "dry ground" THIS pipeline seems to target includes huge aquifer access and protected wetlands.

    The oil companies tried to ram it through without any compromise on their "cheapest route", no matter HOW damaging that could be to the USA!
     
  10. Never Left

    Never Left Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    30,220
    Likes Received:
    410
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bovine scat! Prove it!
     
  11. Never Left

    Never Left Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    30,220
    Likes Received:
    410
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Its hyperbole. Don't hold your breath.
     
  12. BroncoBilly

    BroncoBilly Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    Messages:
    29,824
    Likes Received:
    355
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Really Dave? Ram it through? You do have evidence that they tried to "ram it through" (your words) don't you?
     
  13. BroncoBilly

    BroncoBilly Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    Messages:
    29,824
    Likes Received:
    355
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Yeah, it looks like James couldn't stand the heat. I guess the DF at the end of his name means "Didn't Finish".
     
  14. Never Left

    Never Left Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    30,220
    Likes Received:
    410
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Your onto something there. I'm sure of it!
     
  15. Piscivorous

    Piscivorous New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    11,854
    Likes Received:
    232
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Trucks and trains don't have the capacity for what needs to be moved, doing nothing more than upping the cost of the oil extracted out of the tar sands.

    Ships? You're dreaming. You'd need to fill them at Canada's East Coast then send them through the Canal to the refineries in Texas. Cost prohibitive.

    Build the (*)(*)(*)(*) pipeline and tell the professional liberal envirowacko ass-lickers to go to hell.
     
  16. fiddlerdave

    fiddlerdave Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    19,083
    Likes Received:
    2,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What do you think a absurdly short fuse deadline IS? No time for compromise, no time to question the absurdly risky routing choices, just "TAKE MY HARD PIPELINE, AMERICAN B*****es"
     
  17. JamesDF

    JamesDF Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Overall the pipeline has negative impact on GDP and employment
    http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

    The fact that the oil sands emits 82% more pollution then just regular oil.
    The sands releases mercury arsenic and other pollution into the environment
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/30/energy.oilandpetrol

    The fact that oil causes environmental and health damages due to massive pollution which results in oil costing way more then green energy. (I'm sourcing one study if you want I have 4 more)
    http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer.101.5.1649
     
  18. BroncoBilly

    BroncoBilly Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    Messages:
    29,824
    Likes Received:
    355
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gee James, nothing unbiased about that left wing loon toon group:

    What I'm surprised is that James takes the Cornell report as some kind of unbiased, scientific assessment with no hint of political or ideological bias.

    linked to the report that was generated by Cornell's "Global Labor Institute", which features projects about "Climate Change", "Sustainable Transportation," "Climate Jobs", "Global Trade Union Task Force" ... and on and on.

    The institute has also partnered with leading environmental groups, like the WorldWatch Institute, whose focus (according to Wikipedia) is creating a "low-carbon energy system".
     
  19. Davea8

    Davea8 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    249
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In addition, recovery of tar sands requires huge amounts of water and natural gas. And natural gas or other fuel is needed to keep the thick crude fluid enough to move through a pipe. Refining it also requires large amounts of water. The bottom line is that refined products from tar sands are expensive. Dumping it on the world market will help keep the price of fuel high. So if it happens, get used to $4 gasoline.
    http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3839
     
  20. JamesDF

    JamesDF Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Notice when confronted with facts republicans go straight to insults.
     
  21. Colonel K

    Colonel K Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    President Obama has had three major projects which would boost jobs blocked by the same Rethugs who are screaming about job losses from the pipeline rejection.
     
  22. Clint Torres

    Clint Torres New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    0
    True COL Saunders. Jobs are just that, but the big money comes from the corporate investors who must pony up the project expense once the project is under way. A few menial union jobs will not solve the problems of the USA's uneducated and unskilled workforce. It is just maintaining the status quo while the world is developing at a greater pace. Outsourcing is the only way to make any major project cost effective.

    The capital overhead for any goods or service in the USA is so high, that there is almost no profit for the investor or the worker.
     
  23. Bondo

    Bondo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,768
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Naw,... Obo was offerin' Union pay-offs,...

    The pipeline is Private money, not tax dollars....
     
  24. sherp

    sherp New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,018
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They are using SEa Water in Canada. They know what they are doing. Been doing it for years. As far as the $4 gas, well Obama already did that in the last 3years. It is an Oil and Gas dependent world out there. We are not going back to Horse and Buggy low technology.
     
  25. AnnaK

    AnnaK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    8,893
    Likes Received:
    83
    Trophy Points:
    0

    LOL! Why do you think the Repubs are so anxious to ram it through and get it approved? Because they all stand to get some great big pay-offs from TC and Big Oil. Just like they protected the health insurance companies over the American people - they're all standing in line for the big money and don't care if you have clean water or not.
     

Share This Page