keystone pipeline: pure evil
11 Jun 2013, 4:38 pm
chris5000 wrote:
your forgetting that the pipeline will be running over a massive aquifer and the production of tar sands involves stripping the land and consumes massive amounts of water. its almost as bad as the coal mining in west Virginia were they cut the tops off of mountains and fill in valleys. sure they reclaim the land and plant trees after they are done but it will never be the same as the virgin land. the very fact that the majority of people wont actually see the destruction for themselves that they wont care or even realize how vast it is. seeing a valley fill a few years ago really changed my views on things. on paper is does not seem bad but in person its hard to even put in words that describe what you see.
Pipelines and storage tanks are everywhere, and have been for decades now. Do you have an issue with trains carrying Alberta oil over the same (or nearby) routes?
As for the rest, the government of Canada and Alberta have already approved production, and the oil has been shipped by rail for years now. The State Department blocking Keystone XL is absurd, since the same agency has no problem when oil producing dictatorships want to do something.
_________________
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)
11 Jun 2013, 5:36 pm
AgentPalpatine wrote:
chris5000 wrote:
your forgetting that the pipeline will be running over a massive aquifer and the production of tar sands involves stripping the land and consumes massive amounts of water. its almost as bad as the coal mining in west Virginia were they cut the tops off of mountains and fill in valleys. sure they reclaim the land and plant trees after they are done but it will never be the same as the virgin land. the very fact that the majority of people wont actually see the destruction for themselves that they wont care or even realize how vast it is. seeing a valley fill a few years ago really changed my views on things. on paper is does not seem bad but in person its hard to even put in words that describe what you see.
Pipelines and storage tanks are everywhere, and have been for decades now. Do you have an issue with trains carrying Alberta oil over the same (or nearby) routes?
As for the rest, the government of Canada and Alberta have already approved production, and the oil has been shipped by rail for years now. The State Department blocking Keystone XL is absurd, since the same agency has no problem when oil producing dictatorships want to do something.
those pipelines and storage tanks have also been causing problems for decades why make more a rail accident is a hell of a lot easier to contain than a pipeline failure
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pipeline_accidents_in_the_United_States_in_the_21st_Century
heres a list of accidents from pipelines in the us since 2000
its a long list and will take some time go over
11 Jun 2013, 6:28 pm
AgentPalpatine wrote:
OP was talking about the Keystone XL pipline (really the Alberta Tar Sands by proxy), not "fracking".
Yeah, I know.
I'm not big into any fossil fuels,it's time for alternatives.
My house now has cracked drywall and there was a 5. something earthquake here caused by the stupid fracking.
Everyone wants their fossil fuels, but nobody cares about the people and the natural world it effects.
_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,699
Location: the island of defective toy santas
11 Jun 2013, 6:44 pm
how are we all gonna heat and cook for all 7+ billion of us, when the easy oil runs out? when nuclear is adjudged to be too unsafe for continued widespread use? there isn't enough energy density in alternative energy sources to support our present population at its current rate of growth. the only things that will save us are either population control or some quantum leap in tech.
11 Jun 2013, 6:49 pm
auntblabby wrote:
how are we all gonna heat and cook for all 7+ billion of us, when the easy oil runs out? when nuclear is adjudged to be too unsafe for continued widespread use? there isn't enough energy density in alternative energy sources to support our present population at its current rate of growth. the only things that will save us are either population control or some quantum leap in tech.
The newer designs for fission reactors are quite safe. Using breeder reactors will recycle so call radioactive waste so the waste problem will be minimized. Using thorium based reactors will eliminate the possibility of plutonium which is quite toxic and can be used to build nuclear bombs. Fission has a future.
ruveyn
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,699
Location: the island of defective toy santas
11 Jun 2013, 6:55 pm
ruveyn wrote:
The newer designs for fission reactors are quite safe. Using breeder reactors will recycle so call radioactive waste so the waste problem will be minimized. Using thorium based reactors will eliminate the possibility of plutonium which is quite toxic and can be used to build nuclear bombs. Fission has a future.
would the proliferation of the new reactors mean that another fukushima is not likely to ever happen?
11 Jun 2013, 7:07 pm
auntblabby wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
The newer designs for fission reactors are quite safe. Using breeder reactors will recycle so call radioactive waste so the waste problem will be minimized. Using thorium based reactors will eliminate the possibility of plutonium which is quite toxic and can be used to build nuclear bombs. Fission has a future.
would the proliferation of the new reactors mean that another fukushima is not likely to ever happen?
That depends purely on the people who are in charge of the reactors. If they are careful the reactors will run safely. If they are careless then bad things may happen. But look at the worst case in the U.S. Three Mile Island. Not a single person died as a result of that mishap, which never should have happened if the procedures were followed carefully. No radioactivity leaked out of the site. The reactor was damaged but wide scale Fukusima type damage did NOT occur. However the eco-phreaks made a major case out of it. More people have been killed by broken dams in the U.S. than nuclear plant mishaps in the U.S. The death toll from nuclear plant mishaps in the U.S is 0.
ruveyn
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,699
Location: the island of defective toy santas
11 Jun 2013, 7:10 pm
ruveyn wrote:
That depends purely on the people who are in charge of the reactors. If they are careful the reactors will run safely. If they are careless then bad things may happen. But look at the worst case in the U.S. Three Mile Island. Not a single person died as a result of that mishap, which never should have happened if the procedures were followed carefully. No radioactivity leaked out of the site. The reactor was damaged but wide scale Fukusima type damage did NOT occur. However the eco-phreaks made a major case out of it. More people have been killed by broken dams in the U.S. than nuclear plant mishaps in the U.S. The death toll from nuclear plant mishaps in the U.S is 0.
so the human factor must be fixed, one way or the other- how?
11 Jun 2013, 7:17 pm
auntblabby wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
That depends purely on the people who are in charge of the reactors. If they are careful the reactors will run safely. If they are careless then bad things may happen. But look at the worst case in the U.S. Three Mile Island. Not a single person died as a result of that mishap, which never should have happened if the procedures were followed carefully. No radioactivity leaked out of the site. The reactor was damaged but wide scale Fukusima type damage did NOT occur. However the eco-phreaks made a major case out of it. More people have been killed by broken dams in the U.S. than nuclear plant mishaps in the U.S. The death toll from nuclear plant mishaps in the U.S is 0.
so the human factor must be fixed, one way or the other- how?
The old fashioned way. Training the people rigorously, making their oversight of nuclear facilities a Calling, not just a job.
Where humans are involved perfection cannot be guaranteed. We can hope to keep damage and mishaps at a reasonable level.
ruveyn
11 Jun 2013, 7:17 pm
auntblabby wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
The newer designs for fission reactors are quite safe. Using breeder reactors will recycle so call radioactive waste so the waste problem will be minimized. Using thorium based reactors will eliminate the possibility of plutonium which is quite toxic and can be used to build nuclear bombs. Fission has a future.
would the proliferation of the new reactors mean that another fukushima is not likely to ever happen?
fukushima was supposed to be decommissioned a decade ago it was the anti nuclear people blocking the construction of a new plant that forced it into operation beyond its projected life time. also it was not the reactor that was causing the problems the reactor shut down like it was supposed to do. it was the diesel generators which got flooded out not powering the pumps to keep the spent fuel rod pool cool which is only stored on site because of the anti nuclear lobby blocking reprocessing of the "waste" which is a collection of valuable elements. the fact is the anti nuclear lobby is grasping at anything they can get to make nuclear look bad. by blocking the construction of new reactors they are forcing reactors designed in the 60s to be used long after there projected lifetime. the modern reactor is passively safe and produces little to no "Waste". the nuclear industry is by far the safest industry in history and also has made the least pollution.
12 Jun 2013, 2:18 am
I remember when the reactors were built, I saw it on Black and White TV. Also the open surface tests of bombs in the southwest, with troops in trenches a few miles away.
Primates are crude, but those are the same designs built, and regulated to be the only designs. Cold War, National Security, No Bid Contracts.
The same thinking kept the Edsel Built Space Shuttle flying for longer than the Wright Brothers to commercial jet traffic.
This is what happens when government and industry try to control the future.
The result was their children sprouted hair all over, and the unregulated computer and phone market has been the only development. NASA still claims to own space, the whole Universe, and only people with special friends can build reactors.
Stepping back, the current situation seems to be the old industries making war on a much younger population, that has not learned how to bribe Congress, and any political party they form gets labeled, targeted, and Mediad.
The country belongs to the current generation, as does all the oil and gas in the ground, which produces an income of $50,000 per man woman and child, which someone else gets, because they bribe Congress.
They need the money to spy on you because you might be terrorists.
Turkish women are more man than Americans.
You get the government you deserve.
12 Jun 2013, 4:01 am
Inventor wrote:
I remember when the reactors were built, I saw it on Black and White TV. Also the open surface tests of bombs in the southwest, with troops in trenches a few miles away.
Primates are crude, but those are the same designs built, and regulated to be the only designs. Cold War, National Security, No Bid Contracts.
The same thinking kept the Edsel Built Space Shuttle flying for longer than the Wright Brothers to commercial jet traffic.
This is what happens when government and industry try to control the future.
The result was their children sprouted hair all over, and the unregulated computer and phone market has been the only development. NASA still claims to own space, the whole Universe, and only people with special friends can build reactors.
Stepping back, the current situation seems to be the old industries making war on a much younger population, that has not learned how to bribe Congress, and any political party they form gets labeled, targeted, and Mediad.
The country belongs to the current generation, as does all the oil and gas in the ground, which produces an income of $50,000 per man woman and child, which someone else gets, because they bribe Congress.
They need the money to spy on you because you might be terrorists.
Turkish women are more man than Americans.
You get the government you deserve.
Primates are crude, but those are the same designs built, and regulated to be the only designs. Cold War, National Security, No Bid Contracts.
The same thinking kept the Edsel Built Space Shuttle flying for longer than the Wright Brothers to commercial jet traffic.
This is what happens when government and industry try to control the future.
The result was their children sprouted hair all over, and the unregulated computer and phone market has been the only development. NASA still claims to own space, the whole Universe, and only people with special friends can build reactors.
Stepping back, the current situation seems to be the old industries making war on a much younger population, that has not learned how to bribe Congress, and any political party they form gets labeled, targeted, and Mediad.
The country belongs to the current generation, as does all the oil and gas in the ground, which produces an income of $50,000 per man woman and child, which someone else gets, because they bribe Congress.
They need the money to spy on you because you might be terrorists.
Turkish women are more man than Americans.
You get the government you deserve.
the third party space industry is about to explode spaceX has been moving at leaps and bounds there new engine design is considered the best in the world, right now nasa is getting the old German jr2 rocket motors out of the tanks of oil they were being stored in for use in the next generation of rockets. you cant say nasa is nothing doing anything just recently they had a probe leave the solar system, they put multiple rovers on mars and probes or many other planets they also built the microchip industry. when the lunar rover was built it had over 70% of the worlds microchips. they got people to the moon in a ship made of aluminum foil so thin you could stick a pencil through it. so you have to give nasa credit were credit is do. maybe if the goverment was not in bed with the banking cartel and the military industrial complex things like space exploration would get funded more but instead the money is spend on destabilizing the middle east to keep a steady stream of wars to fund because without war whos going to buy all those bombs?
12 Jun 2013, 4:06 am
Inventor wrote:
The same thinking kept the Edsel Built Space Shuttle flying for longer than the Wright Brothers to commercial jet traffic.
The "Edsel Built Space Shuttle"? Huh?
If you mean the Space Shuttle and not something else, are you really claiming that the Space Shuttle was in use for longer than the time from the Wright Brothers flight at Kitty Hawk until the development of commercial jet traffic?
Let's see. The Wright Brothers first flew at Kitty Hawk in 1903. The first commercial jet airliner was the De Havilland Comet which first flew in 1949 and apparently first flew commercially in 1952. So from 1903 to 1952 was 49 years.
The last flight of the Space Shuttle was in 2011. If it flew for a longer period of time then the time between the Wright Brothers first flight to the first commercial jet flight, then the first flight of the Space Shuttle would have had to have been no later than 1962. Are you sure you want to make that claim?
12 Jun 2013, 10:03 am
eric76 wrote:
Inventor wrote:
The same thinking kept the Edsel Built Space Shuttle flying for longer than the Wright Brothers to commercial jet traffic.
The "Edsel Built Space Shuttle"? Huh?
If you mean the Space Shuttle and not something else, are you really claiming that the Space Shuttle was in use for longer than the time from the Wright Brothers flight at Kitty Hawk until the development of commercial jet traffic?
Let's see. The Wright Brothers first flew at Kitty Hawk in 1903. The first commercial jet airliner was the De Havilland Comet which first flew in 1949 and apparently first flew commercially in 1952. So from 1903 to 1952 was 49 years.
The last flight of the Space Shuttle was in 2011. If it flew for a longer period of time then the time between the Wright Brothers first flight to the first commercial jet flight, then the first flight of the Space Shuttle would have had to have been no later than 1962. Are you sure you want to make that claim?
He got the dates wrong but he was right about something. As spacecraft go, the Shuttles were the Edsels of space-flight. At least Edsels were not covered with tiles.
ruveyn
12 Jun 2013, 2:41 pm
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, etc. My "interest" is environmental preservation. That's is... I don't care about all the technicalities; I care about whether the end justifies the means: the KeystoneXL pipeline would cut through a massive amount of the continent. It would have a ripple effect on the land and air in many ways. Life has been sustained on Earth by the very design that makes it livable...as is. Man has made it this far without the Ksystone pipeline. It is obviously not necessary to survival. I am not calling outevery single oil pipeline in existence as harmful; I am of the position that it has become to excessive. Man is raping the land. They leveled mountains? Yes, there is an area where the did. It is done by stripping them down layer by layer. This has also been done in search of coal in West Virginia and is extremely controversial in that area. Now, I hope the above sentence doesn't render someone thinking I'm completely against all uses of coal either...i am not against all uses of oil either.
So just on the Keystone XL Pipeline.... is anyone else here against its construction besides myself?
Even if you don't care about the environment as long as you have eniugh oxygen and water to live a full lifetime, does the idea that the few can outway the desires of the majority bother you at all? I.E. I havea friend who lives in a town in California where 90% of the town is against a third highway being constructed, yet its goung to happen because the money (omg money! Yay! Lets all go party this wkend!!) is there.
_________________
Seeing beyond the 3rd Dimension.
12 Jun 2013, 2:57 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, etc. My "interest" is environmental preservation. That's is... I don't care about all the technicalities; I care about whether the end justifies the means: the KeystoneXL pipeline would cut through a massive amount of the continent. It would have a ripple effect on the land and air in many ways. Life has been sustained on Earth by the very design that makes it livable...as is. Man has made it this far without the Ksystone pipeline. It is obviously not necessary to survival. I am not calling outevery single oil pipeline in existence as harmful; I am of the position that it has become to excessive. Man is raping the land. They leveled mountains? Yes, there is an area where the did. It is done by stripping them down layer by layer. This has also been done in search of coal in West Virginia and is extremely controversial in that area. Now, I hope the above sentence doesn't render someone thinking I'm completely against all uses of coal either...i am not against all uses of oil either.
So just on the Keystone XL Pipeline.... is anyone else here against its construction besides myself?
Even if you don't care about the environment as long as you have eniugh oxygen and water to live a full lifetime, does the idea that the few can outway the desires of the majority bother you at all? I.E. I havea friend who lives in a town in California where 90% of the town is against a third highway being constructed, yet its goung to happen because the money (omg money! Yay! Lets all go party this wkend!!) is there.
So just on the Keystone XL Pipeline.... is anyone else here against its construction besides myself?
Even if you don't care about the environment as long as you have eniugh oxygen and water to live a full lifetime, does the idea that the few can outway the desires of the majority bother you at all? I.E. I havea friend who lives in a town in California where 90% of the town is against a third highway being constructed, yet its goung to happen because the money (omg money! Yay! Lets all go party this wkend!!) is there.
Please define "massive amount of the continent". If we go by Wikipedia, the expansion (the earlier parts are already operational), we're talking roughly 1,179 miles (per wikipedia) of pipeline, which really is'nt all that much as these things go.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline
I'm honestly trying to figure out what you're against here. You claim that you don't object to at least some oil production, that you don't object to at least some coal production, and you're not objecting to at least some pipelines. What exactly is your objection to Keystone XL, as defined as the Keystone pipeline from Alberta to Cushing, OK?
If it's water supplies, pipelines cross water supplies. If it's land use, then you should speak to farmers who have pipelines underneath their property. If it's above-ground you oppose, talk to Alaska. If it's oil use in general, talk to anyone who drives a car.
_________________
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)
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Loving with a pure heart |
24 Mar 2024, 3:24 pm |
| Resident evil 7 VR |
22 Mar 2024, 4:56 pm |
