Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 151
view profile
History
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline DelayedPage 7 of 21    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)

I think it's much more important for us to look for alternative energy ... believe we should have been doing this for years and years ... believe we need to learn to think past the end of our noses.


If that's your goal, it would be best served by approving the Keystone pipeline. That's going to be way far beyond any anti pipeline mentality though.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 152
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 4:22:32 AM
The Keystone pipeline suffered a serious defeat the other day when Scott Brown, the republican senate hopeful from New Hampshire convinced senate republicans to stall the bi-partisan energy bill in the senate. Senate democrats had promise to vote thru Keystone legislation along with the bi-partisan energy bill. But, republican Brown, wanting not to give political capital to his opponent, lobbied republican senate GOP members to kill the bi-partisan energy bill, ending a chance for a key vote on Keystone. Mr. Brown has placed politics and his personal aspirations over the good of the country.

From Huff Post:


WASHINGTON -- Scott Brown can't win for losing. After helping torpedo Sen. Jeanne Shaheen's (D-N.H.) energy efficiency legislation, he is now being hit by backers of Keystone XL, who saw her bill as the vehicle to get to a vote on the controversial pipeline.

The irony, of course, is that Brown, Shaheen's Republican opponent, is himself a backer of Keystone XL, and cited the pipeline as the reason he opposed her bill.

Teamsters Local 633 Secretary-Treasurer David Laughton released a memo Thursday in response to a Huffington Post report that Brown lobbied Senate Republicans to kill Shaheen's energy bill so that she wouldn't be able to run on it. In it, Laughton said he is "disgusted that Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown's blind partisanship appears to have cost us a stand alone vote to proceed with the Keystone XL pipeline."

The Brown campaign has not disputed reports that he urged Republican leadership to stop Shaheen's bill from advancing in the Senate. Instead, Brown's spokeswoman has argued that he was concerned Shaheen was blocking a vote on Keystone XL.

Laughton rejected that claim, pointing out that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) offered to hold a standalone vote on Keystone XL if Republicans helped pass the energy efficiency bill. "Both projects deserved a vote, and now that is less likely to happen because of Scott Brown," Laughton wrote.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 153
view profile
History
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 4:40:32 AM
That's one of those "it depends on your viewpoint" scenarios.

From the pro-Republican point, they can say that it's the DEMOCRATS who are being obstructionist, by insisting on an all-or-nothing approach.
 DragonBits
Joined: 1/6/2012
Msg: 154
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 5:48:45 AM

think it's much more important for us to look for alternative energy ... believe we should have been doing this for years and years ... believe we need to learn to think past the end of our noses. We simply just cannot continue to pollute at the current rate because if we do, our grandchildren and their grandchildren will pay a high price for what we do today.


I think an important part of the debate on greenhouse gas emissions and climate change is how long it would take to reverse everything? And what will we do about the current global cooling?

Estimates are that if we completely stopped burning fossil fuels and had a COMPLETE halt of greenhouse gas emissions, it would take 1000 years for nature to again lock up carbon dioxide and for the levels to return to pre-industrial levels.

Also, for the next 20 years there are predictions the earth is likely to cool quite a bit. Or even more extreme, we might enter a little ice age.

Last year Artic ice INCREASED by 50%, and in Jan 2013 Antarctic Ice reached a 35 year record HIGH.

Many scientists were surprised by the amount of the increase in Artic ice, but still believe that over time Artic ice will continue to decrease. Which by the way, Artic ice melting DOES not increase sea levels. What can increase sea levels is the ice that is on land in places like Greenland melting that would increase sea levels.
 DragonBits
Joined: 1/6/2012
Msg: 155
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 5:58:59 AM
Another interesting thing about the recent increase (50 years) in CO2.

It's estimated that the increased atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has resulted in an increase in agricultural output valued at around $1. trillion dollars.

The fear is the global cooling could go on for 200-250 years. Which is caused by reduced sun spot activitiy and less heat from the sun. Cooling is even more dangerious for humans than heating.
 Neopoli
Joined: 3/1/2011
Msg: 156
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 6:14:46 AM

Union Pacific line in Colorado operating after derailment

Mon May 12, 2014 9:52am EDT

(Reuters) - U.S. railroad company Union Pacific Corp said on Monday that a rail line on which a train derailed near the town of LaSalle in northern Colorado was back in service.

The train, which was heading to an East Coast destination, spilled 5,300 gallons of oil on Friday morning.

The line, which is used about once a day, connects Windsor, where the oil originated, and other towns in the Niobrara oil shale formation in northeastern Colorado.

Over the past several months, the industry has been under heightened government scrutiny due to an increase in train derailments involving oil tank cars. The amount of oil moving by rail from shale formations, like Niobrara and Bakken, has risen sharply because the regions are not well-connected to pipelines.

Mark Davis, a spokesman for Union Pacific, said there were no injuries in the derailment and the rail line was back in service by Sunday evening. He did not know who owned the oil or its exact destination.

He said six of the train's 100 cars derailed. Only one car leaked. Each car can hold about 28,000 gallons of oil, he said. No oil reached the South Platte River located near the town of LaSalle.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/12/us-railways-union-pacific-derail-oil-idUSBREA4B0AP20140512
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 157
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 6:42:41 AM
and right now, Congress is deciding on rules for double-walled tanker cars, b/c the single wall ones now do exactly what you point out--just like sea-going tankers are going double wall after all the oil spills. So how does a pipeline avoid punctures? It doesn't. There's been plenty of ruptures on those, too, lately. So, do we make the railroad companies re-hire all the people they fired whose job it was to watch out for conditions that lead to derailments?
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 158
view profile
History
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 8:11:38 AM
Forumsreaderisall:

Your litany ignores the equal number of instances where the climate change DENIERS also failed to correctly predict the future. They all said that nothing negative would happen, that climate change was an evil plot by tree huggers, and that therefore no change of course is needed.
Thus, what you seem to be suggesting, is that the reason to keep going the way that we are going, is ....what? You have no positive reason.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 159
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 8:43:46 AM

The train, which was heading to an East Coast destination, spilled 5,300 gallons of oil on Friday morning.


I can top that:


Reuters) - A faulty valve at a petroleum pipeline pump station ruptured early on Thursday in an industrial corner of Los Angeles, spewing crude oil 40 feet into the air, onto the roof of a strip club next door, and leaving four people sick from the fumes.

An estimated 10,000 gallons of oil gushed from the pipeline before it was shut down and the spill was halted, soaking an area about a half-block long, Los Angeles Fire Department Captain Jaime Moore said.


Furthermore:


Since 1990, more than 5,600 incidents were reported involving land-based hazardous liquid pipelines, releasing a total of more than 110 million gallons of mostly crude and petroleum products, according to analysis of federal data. The pipeline safety agency considered more than half — at least 100 spills each year — to be “significant,” meaning they caused a fire, serious injury or fatality or released at least 2,100 gallons, among other factors.

Pipeline operators reported recovering less than half of all hazardous liquids spilled over the last two decades, according to federal records. And the ratio is not improving: after recovering more than 60 percent of liquids spilled in 2005 and 2006, operators recovered less than a third between 2007 and 2010.

Nearly half of all incidents since 2002 arose from malfunctioning equipment, construction flaws and other technical problems with pipelines. Corrosion, which the agency considers to be different from equipment failure, is the second leading cause, and to blame nearly one-quarter of the time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/10/business/energy-environment/agency-struggles-to-safeguard-pipeline-system.html?pagewanted=2
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 160
view profile
History
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 9:40:07 AM

Since 1990, more than 5,600 incidents were reported involving land-based hazardous liquid pipelines, releasing a total of more than 110 million gallons of mostly crude and petroleum products, according to analysis of federal data


I can top that with my eyes closed...

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/the-13-largest-oil-spills-in-history

One tanker can drop that amount easily.

It's all relative. Be sure to analyse how much product reaches its destination safely through pipelines as compared to other methods.

Actually nevermind. Keystone is nothing more than a symbol for environmentalists. If they actually cared about the best and safest way to do things this would have be done ages ago.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 161
view profile
History
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 10:27:36 AM
All of your comparisons are ignoring the complete picture. It isn't a matter of which transport system has the most accidents, or how much oil is spilled. it's a matter of where exactly the pipeline is designed to go, and the danger that has to be accepted if it goes through.

You are comparing, not just apples and oranges, you are comparing the damages from gun accidents on gun ranges versus gun accidents in private homes, to decide whether it's okay to set up a target range that shoots through a populated playground.

Keystone has to go through a gigantic, single aquifer, which multiple states depend upon for their financial existence, and which the entire country depends on for food. If you fail to include THAT in your calculations, your calculations are entirely invalid.
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 162
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 4:54:06 PM
and indeed, it is a singular water source. The farms in the desert state of California have been sucking water out of the West for as long as they've been able to get the rights to do so (the movie Chinatown wasn't just made up), while the expanding population of Las Vegas has been trying to get whatever got missed. If the Okies ruin the aquifer they have left (this isn't light sweet crude that will float on the top we're talking about) just so Canada can sell oil to Asia, using a pipeline bought from India and that will be run by one guy in a computer room..hell, let the Canadians build themselves a refining plant :)
 John255317
Joined: 12/28/2012
Msg: 163
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 5:22:38 PM
UNL expert: Ogallala Aquifer has little risk of Keystone pipeline oil spills

By Shelby Fleig, Kyle Cummings on April 15th, 2013
endowment
When James Goeke stood in western Nebraska for the first time, he thought it was the most desolate and desperate place he’d ever been.

This was 1970 and Goeke had just joined the team at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s Conservation and Survey Division where he still works as a hydrologist. He never would have guessed it, but someday he would own a chunk of western Nebraska and cherish it as much as any person could.

Scattered around the state are close to 6,000 holes each about 5 inches in diameter drilled to the base of the Ogallala Aquifer. During the 1970s, Goeke drilled about 1,000 of those holes in the deepest part of the aquifer.

“I’ve seen more Ogallala than anybody else certainly in the Conservation and Survey Division,” he said.

The Ogallala Aquifer is 174,000 square miles of water-bearing sediment under Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas and Wyoming – one of the largest in the world.

The largest and deepest portion of the aquifer is in Nebraska. For a sense of how much water is really there, imagine this: Since the first use of the aquifer for farmland irrigation, Nebraskans have used less than half of 1 percent of their portion of the aquifer.

When TransCanada proposed the original Keystone XL pipeline route in May 2010, the Ogallala Aquifer, named for a site three miles east of Ogallala, Neb., caused a storm of great concern among scientists, activists, farmers, landowners and conservationists. Groups formed for the sole purpose of fighting the pipeline’s creation. Politicians demanded more information for their constituents. Protestors marched on Washington.

Goeke picked up his phone and called TransCanada, firing off every relevant question he could think of. After all, he knew what he was asking about. He has drilled more holes, a process that holds great importance in a range of scientific and economic decisions, in the Ogallala Aquifer than any other person.

He said TransCanada could answer every question and was honest and forthcoming. That didn’t immediately quiet all his reluctance, so he continued his research until he came to a conclusion: The Keystone XL pipeline is not a serious threat to the Ogallala Aquifer.

“A lot of people in the debate about the pipeline talk about how leakage would foul the water and ruin the entire water supply in the state of Nebraska and that’s just a false,” he said.

His explanation is simple.

Seventy-five to 80 percent of the aquifer lies west of the proposed pipeline route. The aquifer is sloped downward going east. If there were a spill, that entire section is unavailable to be harmed because water cannot move uphill. The 15 to 20 percent left, Goeke says, is in very little risk thanks to abundant fine-grain clays, sediment and sandstone separating the aquifer and potential contaminants from the pipeline.

While Goeke agrees 20 percent would be a problem, he thinks the chances of a leak reaching the aquifer are very minimal.

“It can’t get down to the water table because of the nature of the sediments in the unsaturated zone,” he said.

Goeke likens pipelines to the fear of flying.

“You’re flying at 30,000 feet going 500 miles an hour, and you don’t have a parachute, and that plane can crash,” Goeke said. “Pipelines in Nebraska are similar to flying airplanes. They get the job done, and sometimes the plane might crash. But overall, they’re safe, and I think that pipelines are similarly safe.”

Still, as Goeke mentioned, a plane can crash. And a pipeline can leak. So even if the leak were minor, it would not be easy to handle, he said.

Groups such as BOLD Nebraska and the Sierra Club have focused on those metaphoric plane crashes, though, in their opposition to the pipeline. They oppose it for many reasons, including the risk of a spill into the Ogallala Aquifer and the delicate Sandhills that cover northern Nebraska.

“One of the reasons we have such a concern for it is because of the fact that the area most highly impacted is an area where there is porous soils, and it’s easy for contaminants, or any fluid, to get into the aquifer – including what will be found in the pipeline,” said Ken Winston, a policy advocate at the Nebraska chapter of the Sierra Club.

Winston said the Sierra Club, an environmental advocacy organization, opposed the Keystone XL pipeline from the very day TransCanada proposed the route. He cites three reasons, in addition to the risk of polluting the Ogallala Aquifer for the opposition: the tar sands process, TransCanada’s treatment of Nebraska landowners and TransCanada’s track record for spills.

After initial concern from Nebraskans and Republican Gov. Dave Heineman, TransCanada proposed a revised route in September 2012. The new route avoids the Sandhills, where the most delicate sands and a high water table could struggle to contain a spill. Heineman has since approved the new route and sent a letter to President Obama urging him to approve the pipeline.

The area of concern is in southwest Holt County. While the revised pipeline goes around the border of the Sandhills, it has been pushed farther into and with greater distance across Holt County, where the water table isn’t quite as high.

Goeke said Holt County still has relatively high water tables, 20-30 feet below the earth’s surface, but that “the materials are clay enough that they would attenuate any leakage.”

The only area of concern regarding water pollution, according to Goeke, occurs where the pipeline will have to be pulled under the Platte River and through the 12-mile-wide valley, where the water table is high or near the earth’s surface. The solution will be to pull the pipelines 40 feet below the bed of the Platte River, where Niobrara shale, an impermeable stone, will separate the pipeline from the water supply. In that area, the pipeline will also be double its original thickness, lined in rubber and cased in cement. Extra valves will also be added to ensure any leak could be shut off.

“It’s going to be well-protected,” Goeke said.

Winston isn’t convinced. He said TransCanada’s definition of the boundaries of the Sandhills changed since the revised route.

“TransCanada proposed map in 2008 that included an area they now say is outside the Sandhills,” he said. “Their own representation should control what they define as the Sandhills. The Sandhills issue has not been resolved. I don’t believe peoples’ concerns have been addressed.”

Goeke said a spill in the Sandhills, although messy, would be localized.

“Even if you put the pipeline through the Sandhills, which they aren’t, the materials would immediately restrict leakage and TransCanada could clean up any spills,” Goeke said.

Regardless of the risk of the pipeline, Julene Bair thinks Nebraskans are overlooking some important details.

Bair, author of “One Degree West: Reflections of a Plainsdaughter” and “The Ogallala Road,” set to release in 2014, wrote an op-ed for The New York Times regarding Nebraskans’ worries of the oil polluting their aquifer when they themselves are polluting the aquifer with industrial farming chemicals.

“I wish all the attention the Ogallala Aquifer is getting because of the pipeline extended to industrial agriculture,” she said.

Ninety percent of shallow groundwater samples from the Ogallala contained nitrate, according to a 2009 report by the U.S. Geological Survey. Nitrate and other chemicals such as atrazine, a popular herbicide, trickle through sediment with rain, making a slow but apparent journey into groundwater. The levels of industrial chemicals are below the levels allowed by the government, but are increasing at what is called “creeping normalcy.”

Patrick O’Brien with the Nebraska Association of Natural Resources Districts also said the biggest contamination to the Ogallala Aquifer is nitrates, which can be sourced to fertilizers and waste.

“To manage (high nitrate levels), all of the districts have developed a ground water-management plan, which will layout triggers and then steps to follow if a trigger is hit,” he said.

If the pipeline were to spring a leak, though, that would be out of his control, he said. That’s a point-source problem, meaning the contamination can be sourced to one particular point, and the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality takes charge of those, O’Brien said.

Officials at the NDEQ did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

Bair thinks the general misunderstanding of aquifers and how they work is what leads to the pollution.

“A lot of people have this impression that the aquifer is this giant underground lake and that if you drop chemicals into one end of it, they’ll show up in the other end of it, and that’s not what it is,” Bair said.

While she thinks the Keystone XL pipeline is negative for other reasons, such as burning fossil fuels, she wants Nebraskans to understand the current state of the aquifer.

“My sense of it is that when you have a spill, it’d be worse in the Sandhills than anywhere else,” Bair said. “But I don’t think it would be nearly as bad as it was being made out to be.”

Goeke blames Nebraskans’ emotional attachment to the aquifer for any absolute opposition to the pipeline.

And although Winston said he concedes his knowledge of aquifers to Goeke, he questions Goeke’s motive, although Goeke works for a non-political organization.

“I kind of wonder if he feels like he’s been forced into a position of supporting the pipeline because he thinks people don’t really understand hydrology and aquifers,” Winston said.

“People get attached to the Sandhills and the Ogallala and they don’t want to consider anything that might endanger the resource,” Goeke said. “And even if you explain that any spill would be very localized, they just don’t want to hear it.”

news@dailynebraskan.com
 GreenThumbz18
Joined: 4/25/2012
Msg: 164
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/18/2014 11:23:07 PM
So while we are unable to decide if an oil pipeline is good or bad, other people are not holding their breath: "Ukraine gas producer appoints Biden's son to board
Javier E. David | @TeflonGeek
Tuesday, 13 May 2014 | 2:49 PM ET
CNBC.com
Ukraine's largest private gas producer announced on Tuesday that it added R. Hunter Biden—the son of U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden—to its board of directors.
In a statement on its website, Burisma Holdings said the younger Biden will be in charge of the company's legal unit, while providing support "among international organizations."
The release quoted Hunter Biden as saying that "my assistance in consulting the Company on matters of transparency, corporate governance and responsibility, international expansion and other priorities will contribute to the economy and benefit the people of Ukraine."
Large corporations frequently appoint well-connected marquee names of both major U.S. political parties as directors. Yet corporate governance experts are critical of the process, which can be fraught with conflicts of interests and the appearance of favoritism.
The arrangement raised questions about the propriety of his appointment, given the tense political standoff between Russia and the West over the future status of Ukraine, where fighting has resulted in the deaths of dozens of soldiers and civilians. Natural gas has factored heavily in tensions between Russia and Ukraine, both of which have political leadership that's intertwined with their respective energy industries.
Until a few years ago, the younger Biden was a senior vice president for financial services giant MBNA—an arrangement that drew criticism during the 2008 elections for potential conflict of interests. As a senator, the elder Biden spearheaded legislation that would have affected MBNA's business. Meanwhile, Vice President Biden has been a vocal supporter of a cross-border European natural gas pipeline.
Earlier Tuesday, White House spokesman Jay Carney referred questions on the appointment to the vice president's office.
In response to an inquiry from CNBC, a spokesperson for the vice president said, "Hunter Biden is a private citizen and a lawyer. The vice president does not endorse any particular company and has no involvement with this company."
A representative at Rosemont Seneca told CNBC that Biden was traveling and not immediately available for comment.
With Moscow threatening to cut gas supplies to the former Soviet satellite, some have called for the U.S. to deepen its ties to Ukraine by shipping its own natural gas bounty to Eastern Europe.
Burisma touted Biden's "public service and foreign policy," and is listed as a co-founder of Rosement Seneca Partners, an investment advisory company. He also served as executive director of E-Commerce Policy Coordination under former Commerce Secretary William Daley, and co-chaired the 2008 Obama-Biden Inaugural Committee.
—By CNBC's Javier E. David.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 165
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/26/2014 7:18:41 AM
Why pipe tar sands from Canada to be shipped to China when there's perhaps the largest recent oil find right here in America.

From the Motley Fool:


The pride and joy of Saudi Arabia's oil industry has been the Ghawar oil field, which has been recognized as the largest in the world ever since its discovery in 1948. That is, perhaps, until now. A shale oil formation deep beneath the plains of West Texas has been sitting right under our noses for years, and Pioneer Natural Resources (NYSE: PXD ) estimates that it could usurp the Ghawar field's 60-year reign. Let's look at what Pioneer has discovered, and what this find could mean for producers with heavy investments in the Permian, including Pioneer, Occidental Petroleum (NYSE: OXY ) , EOG Resources (NYSE: EOG ) , and Devon Energy (NYSE: DVN ) .

Hiding in plain view
By the time the Ghawar field was discovered, commercial oil production had been taking place in the Permian Basin in Texas for more than 25 years. Estimates of the Permian's reserves were somewhere in the 10 billion-12 billion barrel range. That's nothing to scoff at, but it certainly didn't come close to the 71 billion barrels in that single formation under the Saudi desert. Apparently, those oilmen simply didn't look hard enough, because they missed the rest of the oil in the Permian.

To be fair to those wildcatters of old, they didn't know that oil trapped in shale would someday be commercially extractable. Now that hydraulic fracturing has made it possible, we are discovering increasing amounts of oil in the Permian. Pioneer Natural Resources -- one of the most prominent landholders in West Texas -- estimates that the recoverable resources in the field's different shale layers could make it the world's largest single source of recoverable oil ever found.

This isn't just a lot of oil. This is a "completely change the dynamics of global production" amount of oil. This is an "enough to supply all of America by itself for more than a decade" amount of oil. If Pioneer's estimates are accurate, and this resource can be de-risked to be considered proved reserves, the U.S. could triple its proved reserves and vault from No. 11 in global reserves to sixth, right behind Iraq. Then there's the really crazy part of all this. Look at the last line of that slide above: Pioneer didn't even include several other potential shale formations that are found in the Permian.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 166
view profile
History
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/26/2014 7:36:10 AM

Why pipe tar sands from Canada to be shipped to China when there's perhaps the largest recent oil find right here in America.


Ummm maybe to make some money and help chip away at the collosal debt you people have incurred. You know, the number one threat against your precious future generations?
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 167
view profile
History
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/26/2014 9:01:45 AM

The number one concern about the future generations would be to leave for them land and water resources that are safe enough to help them live


Aww. That's so cute. Which comes first, money or environmental protection? I mean, in the real world. Like when you look down a list of the worst, most polluted, most environmentally bankrupt countries, what stands out? Are they developed countries? Or developing? What is it going to take to create the state of the art in environmental protection technology? The inevtiable default on American debt is going to be a blow to your environmntal vision like no other you can imagine.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 168
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/26/2014 9:48:04 AM
Ummm maybe to make some money and help chip away at the collosal debt you people have incurred. You know, the number one threat against your precious future generations?


Shale oil from the Permian oil fields is predicted to be enough to supply the US with enough oil, from the Permian alone, to last ten (10) years. Why would we pipe sand oils thru the US to export to China, when the Permian oil fields would produce enough oil to export. And the Permian is in Texas, just a short hop to Galveston for export. We really don't need Canadian tar sands.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 169
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/26/2014 3:44:18 PM


Shale oil from the Permian oil fields is predicted to be enough to supply the US with enough oil, from the Permian alone, to last ten (10) years.
It's not all about what we consume. But also about exporting fuel to other markets. The energy companies are about supplying fuel to fill a contract from wherever it is from.


I think you may have missed the point. The Permian oil fields reserves can supply the US alone, without any other oil sources, for 10 years, without the vast supplies from the Texas Eagle oil fields or the Wyoming Elk Basin.


“The Permian Basin has produced over 29 billion barrels of oil and 75 trillion cubic feet of gas, and it is estimated by industry experts to contain recoverable oil and natural gas resources exceeding what has been produced over the last 90 years.”

From Wikipedia

Therefore, with horizontal drilling the Permian oil fields will supply the US with oil for additional domestic needs, as well as, oil for export. In fact, oil production from the Permian fields have had the greatest production increase in the US for many years.

The Permian shale oil fields are estimated to hold as much oil as the Saudi oil reserves.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 170
view profile
History
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/26/2014 4:01:39 PM

Shale oil from the Permian oil fields is predicted to be enough to supply the US with enough oil, from the Permian alone, to last ten (10) years. Why would we pipe sand oils thru the US to export to China, when the Permian oil fields would produce enough oil to export. And the Permian is in Texas, just a short hop to Galveston for export. We really don't need Canadian tar sands.


That makes no sense. Why do you buy soft wood from Canada when you have enough of your own to last forever? There are just over a zillion different items that enter the USA from other countries that could be manufactured, developed, packaged, processed, consumed, grown, shipped, from inside the USA. It's business. Protectionist trade is a proven loser. There is no common sense in your statement "the Permian oil field would produce enough oil to export". Enough for what? 10 years worth of oil is a drop in the bucket.

Money is never going to be cheaper than it is now. 10 years from now with the way the economy looks from here, there may not be any such thing as venture capital. Borrow now to expand the business and reap rewards when things get really tough.

Also, the Montley Fool article you cited, even though very recent, is old news. Pioneer Resources has been pounding the pavement trying to get every publication on the planet to boast about the reserves it claims in the Permian. It's the major reason their stock price has gone up so dramtically to over $200 a share and their valuation is now stretched well beyond seven times revenue.

You may want to read the following article from two days ago for a more realistic appraisal of reserves...

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/may/22/two-thirds-write-down-us-shale-oil-gas-explodes-fracking-myth


The "state of the art in environmental protection technology" is not to allow development that would result in the destruction of the natural resources needed for survival.


Your own state department doesn't see a major risk here. Beyond that, narly 100% of all r & d money for alternative energy and green practices in Canada comes from oil companies. Here's the website to prove it...

http://www.ai-ees.ca/


We aren't on the road to become a third world country yet,


That is just so adorable. I just want to put a bow on it and set it on my table.


They may as well start tracing the plans for a pipeline north of the US and build it so that the tar sands oil can safely reach the Pacific Ocean on its way to China.


We're already three years into those projects. There is one proposed through BC, one through the Yukon and a reverse pipeline to the east. Keystone is just the easiest and friendliest but by no means the only.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 171
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/26/2014 4:15:39 PM

Why do you buy soft wood from Canada when you have enough of your own to last forever?


We don't have enough wood to last forever. Not only that but the laws of supply, demand, and cost of production come into play. Such is exactly the same with tar sands from Canada and Permian oil shale. With the cost of producing a pipeline, with all the environmental studies and issues, tar sands piped to Texas through the heartland of America far exceeds the cost of producing shale oil from the Permian.


Also, the Montley Fool article you cited, even though very recent, is old news. Pioneer Resources has been pounding the pavement trying to get every publication on the planet to boast about the reserves it claims in the Permian.


OK...try to kill this messenger:


Drillers in Utah and Colorado are poking into a massive shale deposit trying to find a way to unlock oil reserves that are so vast they would swamp OPEC.

A recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office estimated that if half of the oil bound up in the rock of the Green River Formation could be recovered it would be "equal to the entire world's proven oil reserves."

Both the GAO and private industry estimate the amount of oil recoverable to be 3 trillion barrels.

From ABC News.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 172
view profile
History
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/26/2014 9:08:17 PM

We don't have enough wood to last forever.


Sure you do. You just have to "renew" it properly. But you don't have enough oil either, so there you go.


With the cost of producing a pipeline


That's free for you. TCPL pays that bill.


with all the environmental studies and issues, tar sands piped to Texas through the heartland of America far exceeds the cost of producing shale oil from the Permian.


That's a nice opinion. Any fact to go with it?


OK...try to kill this messenger:


That's too funny. So, let me get this straight. You're now willing to develop shale oil in Utah/Colorado in order to save the environment from Alberta oil sands? That's wicked funny. First of all, the Green River Formation really has about 77 billion achievable barrels. Not quite 3 trillion but your info is a couple years old now. What you really have to ask yourself is, if there really were 3 trillion barrels ready to go in 2012, why hasn't every major producer in the USA stuck their nose in that trough yet?


Unlike conventional oil, shale must be mined, crushed and processed, then upgraded further before it can be shipped and refined. That consumes too much energy and water, critics say.

"With commercial-scale development we are talking strip mining some of Utah's best backcountry and hunting grounds. It's committing to a final land use. It doesn't bode well for future generations," says Taylor McKinnon, energy director for the Grand Canyon Trust. "We foresee a need to transfer water rights from agriculture to this industry.


http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56709331-78/shale-oil-enefit-utah.html.csp

So, you have to strip mine the rock, pulverize it into dust, boil it at 900 degrees for several months, refine it chemically, then ship it to be refined into sellable product. And that's better than having someone else do the dirty work and just selling the end product? Does that make any sense to you?
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 173
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/27/2014 4:00:48 AM

With the cost of producing a pipeline
That's free for you. TCPL pays that bill.

Nothing is free.


Sure you do. You just have to "renew" it properly. But you don't have enough oil either, so there you go.


The short sided view. Oil is a finite quantity. How much and how easy to recover is only estimable. Even when technology makes recovery efforts economically feasible the resource is finite. Therefore, the US must continue to develop renewable energy sources.


What you really have to ask yourself is, if there really were 3 trillion barrels ready to go in 2012,


I reread the article. This is not what it said. However it did say the recoverable estimate is 3 trillion barrels of oil.


First of all, the Green River Formation really has about 77 billion achievable barrels. Not quite 3 trillion barrels


No that is funny, because you then quote a cite where the article says:


http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56709331-78/shale-oil-enefit-utah.html.csp
Billions of barrels • Nearly three-fourths of the world's kerogen-bearing shales occurs in the United States. Most of it is in the Green River Formation under northeastern Utah and neighboring territory in Wyoming and Colorado, deposited during the Eocene when vast lakes covered the region. Algae settled to the lake beds, blended with sediments, and transformed into kerogen, an "immature" hydrocarbon that becomes oil when heated.

The federal government estimates these deposits represent more than 4 trillion barrels of oil and about 800 billion are technically recoverable — more than triple Saudi reserves. There is enough kerogen in Uinta Basin's shale to fill 1.32 trillion barrels. According to the Utah Geological Survey, however, "only" 77 billion barrels are economically recoverable, or enough to satisfy national demand for 11 years at current rates of consumption.


So, your article has Utah geologists in conflict with GAO and industry estimates. The GAO and industry says 3 trillion barrels of recoverable oil and Utah says 77 billion barrels.

Therefore, on the low estimate of 77 billion barrels the US would only be able to have it's entire oil needs met for 11 years.


why hasn't every major producer in the USA stuck their nose in that trough yet?


Many have.


You're now willing to develop shale oil in Utah/Colorado in order to save the environment from Alberta oil


Hold on. Didn't you say Keystone was free? "That's free for you. TCPL pays that bill." There is no cost. Now you seem to agree that there is a cost for any type of oil exploration, development, production, and shipping.

I digress. I do agree strip mining shale oil in Utah won't float any environmentalist boat, but technology improves every so often and as with horizontal drilling in the Permian oil fields recovery efforts become both economically feasible and environmentally feasible.

But, a free pipeline through the breadbasket of America sounds like a better idea.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 174
view profile
History
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/27/2014 4:04:28 AM
There's more than one element of the dynamic of energy production in the world, and especially in the US.

It's complicated more than it should be, because both politicians with other agendas, and energy producers who are convinced they have to lie to get things done, act to confuse the issues constantly. And they really are NOT all coordinated conspirators on either side of the arguments that erupt, no matter how much it might seem as though they must be, and no matter how much their opponents want to convince the onlookers that they are, as a maneuvering trick.

One of the basic mostly-lies stories, is the oft repeated idea that we HAVE plenty of energy resources available domestically, but a bunch of crazy tree huggers are standing in the way of developing them, because they are trying to destroy the United States and bring about a new Western Soviet Union, or some such. The real story behind that kind of thing, is that the folks who see potential profit in stuff like shale sand oil, realize that their profit margin will be too small if they have to obey all the existing environmental laws, and if they have to actually see to it that the rest of the people living in the area wont have their livelihoods messed up by the extraction process, so they try to get the regulations overturned. They wont say it's just because there's not enough profit to dig the oil up and process it cleanly, because that sounds bad, so instead they pretend that the regulations are entirely unnecessary, and are the result of panicked funk of a few evil leftists. A variety of politicians with entirely unrelated agendas join in, not because they give a crap about developing the oil fields, but because they see an opportunity to grab a bunch of disgruntled voters away from their opponent, simply by pretending to support destruction of natural resources, disguised as financial patriotism. Or they join the opposition, to gain the support of those concerned about the ecology, not because they even understand it all themselves, but simply because by pretending to care about clear air and water, they can get votes from lots of people whether they deliver clean air and water or not.

What is the REAL truth on both sides? Hard to tell, because the bulk of the media and research groups who could give us answers, are supported directly by one side or the other, or they make their own independent money off of sewing confusion, and getting EVERYONE upset and arguing.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 175
view profile
History
Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed
Posted: 5/27/2014 5:17:57 AM

So, your article has Utah geologists in conflict with GAO and industry estimates. The GAO and industry says 3 trillion barrels of recoverable oil and Utah says 77 billion barrels.

Therefore, on the low estimate of 77 billion barrels the US would only be able to have it's entire oil needs met for 11 years.


The EIA also said the Monterey shale oil field had 13 billion more barrels than it actually did. That's a 96% hit but who's counting?


Many have.


Like so many, in fact, like all environmntalist wannabe's you're just making stuff up to suite your needs. No Irish, the big oil companies are not strip mining, bashing rocks to dust, boiling the dust for months, then chemically treating the vapour and hoping for a profitable outcome. As of Jan 2014...


Unfortunately, neither method has proven economically viable to this point. In recent years, both Shell and Chevron have abandoned their respective oil shale efforts in Colorado, after investing tens of millions of dollars into finding profitable extraction methods. And so, for now, the alluring deposits of oil in this fine-grained sedimentary rock in the Green River – that could put an end to America’s dependence on foreign oil – remains out of reach.


http://canaryusa.com/oil-production-in-colorado-skyrockets-thanks-to-fracking/


Hold on. Didn't you say Keystone was free? "That's free for you. TCPL pays that bill." There is no cost. Now you seem to agree that there is a cost for any type of oil exploration, development, production, and shipping.


Ya, the pipeline doesn't cost you anything. What's so hard to understand about that. Pipelines aren't oil exploration, development and production. TCPL doesn't produce oil. They pay you to build this pipeline.


digress. I do agree strip mining shale oil in Utah won't float any environmentalist boat, but technology improves every so often and as with horizontal drilling in the Permian oil fields recovery efforts become both economically feasible and environmentally feasible.


Oh really? So you guys can develop, inovate, and create cutting edge technology that magically satisfies all interests but no one else can. That's a bloody joke. If you and everyone else would look at the innovation that has already takn place in the oil sands you'd see a list a mile long of real innovation that has reduced emmissions per barrel while increasing production, cut down the amount of water used for fracking to almost zero, created a resource of zero recoverable barrels to 175 billion recoverable, created a way to store co2 in the ground, and the list goes on and on...

http://www.capp.ca/canadaindustry/oilsands/innovation/technology/Pages/default.aspx

There are pages and pages of innovation that's already taken place but by all means go reinvent the magic wheel.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Decision On Keystone XL Pipeline Delayed