Let me get this straight

Insp4

Veteran
May 27, 2016
5,653
826
Is this what the Democrat's call progress?
1626007922332.png
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Seatacus

Insp4

Veteran
May 27, 2016
5,653
826
You do realize that we still export more than we import. The keystone pipeline that supposedly has killed the oil industry was shipping crap from Canada down to Houston, refined and then.....exported. In other words, we weren't using that oil here and we weren't GOING to use the oil from Keystone.
You still don't get it. Biden killed thousands of American and Canadian jobs! ........ Why? For political purpose's only! By doing so what really has he accomplished? That Canadian oil is still going to make it to Houston! Only now it well be transported by rail and over our highways and through our Cities with a much greater chance of an environmental disaster!
 

KCFlyer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
10,694
1,324
www.usaviation.com
He didn't kill thousands of jobs and the jobs he did "kill" were temporary....when the pipeline was done, the jobs would be gone. And yes...that oil is still going to Houston and still being exported, which means that the job killing actions did NOT impact our imports. As for environmental disasters. I guess what you can't see doesn't matter, but I worry about groundwater. If you think 4 bucks a gallon for gasoline is bad, just let the water supply get messed up and we look a 4 bucks a gallon for water. To drink. To bathe. To water golf courses. To water crops. If we mess up the water, we kind of screw ourselves. I'd rather have some Exxon Mobil shareholders see a little bit of reduced dividends than have a screwed up water supply.
 

La Li Lu Le Lo

Veteran
May 29, 2010
6,969
2,613
He didn't kill thousands of jobs and the jobs he did "kill" were temporary....when the pipeline was done, the jobs would be gone. And yes...that oil is still going to Houston and still being exported, which means that the job killing actions did NOT impact our imports. As for environmental disasters. I guess what you can't see doesn't matter, but I worry about groundwater. If you think 4 bucks a gallon for gasoline is bad, just let the water supply get messed up and we look a 4 bucks a gallon for water. To drink. To bathe. To water golf courses. To water crops. If we mess up the water, we kind of screw ourselves. I'd rather have some Exxon Mobil shareholders see a little bit of reduced dividends than have a screwed up water supply.
You worry about what fear mongers pushing a political agenda tell you to worry about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Insp4

KCFlyer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
10,694
1,324
www.usaviation.com
You worry about what fear mongers pushing a political agenda tell you to worry about.
I don't worry about much. I don't listen to talking heads. I don't read conspiracy theory sites. I don't have cable so I don't watch "fake news" or conservative (alternative facts) news. I read a bunch and I form my own opinion. Seems that those who follow conspiracy theories worry a helluva lot more than I do.
 

La Li Lu Le Lo

Veteran
May 29, 2010
6,969
2,613
I don't worry about much. I don't listen to talking heads. I don't read conspiracy theory sites. I don't have cable so I don't watch "fake news" or conservative (alternative facts) news. I read a bunch and I form my own opinion. Seems that those who follow conspiracy theories worry a helluva lot more than I do.
Your post history suggest otherwise.
 

delldude

Veteran
Oct 29, 2002
28,242
5,881
Downrange
www.youtube.com
He didn't kill thousands of jobs and the jobs he did "kill" were temporary....when the pipeline was done, the jobs would be gone. And yes...that oil is still going to Houston and still being exported, which means that the job killing actions did NOT impact our imports. As for environmental disasters. I guess what you can't see doesn't matter, but I worry about groundwater. If you think 4 bucks a gallon for gasoline is bad, just let the water supply get messed up and we look a 4 bucks a gallon for water. To drink. To bathe. To water golf courses. To water crops. If we mess up the water, we kind of screw ourselves. I'd rather have some Exxon Mobil shareholders see a little bit of reduced dividends than have a screwed up water supply.
Ahh.....that's how those people make their livelihood. They go from job to job creating whatever the work order demands. They finish the job and go to the next one. In this case, they lost their personal investment in that job contract, upsetting their income stream.

What experts say


Gillibrand suggests the crude oil imported through the pipeline would be immediately exported to other countries once it reaches the Gulf Coast. Experts say that is not the case.

"I don't believe that she is correct," said Mark Bateau, Director of the Energy Institute at the University of Michigan. "In general, refineries designed to handle heavier crudes are the ones most likely to utilize this oil, in some cases instead of heavy crudes imported from places like Venezuela."

"I would say it doesn’t accurately describe the likely outcome," said Stanley Reynolds, an environmental economics expert from the University at Arizona. "It’s true that the oil would come from Canada and then mainly go to the U.S. Gulf Coast for refining."

TransCanada, the company building the pipeline, confirmed in an email that the pipeline was designed to reach refineries in the Gulf Coast region.

Experts also say it’s unlikely that none of the refined products will be sold in the U.S. once the pipeline is built.

"That refined oil product, gasoline or whatever, could be just as easily consumed in the United States as somewhere else," said Barry Rabe, an expert on environmental policy from the University at Michigan. "There’s nothing on the oil coming through a pipeline from Canada that requires all of that to be sold somewhere else."https://www.politifact.com/factchec...ibrand/will-oil-keystone-xl-pipeline-stay-us/
Do you worry about truck and rail oils spills contaminating ground water? They are both less reliable than an underground pipeline.
Moving oil from where it is produced to ports for transport is clearly safest and efficient when it is transported by pipelines designed fit for purpose for the task at hand. Pipelines are undeniably the lowest risk and most efficient means of transport onshore for point to point movement. They require both regulation and ongoing inspection and maintenance and should be replaced based on predetermined age and risk factors.

Trains and trucks work when the distance is short and the volumes not so large. Trains can also provide a temporary longer distance, higher volume solution until the costs of a pipeline are justified. Facts are facts and crude oil in tankers weighs a lot; its contents are volatile under certain conditions; rails are thin, as are train car wheels, and possibly brittle, depending on age, construction, wear and tear, and weather. Tracks are constantly exposed to breakdown. Trucks are exposed to the same risks, including traffic and other highway conditions. Trucks are also higher risk being subject to human factors, more so than other transport infrastructure.

It’s not rocket science to use experience and results, real data in real time, to rank the risks and decide fact-based outcomes in the order provided. https://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-258B-4615