All your doing is squeezing the margins on the oil companies, think about this theoretically if stopping the pipeline stopped the tar sands (which it doesnt) then where does the remaining oil we need every day come out of the ground, maybe in the arctic wildlife areas obama blocked and said we couldnt drill at...... The oil is coming out of the ground regardless until the price of green energy comes down enough to match the price of oil.
Trump approves Keystone pipeline and...
- Thread starter Tony Stark
- Start date
All your doing is squeezing the margins on the oil companies, think about this theoretically if stopping the pipeline stopped the tar sands (which it doesnt) then where does the remaining oil we need every day come out of the ground, maybe in the arctic wildlife areas obama blocked and said we couldnt drill at...... The oil is coming out of the ground regardless until the price of green energy comes down enough to match the price of oil.
Chinese oil glut and disregard for environmental norm would say otherwise.
Maybe I’m playing a little too much devils advocate here but the argument that transporting tar sands through a pipeline is a great option compared to others isn’t correct.
That pipeline was built for the sole purpose of developing Canadian tar sands. We didn’t need the oil and the Canadians weren’t going to build a pipeline across Canada, nor were they going to refine that oil on their land. We’re the suckers in the deal. There is no real benefit to our country to ship and refine that oil here.
But those points are irrelevant, we are talking about risk to local natural resources which are important for agriculture etc. Why should locals risk their way of life so that some other country can export their oil into the international market - if US citizens benefited from the supply then maybe it was worth considering. Currently, there is excess of oil in the international markets and it's only going to decrease as more green technology comes in, the risk to reward doesn't make sense in that scenario.
I don’t follow what you mean here.
US doesn't get to buy the oil, the oil goes into international market, that's the whole problem.
FIRST: A DISCLAIMER - I HAVE POSTED TEXT FROM THESE TWO ARTICLES. POSTING THE TEXT DOES NOT MEAN I AGREE WITH OR PERSONALLY ASSERT ANY WORDS IN THE CONTENT OF THE ARTICLE. THIS DISCLAIMER APPLIES TO TEXT FROM ALL PREVIOUS ARTICLES I POSTED. THIS DISCLAIMER HAS BEEN PUT IN PLACE DUE TO exGOPer's POOR BEHAVIOR AND ABUSE.
I am polite enough to other posters to spend the time to cut/paste the first few paragraphs of an article so other readers can determine if they desire to go to the link and read the entire article (with a "More at above url" indicator at the bottom).
------------------------------------------------------------
Pipelines much safer than shipping oil by rail, Fraser Institute study says
'I hope it becomes better understood that saying 'No' to a pipeline is saying 'Yes' to rail and that is to increase the risk to the environment and human health and not decrease it,' lead author says
http://business.financialpost.com/c...pping-oil-by-rail-fraser-institute-study-says
Oil pipelines vs. rail transport: The statistics on spills vs. safety point to a clear winner
https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-01...spills-vs-safety-point-to-a-clear-winner.html
"The U.S. government estimates that 70 percent of all oil is transported via pipeline, and yet given that massive amount, multiple sources have noted that generally speaking, it is the safest, most efficient and cost-effective way to transport the very resource that powers our economy."
(More of these two articles at above urls)
I am polite enough to other posters to spend the time to cut/paste the first few paragraphs of an article so other readers can determine if they desire to go to the link and read the entire article (with a "More at above url" indicator at the bottom).
------------------------------------------------------------
Pipelines much safer than shipping oil by rail, Fraser Institute study says
'I hope it becomes better understood that saying 'No' to a pipeline is saying 'Yes' to rail and that is to increase the risk to the environment and human health and not decrease it,' lead author says
http://business.financialpost.com/c...pping-oil-by-rail-fraser-institute-study-says
Oil pipelines vs. rail transport: The statistics on spills vs. safety point to a clear winner
https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-01...spills-vs-safety-point-to-a-clear-winner.html
"The U.S. government estimates that 70 percent of all oil is transported via pipeline, and yet given that massive amount, multiple sources have noted that generally speaking, it is the safest, most efficient and cost-effective way to transport the very resource that powers our economy."
(More of these two articles at above urls)
I give up, thx for the posts man, but there is no amount of logic that can change someones mind if they dont want to think for themselves, ive tried all morning to show how ridiculous their argument is but they wont even agree on basic facts all they know is they hate oil so anything to do with it must be stopped.
At least these two articles provide the basic facts and figures... and links to reports with in-depth information with statistics & supporting information. At this point it is more a situation of providing proper information for others who come along & read this thread who want concrete factual information on the subject.
Please. I’ve heard your arguments, you haven’t heard mine or addressed any of the issues I’ve presented. You just keep making the same general statements. See if you can answer any the following:
We don’t need the oil from keystone, we are currently in a glut of much cleaner oil.
Pipelines are more efficient for the transportation of oil but developing and refining oil sands produce more pollution than tradition oil, which we already have a glut of.
Without the keystone pipeline TransCanada would not be able to develop those reserves on the scale they are now. Canadians did not want a pipeline and do not want to refine that dirty oil on their land.
We get stuck with all the downside and TransCanada and Canada get all of the upside.