never happy posted:

Syncrude is a company you dummy. I guess they do have their own products but whatever you're getting at still doesn't make sense

It is not a lie. if a leak were to occur the diluent would evaporate and you'd be left with bitumen. Bitumen does not evaporate like most higher API crudes. it is hard to clean. Imagine taking peanut butter. Melting it into a nice fluid substance similar to water. Pouring it all over your furniture so it seeps through the cushions. And let it cool so it turns back into regular peanut butter. Try cleaning that.

420DD Butts posted:

Actually, it's not.

Hal_2005 posted:

Technically you are correct, but go google up the WHMIS form for diluent adjusted bitumen, and for tailings dirt from your local Kentucky coal mine or silicon valley chipset manufacturing company. I stand by my statements, you can argue all you like; dirt is what bitumen is, and standard loam is about 60% carbon (mulch) anyways. So even if you want to be snarky, I'm still right.

420DD Butts posted:

You're really pushing the definition of "dirt" here to the point of meaningless.

e: Love your edit, though. How much experience do you have with soils, again? Just wondering.

Hal_2005 posted:

Technically you are correct, but go google up the WHMIS form for diluent adjusted bitumen, and for tailings dirt from your local Kentucky coal mine or silicon valley chipset manufacturing company.

I stand by my statements, you can argue all you like; dirt is what bitumen is, and standard loam is about 60% carbon (mulch) anyways.

So even if you want to be snarky, I'm still right and you look like an undereducated idiot who thinks he knows about carbon from a 350.org press kit.

paragon1 posted:

Dude the cops busted my dealer and now I can't get a hold of Cali Sour anymore, total bummer.

PupsOfWar posted:

America's Interests are not served by funneling oil revenoo to damnyankees and louisiana socialists



god bless america

Trabisnikof posted:

We have to do Keystone-XL because if there is an opportunity to take Indian Lands in violation of a treaty, America is obligated to do it.



On the safety question, I think this forbes article is the best at delineating the confusing statistics:

SHISHKABOB posted:

how about by plane?

or perhaps a human bucket chain

Miltank posted:

Nebraska farmers rely on the Ogallala Aquifer and everything else in Nebraska relies on the farmers so it's kind of a big deal.

Hal_2005 posted:

Syncrude sweet is a blend:

http://www.crudemonitor.ca/crude.php?acr=SSP

Bitumen does nothing, its dirt, held in a diluent (what is diluent you ecological fuckwit ? Well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diluent ) which has an inert flashpoint unless held at well over double a DOT tank car's pressure rating. If you pour it out? it does not turn into anything other than a emulsion tar, no different then the poo poo you pump out of Mexico, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia or California at Bakersfield. In fact, unlike the poo poo rear end blends you likely never loving heard of until I said this post, those blends have a ultra high sulfur content, which is not cleaned out of the oil before shipped to the refinery complex in PADD II / III.

Helsing posted:

The Republican problem seems to be that after successfully co-opting and then cultivating John Birch style insanity and riding it to numerous election victories they've become victims of their own success and the inmates are getting closer and closer to running the asylum. It's created a major structural problem for the GOP where they can hold the House and maybe the Senate for a long time but have issues putting forward a nationally competitive Presidential candidate who is acceptable to their increasingly crazy "base".

The Democrats actually have a parallel structural problem that you've just pointed at. On the one hand the Democrats need a populist economic message to attract their core constituents to the ballot box. But the Democrats also need money to be competitive and that means keeping some parts of the corporate or financial world happy or at least appealing to multimillionar donors. And those folks passionately hate even the mildest kinds of populist appeals. Just look at how much Obama's Wall Street buddies flipped out when he made the most mildly critical comments about their bonuses.

It isn't hard to see why politicians and political institutions have become so reviled in America, even compared to other countries. Both the Democrats and the Republics need to manage so many contradictory positions at once to actually have a hope at winning that the mind simply balks at the ludicrousness of the entire system.

never happy posted:

Powercrazy posted:

I don't think cost-effectiveness has ever been a major concern for pork-barrel projects.

Miltank posted:

Don't they carry a less dangerous substance or something though?

Trabisnikof posted:

All those domestic oil sands oil pipelines.

Miltank posted:

Nebraska farmers rely on the Ogallala Aquifer and everything else in Nebraska relies on the farmers so it's kind of a big deal.

drilldo squirt posted:

These oil names sounds like what potheads come up with to name strains.

CommieGIR posted:

Remember how they touted how 'safe' and 'reliable' Keystone will be?

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/breakingnews/story/2015/jan/18/pipeline-breach-spills-oil-yellowstone-river/283374/

Remember?

Well, heres one to prove that they'll just keep making GBS threads on the environment. 50,000 gallons of oil into the Yellowstone River.

Nintendo Kid posted:

Cool story. What does that have to do with TransCanada or the Keystone project in particular?

quote:

Different environmental groups, citizens, and politicians have raised concerns about the potential negative impacts of the Keystone XL project.[60] The main issues are the risk of oil spills along the pipeline, which would traverse highly sensitive terrain, and 17% higher greenhouse gas emissions from the extraction of oil sands compared to extraction of conventional oil.[61][62]

A concern is that a pipeline spill would pollute air and critical water supplies and harm migratory birds and other wildlife.[40] Its original route plan crossed the Sandhills, the large wetland ecosystem in Nebraska, and the Ogallala Aquifer, one of the largest reserves of fresh water in the world.[28][63] The Ogallala Aquifer spans eight states, provides drinking water for two million people, and supports $20 billion in agriculture.[64] Critics say that a major leak could ruin drinking water and devastate the mid-western U.S. economy.[29][65] After opposition for laying the pipeline in this area, TransCanada agreed to change the route and skip the Sand Hills.

CommieGIR posted:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline#Environmental_issues


Spilling 50,000 gallons into the Yellowstone River, which IS a sensitive area, is kinda not helping sell the Pipeline.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowstone_River

But, you should've known that already, it was a self-answering question.

Nintendo Kid posted:

So yes it has nothing to do with it. Noted.

Next time, try posting something that has a shred of connection. If Ford Pintos explode when you tap the bumper it doesn't mean Citroens will too!

CommieGIR posted:

You must be dense as hell to complete ignore both one of the key concerns about the Keystone Pipeline, and then an actual accident that happens that highlights that key concern.

Whats up, Fishmech?

Nintendo Kid posted:

There are concerns that chemtrails cause mind control among certain people too.

Nintendo Kid posted:

That accident doesn't highlight jackshit about Keystone XL, because the piepline design has very little similarity, and none of the same companies are involved. As I said: just because Ford Pintos blew up with a bumper tap, doe snot mean Citroens also did!

Nintendo Kid posted:

There are concerns that chemtrails cause mind control among certain people too.

That accident doesn't highlight jackshit about Keystone XL, because the piepline design has very little similarity, and none of the same companies are involved. As I said: just because Ford Pintos blew up with a bumper tap, doe snot mean Citroens also did!

CommieGIR posted:

......are you seriously comparing a paranoid tinfoil hat conspiracy to an actual accident that occurred JUST NOW that highlights one of the key concerns about the Keystone pipeline?

Let alone the fact that it dumped this into a river that is considered a sensitive part of the ecology of Yellowstone National Park.

What the gently caress is wrong with you?

CommieGIR posted:

So? Its Conoco Phillips? Oh, I guess that gives them a free out, obviously they'll be MUCH more careful.

Condiv posted:

what evidence do you have that this pipeline is a ford pinto? nothing in the article says that it was poorly designed or maintained, and the article even says the leak was detected and stopped rapidly.

Nintendo Kid posted:

Well chemtrails are about as relevant to reality as your whining about a completely different pipeline is to Keystone XL, bucko.

What's wrong with YOU? Why do you have a boner for putting the oil in trucks and trains instead?

Nintendo Kid posted:

Having a pipeline run by a different company, and also built by a different company and built at a different time and in a differenet way means that everything about the pipeline is different other than "will exist" and "will carry liquid" So yeah they probably will? You kinda need to come up with something that shares more resemblance than "is the same general category" for your wacky "KEYSTONE XL WILL DEFINITELY SPILL OIL AND KILL US ALL" tripe.

Nintendo Kid posted:

So you're not together enough to understand that the analogy is that a totally different car probably won't share the same issue or what.

CommieGIR posted:

No, the story I posted has the following in common:

1. Its an oil transport pipeline
2. It had an accident in a ecologically sensitive area
3. It directly highlighted one of the stated problems and oppositions to the Keystone project
4. You are trying to discredit my argument by hand-waving with comparing it a loving CONSPIRACY THEORY?!

Well done. Blew my entire argument out of the water.


1. Its a pipeline for transporting oil.

In a sheer star struck coincidence, so is the Keystone pipeline! WOW!

2. It had an accident in an ecologically sensitive area

By a sheer coincidence, again, one of the biggest stated issues with Keystone is possible spills in ecologically sensitive environmental areas. WOWZA! We're two for two so far!

But please, let's compare this to a fictional conspiracy theory. I mean, this is basic compare/contrast errors you are making.

Nintendo Kid posted:

Actually, all of that has nothing to do with it, sorry.

Like I said, you're trying to claim Citroens all blow up, because Ford Pintos blew up when they got rear impacted. Because
1) They're cars
2) They can be tapped on the bumper
3) Some morons claimed all cars blow up
4) Car & Driver magazine was mean to me

CommieGIR posted:

Number 3 and 4 is hilarious, because between that and the 'Chemtrail' comment, you've literally spent half of the last page trying to paint others arguments as invalidated by comparing them to conspiracies and know flawed designs.

gently caress it. Let's spill oil everywhere, Nintendo Kid said its not a big deal, let's get this Keystone Pipeline moving and ignore the massive environmental damage we've done with petroleum spills. Hell, let's open Yellowstone National Park up for mining and exploitation, because apparently we've worked all the bugs out of petroleum transport, completely ignore that spill today that happened.

Drill, baby, drill.

Nintendo Kid posted:

So you're not together enough to understand that the analogy is that a totally different car probably won't share the same issue or what.

Condiv posted:

you're downplaying commiegir's article with an analogy that compares one of the worst cars ever made to the pipeline in his article. the issue we're talking about is leaking, and you seem to think that will be designed around or significantly mitigated in keystone xl compared to this pipeline. what will change with keystone xl that would've prevented 50k gallons from leaking into the yellowstone river? what are the design differences between the pinto and your generic citroen that prevents the bumper tap explosion?

Nintendo Kid posted:

Yes I'm calling you a conspiracist for latching on to one random pipeline having a problem as proof that Keystone XL must have a problem when it gets built. Because that's chemtrail believer levels of thinking and evidence.

Also it's hilarious that you try to pretend that this one phase of one pipeline is definitely going to cause spills, but trucks and trains that would be used instead sure won't. At least you aren't as daft as that one guy who demanded that every pipeline over an aquifier be torn up and then was baffled that theis would require a shitload of truck and train transport instead.

PS buddy, the drilling already happened decades ago.

Nintendo Kid posted:

Because his article means jack and squat about a completely different pipeline with completely different people involved. The vast majority of pipelines don't leak, and of the ones that develop leaks it rarely leads to 50,000 gallons dumped in a river.

CommieGIR posted:

Nah, its okay, just the second spill in...what, 4 years? Yeah, that same pipe in Yellowstone leaked in 2011 too, into the same river even. So, forgive me for being skeptical about the 'safety' record of the Petroleum industry at large, and their 'commitment' to the environment.

But comparing it to Chemtrails misses the point entirely: A spill COULD happen in Keystone, its not an impossibility like Chemtrails, which are a nonexistent thing. Most of the Keystone pipe hasn't even had the time to really wear in to the point where failures will start to occur, but they will occur none the less, its to what degree of damage they will do.

And that is beside the point: The fact that we are importing from the tar sands to begin with, let alone that we should ignore the petroleum industries already poor record in the United States, misses why the Keystone is a problem from the start.

CommieGIR posted:

Because this one pipe in that article? Spilled in 2011 too. Into the Yellowstone River. Its not like it spilled into a minor creek in the middle of bumfuck nowhere, Montana. Keystone crosses even MORE major ecologically sensitive rivers.