Pipelines - Yay or Nay?

[Trackdayguy]

Of course it's here. It's been around for decades. The question is are we going to support it, and develop it, or are we going to hamstring it by letting the oil industry do whatever it wants, regardless of the environmental costs?

Trying to find any balance in life is hard. You are quite correct we do need to protect our environment, we also need to remember that we are not here to serve the earth it's the earth severs us and future generations.

The reality for lots of Albertans is their losing their jobs and our provincial economy is rushing towards recession. The bottom line is we need these pipe lines now. This is about putting Canada 1st, not the US

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually there is no demonstrable global warming, let alone any caused by fossil fuels used by humans. Secondly, no one knows how much oil is left. We are discovering new deposits yearly. Again, no offense, but this is an example of the knee jerk scare tactics used by those with a certain environmental agenda.

You are at least fifty years behind the times. The ten hottest years measured all happened in the past twenty years:

The 10 Hottest Global Years on Record

 

[Trackdayguy]

It makes me laugh when I see the tree huggers protesting against these pipelines, most of them turning up for the latest protest in either their car or plane. Dont they both use the same oil we are talking about here.

 

[Trackdayguy]

You are at least fifty years behind the times. The ten hottest years measured all happened in the past twenty years:

The 10 Hottest Global Years on Record

I'm not arguing that climate change isn't taking place and to be honest I choose not to be offended by your accusation. The facts are people are more important. "We saved the environment but billions are out of work." Yea' real smart.

 

[Trackdayguy]

I think that's one of the problems. The proposed pipeline, outside of offering temporary jobs, does not benefit the US economy, but simply allows Canada a route for its oil export. The biggest reason for not wanting it is the lands that it must go through.

I can't believe you said that

 

[PureX]

Trying to find any balance in life is hard. You are quite correct we do need to protect our environment, we also need to remember that we are not here to serve the earth it's earth severs us and future generations.

The reality for lots of Albertans is their losing their jobs and our provincial economy is rushing towards recession. The bottom line is we need these pipe lines now. This is about putting Canada 1st, not the US

If we were to put a stop to global sex-trafficking, a lot of people would 'lose their jobs'. Pimps and prostitutes all over the world would be out of work. So, are you saying that we should not put a stop to global sex-trafficking because those involved in it would lose their jobs?

I'm sure you see my point, here. Every time someone says anything about saying "no" to industrial-scale pollution, the old 'lost jobs' threat come out. But the truth is that I really just don't care if people working for polluting oil conglomerates lose their jobs, because their jobs are actively helping to pollute the global environment that is NOT THEIRS TO POLLUTE, any more than women's bodies exist for men to exploit for their own fun and profit.

 

[Trackdayguy]

If we were to put a stop to global sex-trafficking, a lot of people would 'lose their jobs'. Pimps and prostitutes all over the world would be out of work. So, are you saying that we should not put a stop to global sex-trafficking because those involved in it would lose their jobs?

I'm sure you see my point, here. Every time someone says anything about saying "no" to industrial-scale pollution, the old 'lost jobs' threat come out. But the truth is that I really just don't care if people working for polluting oil conglomerates lose their jobs, because their jobs are actively helping to pollute the global environment that is NOT THEIRS TO POLLUTE, any more than women's bodies exist for to men to exploit for their own fun and profit.

No I dont see your point. Sex trafficking is a moral issue. Pipe lines help put fuel in YOUR car, let me know when you want to sell it Im sure we can find some polluter who would buy it.

 

[LuisDantas]

But it's not here yet, and people have jobs now that need protecting.

I fear that while that worry is quite legimate, it has been abused way beyond the breaking point.

Fossil fuels are appealling because they are readily available and are comparatively cheap and easy to harvest. They could never be sustainable, yet whole gigantic structures, even cultures, have been built over the assumption that they would always be available.

A prudent society would count its blessings and develop alternative, sustainable energy and technology to the best of its ability, carefully planning its consumption habits and demographic situation in order to avoid a major crisis.

I don't know if such a society ever existed on Earth. Perhaps among the Amish and similar groups?

As things stand, we are driving full speed towards a variety of symultaneous major collapses simply because it is so unconfortable to be responsible regarding fuels and population levels. Our passions and attachments have subdued our logic and common sense.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not arguing that climate change isn't taking place and to be honest I choose not to be offended by your accusation. The facts are people are more important. "We saved the environment but billions are out of work." Yea' real smart.

It does not have to be that way. You are using a false dichotomy. Why not do both? Be nice to the environment and develop carbon free or carbon reduced energy? It worked for Australia when they had a carbon "tax" (it was not really a tax which may be why it worked). I am against taxing carbon based fuels just to tax them That will not solve the problem. Australia's tax was revenue neutral The money raised was returned to the populace as a tax credit or as incentives to businesses to "go green". Some businesses ended up taking on changes that not only made them greener but saved them money in the process. Sooner or later we will run out of oil. Yes, we are always improving technology to get more existing oil out and occasionally finding new sources, but it keeps getting more and more expensive to harvest that oil The end of fossil fuels is coming one way or another and a controlled change to alternative sources is much better than suddenly finding that there is no longer anywhere near enough oil left.

 

[Ellen Brown]

What people do not also know is that the material being pumped through those pipelines is not crude oil, but oil mixed with "secret" chemicals that were used to force it from the ground, and that causes the oil to sink, in water. So when it spills into a stream, or river, or aquifer, it becomes extremely difficult to clean up. And it has already been spilled from these pipelines many times, and is being spilled constantly. There are literally thousands of instances of oil spills from the pipelines just in the last decade. Some are small, and some are huge. And it's not as simple as just scraping it off the ground, or skimming it off the water, anymore. The oil companies won't even divulge what these chemicals are that they are pumping into the ground to force the oil up, but they are powerful solvents of some sort, and these are historically very toxic and very damaging to the environment.

There is a hierarchy of needs that seems to allow people to suspend reason and due caution. For Huumans aggression that is linked to self preservation somehow, through denial allows us to suspend thinking about consequences so immediate needs take precedence. Perhaps that is what happened to likely dozens of civilizations before this present one. Unless we do something different, we will "feed" ourselves into oblivion and extinction, and sooner than we think.

 

[Trackdayguy]

It does not have to be that way. You are using a false dichotomy. Why not do both? Be nice to the environment and develop carbon free or carbon reduced energy? It worked for Australia when they had a carbon "tax" (it was not really a tax which may be why it worked). I am against taxing carbon based fuels just to tax them That will not solve the problem. Australia's tax was revenue neutral The money raised was returned to the populace as a tax credit or as incentives to businesses to "go green". Some businesses ended up taking on changes that not only made them greener but saved them money in the process. Sooner or later we will run out of oil. Yes, we are always improving technology to get more existing oil out and occasionally finding new sources, but it keeps getting more and more expensive to harvest that oil The end of fossil fuels is coming one way or another and a controlled change to alternative sources is much better than suddenly finding that there is no longer anywhere near enough oil left.

Of course we need to develop alternative energies, in the mean time we need these pipelines.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Of course we need to develop alternative energies, in the mean time we need these pipelines.

As I said earlier, pipelines are probably the safest way to ship that gas. Yes, problems can and do happen, but they tend to be less severe than alternative ways of shipping that petroleum. Meanwhile here is a video that you might find interesting on a conservative approach to climate change:

Quick question, what world leader first brought up the problem of climate change?

 

[Trackdayguy]

Moving oil by rail is far more hazardous

 

[Willamena]

Of course we need to develop alternative energies, in the mean time we need these pipelines.

Just so. Oil jobs are here, now. It's not reasonable to ask a person to quit their job on the promise of retraining for a future that isn't here yet.

 

[Trackdayguy]

Just so. Oil jobs are here, now. It's not reasonable to ask a person to quit their job on the promise of retraining for a future that isn't here yet.

I think there must be some people out there who have forgotten that most people have mortgages, hockey club fees and car payments, yes it would be wonderful in a dream world to all walk away from our responsibilities and "say forget the pipelines we dont need them" What planet are these people on.

 

[Mister Emu]

Of course we need to develop alternative energies, in the mean time we need these pipelines.

We already have the only carbon fuel alternative we will ever need. The same people who say we have to give up petroleum tell us we can't use that either.

 

[PureX]

There is a hierarchy of needs that seems to allow people to suspend reason and due caution. For Huumans aggression that is linked to self preservation somehow, through denial allows us to suspend thinking about consequences so immediate needs take precedence. Perhaps that is what happened to likely dozens of civilizations before this present one. Unless we do something different, we will "feed" ourselves into oblivion and extinction, and sooner than we think.

Behavioral mechanisms that developed to serve the animal being have become liabilities in the culture of human beings. If we do not learn to recognize this, and to overcome these animal inclinations, they will destroy us in our present environment. I am not hopeful that we will learn this without being nearly destroyed. If even then.

 

[UpperLimits]

You are at least fifty years behind the times. The ten hottest years measured all happened in the past twenty years:

The 10 Hottest Global Years on Record

Key words: ten hottest years measured

That's hardly an accomplishment since the States has only been keeping records for a couple hundred years. And in many countries it's even much less time than that. Climatologists have determined that the earth has historically been much hotter, and much colder, than today. And all without any human intervention at all. You need to get a grip on reality. The sky is not falling. (And even it it was, we didn't cause that either.) Keep it in context. The last 20 years equates to diddly in terms of overall history.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Key words: ten hottest years measured

That's hardly an accomplishment since the States has only been keeping records for a couple hundred years. And in many countries it's even much less time than that. Climatologists have determined that the earth has historically been much hotter, and much colder, than today. And all without any human intervention at all. You need to get a grip on reality. The sky is not falling. (And even it it was, we didn't cause that either.) Keep it in context. The last 20 years equates to diddly in terms of overall history.

Yes, but ancient temperature changes were not caused by man nor were anywhere near as fast. It is the speed of temperature change that is a threat.

Man is responsible for these changes, there is no doubt about that. Don't you think we should try to correct our errant behavior?

 

[UpperLimits]

It does not have to be that way. You are using a false dichotomy. Why not do both? Be nice to the environment and develop carbon free or carbon reduced energy? It worked for Australia when they had a carbon "tax" (it was not really a tax which may be why it worked). I am against taxing carbon based fuels just to tax them That will not solve the problem. Australia's tax was revenue neutral The money raised was returned to the populace as a tax credit or as incentives to businesses to "go green". Some businesses ended up taking on changes that not only made them greener but saved them money in the process. Sooner or later we will run out of oil. Yes, we are always improving technology to get more existing oil out and occasionally finding new sources, but it keeps getting more and more expensive to harvest that oil The end of fossil fuels is coming one way or another and a controlled change to alternative sources is much better than suddenly finding that there is no longer anywhere near enough oil left.

Perhaps not. I was recently reading a PLOS1 article in which it was proposed that "fossil fuels" may actually be a misnomer. It's actually more properly referred to as hydrocarbons. The interesting thing in the article was the proposition that these hydrocarbons may not all have been formed by organic deposits. (Although some may certainly have been.) But rather that the process of forming hydrocarbon particles was actually a natural process of geological function that is still ongoing. In other words, the earth may very well renew its own oil reserves over time.

That may sound like an astounding claim, but consider that the more space exploration we do, the more hydrocarbons we find. All the planets in our solar system have varying degrees of hydrocarbons. They are present in asteroids, the occasional meteor, comets, and according to the Hubble telescope, even some nearby planets, and even wide open inter-planetary space. They are found in abundance in our universe. Although, perhaps not always in the black, liquid form we think of as "oil."