Page 4 of 4 [ 59 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

12 Jun 2013, 4:45 pm

dinetahrisingsun wrote:
So just on the Keystone XL Pipeline.... is anyone else here against its construction besides myself?


I'm not against the construction of the pipeline, but I am against the use of the power of eminent domain to acquire the rights of way for the pipeline. If they want the right of way, they should negotiate with the individual landowners along the path to come to agreements that satisfy the pipeline builders and the landowners. Anything else is tyranny.



AgentPalpatine
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,881
Location: Near the Delaware River

12 Jun 2013, 4:55 pm

eric76 wrote:
dinetahrisingsun wrote:
So just on the Keystone XL Pipeline.... is anyone else here against its construction besides myself?


I'm not against the construction of the pipeline, but I am against the use of the power of eminent domain to acquire the rights of way for the pipeline. If they want the right of way, they should negotiate with the individual landowners along the path to come to agreements that satisfy the pipeline builders and the landowners. Anything else is tyranny.


My understanding is that most states have historically linked the power of eminent domain to public utilities to the dramatically different regulatory and taxation regime that public utilities historically faced. Public Utilities, by definition (in most states) have to provide services to pretty much everyone on a highly regulated basis, a burden most companies do not face.

Before you bring up Kelo, I think that ruling was wrong, and that had nothing to do with a regulated public utility.


_________________
Our first challenge is to create an entire economic infrastructure, from top to bottom, out of whole cloth.
-CEO Nwabudike Morgan, "The Centauri Monopoly"
Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri (Firaxis Games)


eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

12 Jun 2013, 5:25 pm

AgentPalpatine wrote:
eric76 wrote:
dinetahrisingsun wrote:
So just on the Keystone XL Pipeline.... is anyone else here against its construction besides myself?


I'm not against the construction of the pipeline, but I am against the use of the power of eminent domain to acquire the rights of way for the pipeline. If they want the right of way, they should negotiate with the individual landowners along the path to come to agreements that satisfy the pipeline builders and the landowners. Anything else is tyranny.


My understanding is that most states have historically linked the power of eminent domain to public utilities to the dramatically different regulatory and taxation regime that public utilities historically faced. Public Utilities, by definition (in most states) have to provide services to pretty much everyone on a highly regulated basis, a burden most companies do not face.

Before you bring up Kelo, I think that ruling was wrong, and that had nothing to do with a regulated public utility.


In Texas, it is "common carrier" status. As I understand it, at least 10% of the oil a pipeline carries must be for other companies, not their own, to qualify as a common carrier.

There are allegations that the Keystone Pipeline does not qualify for this status under Texas law because it will not carry other company's oil. The problem is that they just check the "common carrier" box on the form to claim common carrier status and the state doesn't look any further. There doesn't even seem to be anyone in the Texas government with the task of verifying that claims of being a common carrier are accurate.



AgentPalpatine
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,881
Location: Near the Delaware River

12 Jun 2013, 5:57 pm

eric76 wrote:
In Texas, it is "common carrier" status. As I understand it, at least 10% of the oil a pipeline carries must be for other companies, not their own, to qualify as a common carrier.

There are allegations that the Keystone Pipeline does not qualify for this status under Texas law because it will not carry other company's oil. The problem is that they just check the "common carrier" box on the form to claim common carrier status and the state doesn't look any further. There doesn't even seem to be anyone in the Texas government with the task of verifying that claims of being a common carrier are accurate.


Yeah, I know about that issue. My understanding is that they just need to make sure that they don't own the oil when they move it, but it's not the first legal fiction for a large project :D .

Railroad Commission of Texas claims it's to the Texas courts to decide...which seems as fair as you can get on this issue.

Looks like another pipeline lost such a legal battle in a case two years ago...

http://www.pipelineandgasjournal.com/te ... -difficult


_________________
Our first challenge is to create an entire economic infrastructure, from top to bottom, out of whole cloth.
-CEO Nwabudike Morgan, "The Centauri Monopoly"
Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri (Firaxis Games)


eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

12 Jun 2013, 6:31 pm

AgentPalpatine wrote:
eric76 wrote:
In Texas, it is "common carrier" status. As I understand it, at least 10% of the oil a pipeline carries must be for other companies, not their own, to qualify as a common carrier.

There are allegations that the Keystone Pipeline does not qualify for this status under Texas law because it will not carry other company's oil. The problem is that they just check the "common carrier" box on the form to claim common carrier status and the state doesn't look any further. There doesn't even seem to be anyone in the Texas government with the task of verifying that claims of being a common carrier are accurate.


Yeah, I know about that issue. My understanding is that they just need to make sure that they don't own the oil when they move it, but it's not the first legal fiction for a large project :D .

Railroad Commission of Texas claims it's to the Texas courts to decide...which seems as fair as you can get on this issue.

Looks like another pipeline lost such a legal battle in a case two years ago...

http://www.pipelineandgasjournal.com/te ... -difficult


The problem with going through the courts is that by the time you get to court, the pipeline has probably already been built and in operation for a few years. And the cost of getting someone into a courtroom is probably going to cost more than it is worth economically.

Thanks for the link. I'll take a good look at it.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 84
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

12 Jun 2013, 7:59 pm

dinetahrisingsun wrote:
I really am not interested in the study of energies to ever become an expert on fossil fuels, natural gasses, neuclear energy, etc. I have aquantiances who are extremely interested in each scientific aspect of environmental damages versus preservations,


If you are truly interested in preserving the Environment you should work on bringing the last Ice Age back. In the last 40 million years the Earth has been more like a snowball for most of the time.

The last Good Times were between 1300 and 1750 when we had the "Little Ice Age" during that time lucky Londoners could cross the Thames on foot during the winter.

ruveyn



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

12 Jun 2013, 9:15 pm

ruveyn wrote:
dinetahrisingsun wrote:
I really am not interested in the study of energies to ever become an expert on fossil fuels, natural gasses, neuclear energy, etc. I have aquantiances who are extremely interested in each scientific aspect of environmental damages versus preservations,


If you are truly interested in preserving the Environment you should work on bringing the last Ice Age back. In the last 40 million years the Earth has been more like a snowball for most of the time.

The last Good Times were between 1300 and 1750 when we had the "Little Ice Age" during that time lucky Londoners could cross the Thames on foot during the winter.

ruveyn


Good way of looking at it. An environmentalist who hates cold weather would seem to be rather out of place, wouldn't he?



Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

12 Jun 2013, 11:25 pm

Looking up dates is cheating!

Down to evil, I will agree, but for my own reasons. There will be disruption, change, and knowing humans, that is a bad thing.

What is needed is worse for some, increases the cost, but an Enviro Offset should be demanded, A twenty five mile wide right of way, a water pipeline demanded, and the whole strip cultivated, fed, watered, and planted in native species, trees, forming an international Monarch Butterfly and Hummingbird path.

It will take the land that poor farmers ancestors murdered Native Americans for hardly a hundred years ago, will return some nature where destroyed for "Progress".

A misting system would change the climate, bring more rain to a wide area,

I have called for a hundred mile strip, but starting somewhere, something must be done because the Great Plains is heading toward desert, and restoring that will cost a lot more.

Just the farming and grazing have caused a drying, that then sends the storms east, where they gain power and dump rain, hail, tornados, which could at least be reduced, if a cool and moist plate crossing the plains would cause rain to fall farther west, and take energy out of the storms.

Flooding could be checked by spreading the river floods over the land. There is water in the Great Lakes.

It would be on the scale of a National Park, a WPA type project, and would provide employment. As it runs from Indian Terretory to Grandmother's Land, It could be routed through Wounded Knee, Rosebud, and connect the small Nations within the country.

We can demand a price for use, and should chose wisely for the generations to come.

In the good old days, The Ice Age, the earth was much richer because of the constant moisture just below the ice. The Mammoth Steppe was richer than anything we know. The earth can be supercharged to much higher state of life support.

The effect of a 25,000 square mile evaporation plate would change the climate for the better. A major water pipeline would also serve the cities, farming, cattle, along the way. Irrigated hay would pay for upkeep.

Ending greenhouse gasses is not going to happen, as China and India are the main producers, we cannot regulate, tax and trade, or have it regulated by Al Gore. We need to look to offsets, Carbon Sinks, and major climate control projects.

Without our help, the west was in drought from 800 to 1500. It is quickly moving that way again.

The only thing that will stop an evil man with a pipeline, is a good man with a pipeline.

For The Butterflies!



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

12 Jun 2013, 11:35 pm

Inventor wrote:
Looking up dates is cheating!


Not really -- I just wanted to make sure I had them right.

I already knew that the first flight was in 1903. I also knew that the first commercial jet flight was in the 1950s. And I remember the first space shuttle flight as being in 1981 and the last as approximately couple of years ago.



dinetahrisingsun
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 11 Apr 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 240
Location: West Coast, USA

13 Jun 2013, 9:47 am

^
Now, thats what to me is prosperity. :D


_________________
Seeing beyond the 3rd Dimension.


dinetahrisingsun
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 11 Apr 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 240
Location: West Coast, USA

13 Jun 2013, 9:48 am

(Inventor's ideas)


_________________
Seeing beyond the 3rd Dimension.