Oh, not again.

RIP Becky.

7: Sand in oil is used as a polishing technique for performance cylinder heads. Do I need to explain this any further.

One weird trick to deal with oil spills.

If it's happening in the south, they bought there ticket they know what they where contracting for.

/No aid, they can lick it up

an Exxon official confirmed the pipeline was "transporting a heavy form of crude from the Canadian tar sands region." Specifically, it has been identified as Wabasca Heavy, Lisa Song writes, "which is a type of diluted bitumen, or dilbit, from Alberta's tar sands region" although you won't hear any Exxon folks calling it tar sands.


I love clear, unambiguous reporting that doesn't leave you confused or saying "uh, wtf?"

Unfortunately it's getting more and more scarce.

Christian Bale: an Exxon official confirmed the pipeline was "transporting a heavy form of crude from the Canadian tar sands region." Specifically, it has been identified as Wabasca Heavy, Lisa Song writes, "which is a type of diluted bitumen, or dilbit, from Alberta's tar sands region" although you won't hear any Exxon folks calling it tar sands.


I love clear, unambiguous reporting that doesn't leave you confused or saying "uh, wtf?"

Unfortunately it's getting more and more scarce.

True though the new speak is oil sands

We have to export it somehow.  We might as well do it in the most cost effective way possible.  Won't someone think of the shareholders?

Item 1: the fact that there even was an oil spill in Arkansas.

Seriously, I have not heard a word about this until now.  I'd like to thank subby for getting this posted; I found the article informative.  Although, it failed to address the ramifications on summer gas prices.  Also, what effect this will have on relations with Canada.

Fun fact: Canada recently pulled out of an international coalition on the issue of preserving freshwater resources.  Canada has the largest freshwater reserves of any nation in the world.

davidphogan: We have to export it somehow.  We might as well do it in the most cost effective way possible.  Won't someone think of the shareholders? Children/Media

FTFR
(fixed that for reality)

Oh, and was this pipeline built in the 1940s or was the ORIGINAL pipeline built in the 1940s and the current active line was built on the same route more recently?

HotWingAgenda: Item 1: the fact that there even was an oil spill in Arkansas.

Seriously, I have not heard a word about this until now.  I'd like to thank subby for getting this posted; I found the article informative.  Although, it failed to address the ramifications on summer gas prices.  Also, what effect this will have on relations with Canada.

Fun fact: Canada recently pulled out of an international coalition on the issue of preserving freshwater resources.  Canada has the largest freshwater reserves of any nation in the world.

You haven't been paying attention

Also Canada has no fresh water we are sending it all down to the US to FLUSH THEIR CRAPPERS

Really? I sit with my polyester clothes, my plastic everything, making my organic food that I bought with gas and was shipped by a deisel truck paid by my money made from oil.

Oh god, shut up. Find a solution for the population not vilificaction.

#7:
Oil executive talking:

we promise to clean up all the oil and pay for the clean up and

...oh waiter, I need another bottle of your finest 80 year old booze, chop, chop....

OK just send your claims to your local government office who will then send us a bill and

...yea my favorite lawyer, can you start the paper work on why we don't have to pay for this spill cause of the retro-active law that can be backdated on the books....

thank you for being so patient over the next 8 years as we clean up this spill.

....Whoa, the agency sent me a nice one this time. Are the breasts real? Cause that makes the penis of yours that much more special kinky.....

Yeahhhhh; the federal government definitely has our backs on this one.

/ remain calm; all is well!

Bucky Katt: but we were told that pipelines are perfectly safe

Nadie_AZ:
Think about it. The XL will be 10 times bigger with hotter oil going faster. So your oil spill will basically sent cannon shots of oil when it bursts.

It's likely to have problems when the oil hits the seal

albatros183: HotWingAgenda: Item 1: the fact that there even was an oil spill in Arkansas.

Seriously, I have not heard a word about this until now.  I'd like to thank subby for getting this posted; I found the article informative.  Although, it failed to address the ramifications on summer gas prices.  Also, what effect this will have on relations with Canada.

Fun fact: Canada recently pulled out of an international coalition on the issue of preserving freshwater resources.  Canada has the largest freshwater reserves of any nation in the world.

You haven't been paying attention

Also Canada has no fresh water we are sending it all down to the US to FLUSH THEIR CRAPPERS

I'm sorry, you're right.  Canada is third behind Brazil (no. 1 because of the Amazon) and Russia (no. 2).  The US is a close fourth.

And I just checked CNN, and there is f*ck-all reporting about any oil spill.  The mainstream media only reports white girl kidnappings and celebrity scandals.

BarkingUnicorn: HotWingAgenda: And I just checked CNN, and there is f*ck-all reporting about any oil spill. The mainstream media only reports white girl kidnappings and celebrity scandals.

You're not mad enough to suit me.  Go read this:

Why the Arkansas Pipeline Spill Won't Hurt Exxon Mobil's Reputation

Synopsis:  your opinion doesn't matter, hippie.

That was interesting from a marketing and PR standpoint, but the issue is that Exon and other oil producers don't need marketing or PR, as that author points out.  They deal in a commodity with inelastic demand and dwindling supplies.  They could have their executives wander down the street throwing buckets of oil on peoples' pet chihuahuas, and it wouldn't have any effect on their profit margins.

I want to get peoples' opinion on this: the oil spill in Arkansas has made me MORE in favor of the Keystone pipeline, simply because if we're already relying on potentially-dangerous infrastructure, we ought to rely on NEW potentially-dangerous infrastructure. I feel the same way about nuclear power plants; ie. how do people expect to rally against old plants and simultaneously prevent the construction of new plants? The industry in either case is not going to let anyone shut down their old infrastructure, while on the contrary they will fail to build new infrastructure. It's a case of wanting your cake and eating it too. As long as we rely on oil, or in the second case, nuclear for generating electricity, we're going to need pipelines and/or power plants. And that being the case, do we not want the newest, most technologically advanced, and most reliable alternatives?

kazikian: I want to get peoples' opinion on this: the oil spill in Arkansas has made me MORE in favor of the Keystone pipeline, simply because if we're already relying on potentially-dangerous infrastructure, we ought to rely on NEW potentially-dangerous infrastructure. I feel the same way about nuclear power plants; ie. how do people expect to rally against old plants and simultaneously prevent the construction of new plants? The industry in either case is not going to let anyone shut down their old infrastructure, while on the contrary they will fail to build new infrastructure. It's a case of wanting your cake and eating it too. As long as we rely on oil, or in the second case, nuclear for generating electricity, we're going to need pipelines and/or power plants. And that being the case, do we not want the newest, most technologically advanced, and most reliable alternatives?

Except that you'll still be relying on that old, potentially-dangerous infrastructure, just with the addition of new, potentially-dangerous infrastructure. Which will then get old, and will assuredly be treated with all of the care and loving that the older infrastructure has received to date.

Albino Squid: kazikian: I want to get peoples' opinion on this: the oil spill in Arkansas has made me MORE in favor of the Keystone pipeline, simply because if we're already relying on potentially-dangerous infrastructure, we ought to rely on NEW potentially-dangerous infrastructure. I feel the same way about nuclear power plants; ie. how do people expect to rally against old plants and simultaneously prevent the construction of new plants? The industry in either case is not going to let anyone shut down their old infrastructure, while on the contrary they will fail to build new infrastructure. It's a case of wanting your cake and eating it too. As long as we rely on oil, or in the second case, nuclear for generating electricity, we're going to need pipelines and/or power plants. And that being the case, do we not want the newest, most technologically advanced, and most reliable alternatives?

Except that you'll still be relying on that old, potentially-dangerous infrastructure, just with the addition of new, potentially-dangerous infrastructure. Which will then get old, and will assuredly be treated with all of the care and loving that the older infrastructure has received to date.

Old infrastructure would have to be phased out of use as new infrastructure is installed. Presumably there are laws that can be put in place enforcing this. I truly believe we will see a future where oil is phased out entirely (and nuclear in the current form, likely as well), not least of all because we'll have to do so eventually. But in the meantime, shouldn't we continue to support the infrastructure we're relying on?

Also... How hard can it be to build a pipeline that doesn't leak? Or rather, one that contains its leaks? Of course the sort of countermeasures I can envision (like double-wall pipes) cost money.

kazikian: Also... How hard can it be to build a pipeline that doesn't leak? Or rather, one that contains its leaks? Of course the sort of countermeasures I can envision (like double-wall pipes) cost money.

You should talk to the guys at Kramerica Industries. They're working on a bladder system.

4. No Media Access

They're even letting Exxon control the airspace above the spill so it can't be photographed from the air.

Exxon's Unfriendly Skies: Why Does Exxon Control the No-Fly Zone Over Arkansas Tar Sands Spill?

Nothing to see here, citizen, move along...

fusillade762: 4. No Media Access

They're even letting Exxon control the airspace above the spill so it can't be photographed from the air.

Exxon's Unfriendly Skies: Why Does Exxon Control the No-Fly Zone Over Arkansas Tar Sands Spill?

Nothing to see here, citizen, move along...

I was about to ask how that's even possible, but then I realized the media has to weigh the cost of possible legal action (even if it's totally baseless) against the page hits such a story would generate.  Oh and bribes.

I live within 8 miles of the oil spill. I have posted several articles since it began but typically fark tends to post second hand accounts. There has been a large public backlash against Exxon for not letting people rescue tar covered animals. Private land owners gave several groups permission to rescue said animals and Exxon confronted the animal rescuers. The confrontation has reached the point that people are arming themselves to look for animals in the surrounding areas because Exxon refuses to let people on private land. Also the no fly zone was enacted the day after someone flew over and took video of the damage. I posted that to but apparently first hand accounts aren't good enough for fark. 

NOTAM

Sure enough, the airspace is closed below 1000 feet AGL.

Once again this has nothing to do with Keystone. Keystone is safe and effective. Keystone will bring oil to refineries so that gas prices will go down. It is un-american to report that the refined products will be shipped from the gulf coast to China and India. Everyone knows that all crude refined in the United States is for domestic use only. Exxon is as American as Shell or BP. Exxon supports the troops. Exxon provides millions of jobs right here in your neighborhood. The only people who oppose the Keystone pipeline are crazy enviro-terrorists and Al  Quidia.

God Bless America
Exxon

So is the CEO of Exxon being hauled into to White House and forced at almost gunpoint to sign a cheque for billions?

No? Why is that?

Oh wait Exxon has spent far more money on  bribes campaign contributions than BP did.

Carry on, nothing to see here.