Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Globe and Mail)   Canadian PM politely retains right to contaminate U.S soil, aquifers   (theglobeandmail.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, canadian pm, United States, TransCanada, container terminal, Western Canada, environmental issues, pipeline, Prime Minister Stephen Harper  
•       •       •

1688 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Aug 2013 at 5:03 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



42 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-08-02 05:08:40 PM  
So this is their revenge for the acid rain, then.
 
2013-08-02 05:14:47 PM  
Right - Canada should just sell it to China instead.
 
2013-08-02 05:19:40 PM  
We can take you in less than a day, Canada.
Pray that doesn't become necessary.
 
2013-08-02 05:21:58 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: We can take you in less than a day, Canada.
Pray that doesn't become necessary.


Yes, but it'll take 12 years and a trillion dollars to 'pacify' them.
 
2013-08-02 05:24:57 PM  

theborg1of4: Right - Canada should just sell it to China instead.


That's what would happen anyway if we let Keystone go all the way to the gulf.
 
2013-08-02 05:25:55 PM  

MorteDiem: Yes, but it'll take 12 years and a trillion dollars to 'pacify' them.


Pretty sure we could do it with a few truck loads of beer and free Tim Hortons.
 
2013-08-02 05:26:02 PM  

MorteDiem: HotIgneous Intruder: We can take you in less than a day, Canada.
Pray that doesn't become necessary.

Yes, but it'll take 12 years and a trillion dollars to 'pacify' them.


Pish posh, just give 'em some poutine.
That'll chill them right the fark out.


upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-08-02 05:27:29 PM  
1) Allow pipeline.
2) Seize pipeline.
3) PROFIT!
 
2013-08-02 05:29:24 PM  
Tell you what Canada.

We'll consider building the Keystone XL as soon as you farking figure out what to do with the shiat like these you're leaving here in America.

graphics8.nytimes.com

That's the leftovers, sitting in Detroit, from refining oil from tar sands.

Take it back, then we'll talk.
 
2013-08-02 05:31:19 PM  

12349876: That's what would happen anyway if we let Keystone go all the way to the gulf.


Sure but what about the 70 gazillion jobs it would create?
 
2013-08-02 05:33:19 PM  
 
2013-08-02 05:36:24 PM  
Global Corporate Socialism will do what Global Corporate Socialism wants to do and you can just suck it, Citizen.
 
2013-08-02 05:43:42 PM  

12349876: theborg1of4: Right - Canada should just sell it to China instead.

That's what would happen anyway if we let Keystone go all the way to the gulf.


There's no question about "letting Keystone go all the way to the gulf"; that section is already under construction and will be turned on later this year. It's only the northern half (across the Canadian border) which still needs State Department approval.
 
2013-08-02 05:53:17 PM  
fark em. run the pipeline to Canada's west coast and they can have all the jobs, all the profit and all the problems.

there will be problems.
 
2013-08-02 05:55:50 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: MorteDiem: Yes, but it'll take 12 years and a trillion dollars to 'pacify' them.

Pretty sure we could do it with a few truck loads of beer and free Tim Hortons.


Offer them the stanely cup?
 
2013-08-02 05:57:28 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: We can take you in less than a day, Canada.
Pray that doesn't become necessary.


Our igloos are impenetrable.
 
2013-08-02 06:03:10 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: We can take you in less than a day, Canada.
Pray that doesn't become necessary.


Oh take us, sure.  Hold us?  That's funny.  You guys couldn't hold a country half the size of Alberta where the bad guys were colour-coded.  Imagine a nation of 30 million people, each one of whom has been studying American culture professionally their entire lives and is capable of appearing American at will.  Our sleepers have already infiltrated your society at every level.

You exist only on the mercy of your unseen Canadian overlords.  Now lets go for a beer, eh.
 
2013-08-02 06:06:39 PM  
Hey Sweatervest....... Build some Oil refineries in Canada and you can make your own Diesel or dirty gasoline, instead of having to import it from the U.S. from the oil sands oil you send south.

I see that Northern Alberta's air has a nice tinge of brown from just refining the sand to oil and the Natives love that thing called cancer that they get from the rivers, caused by accidental damn breaches of the refining effluent..

/British Columbia is banking on Natural gas condensing and shipping that to Asia. Charge $20 instead of local $2.
//A blowout on a natural gas line makes less of a mess as it only kills fish until the blowout is sealed.
///blowout under one of many many rivers would diffuse into the water, bla bla bla.
 
2013-08-02 06:07:15 PM  

hamiltonjdavid: HotIgneous Intruder: We can take you in less than a day, Canada.
Pray that doesn't become necessary.

Our igloos are impenetrable.


Literally igloos are excellent bunkers.
 
2013-08-02 06:15:06 PM  

Curious: fark em. run the pipeline to Canada's west coast and they can have all the jobs, all the profit and all the problems.

there will be problems.


We already have one of those, operating since 1953 with a few serious (but not catastrophic) problems over the years.
 
2013-08-02 06:22:58 PM  
images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-08-02 06:23:45 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: We can take you in less than a day, Canada.
Pray that doesn't become necessary.


Last time you tried you got a new white house out of it (it used to be pink)

meat0918: Tell you what Canada

.

We'll consider building the Keystone XL as soon as you farking figure out what to do with the shiat like these you're leaving here in America.

[graphics8.nytimes.com image 600x316]

That's the leftovers, sitting in Detroit, from refining oil from tar sands.

Take it back, then we'll talk.


I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that Michigan got some sort of monetary compensation for this.

/Apparently no one read the article anyways as this is about a proposed pipeline from Alberta to New Brunswick (those are both in Canada). Hopefully we start refining our oil as well.
 
2013-08-02 06:27:56 PM  
www.toyjoy.com
 
2013-08-02 06:38:10 PM  

Ivo Shandor: Curious: fark em. run the pipeline to Canada's west coast and they can have all the jobs, all the profit and all the problems.

there will be problems.

We already have one of those, operating since 1953 with a few serious (but not catastrophic) problems over the years.


700 miles long. Keystone is 3 times. I imagine the capacity will be much higher.

Also, til Canada figures out how to stop the blow-outs, maybe they shouldn't be trying to get that crap.

4 blow-outs under a military base's active firing-range
 
2013-08-02 06:39:59 PM  

ordinarysteve: HotIgneous Intruder: We can take you in less than a day, Canada.
Pray that doesn't become necessary.

Last time you tried you got a new white house out of it (it used to be pink)

meat0918: Tell you what Canada.

We'll consider building the Keystone XL as soon as you farking figure out what to do with the shiat like these you're leaving here in America.

[graphics8.nytimes.com image 600x316]

That's the leftovers, sitting in Detroit, from refining oil from tar sands.

Take it back, then we'll talk.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that Michigan got some sort of monetary compensation for this.

/Apparently no one read the article anyways as this is about a proposed pipeline from Alberta to New Brunswick (those are both in Canada). Hopefully we start refining our oil as well.


I'm gonna go out even further on a limb and say that price did not include the externality of dealing with the waste, since while usable as fuel, is not allowed to be burned in the US as fuel.

Also, the article starts out by talking about the Keystone XL, then goes into detail about the East/West pipeline across Canada.  Go for it.  I'm sure the PQ is just dying to bend over for Harper.
 
2013-08-02 06:43:24 PM  

ordinarysteve: Apparently no one read the article anyways as this is about a proposed pipeline from Alberta to New Brunswick (those are both in Canada). Hopefully we start refining our oil as well.


By all means, proceed.

If you want to scrape the top off of Alberta to get to what is literally the shiattiest petroleum on the planet, extract a toxic sludge from the sand, pipe that heated sludge across your country and refine it on your own soil, and figure out what to do with the mountains of toxic sand and slag, in order to make a few bucks, be my farking guest.
 
2013-08-02 07:25:21 PM  

MorteDiem: HotIgneous Intruder: We can take you in less than a day, Canada.
Pray that doesn't become necessary.

Yes, but it'll take 12 years and a trillion dollars to 'pacify' them.


Nonsense.  The brave Canadians will treat us as liberating heroes!

/ or something.
 
2013-08-02 07:26:34 PM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: ordinarysteve: Apparently no one read the article anyways as this is about a proposed pipeline from Alberta to New Brunswick (those are both in Canada). Hopefully we start refining our oil as well.

By all means, proceed.

If you want to scrape the top off of Alberta to get to what is literally the shiattiest petroleum on the planet, extract a toxic sludge from the sand, pipe that heated sludge across your country and refine it on your own soil, and figure out what to do with the mountains of toxic sand and slag, in order to make a few bucks, be my farking guest.


I'm not even pro-tar sands. I just think subby was extremely misleading and find the idea of Americans feeling as they should have any say in what Canada does to be laughable, let alone the fact that they are the 2nd largest polluter in the world (roughly equivalent to Canada per capita) This is a Canadian issue for Canadians to sort out. It's not like America is a world leader in green energy or something, they buy most of our oil. And since we are discussing the wrong-doings of other countries, I would really appreciate it if the NSA didn't spy on Canadian citizens as well.
 
2013-08-02 08:47:08 PM  

Ivo Shandor: Curious: fark em. run the pipeline to Canada's west coast and they can have all the jobs, all the profit and all the problems.

there will be problems.

We already have one of those, operating since 1953 with a few serious (but not catastrophic) problems over the years.


well good, you shouldn't mind another pipeline then. i really don't see what this pipeline does for 99.96% of Americans and given some history here i see a big potential for some serious hurt. which all of us will then pay for.
 
rka
2013-08-02 09:35:52 PM  

ordinarysteve: I would really appreciate it if the NSA didn't spy on Canadian citizens as well.


Maybe if your duly elected government wouldn't beg for the US to do so and then, in a truly slutty display, bend over in order to be let in on the spying act with the UK/Australia/NZ, the US wouldn't spy on you.
 
2013-08-02 10:02:53 PM  
Crude oil pipelines are no threat to aquifers. Crude floats in water and soil. even if it leaks, it won't penetrate the ground more than a foot. Its easy to clean up and you shut off the pipeline if there is a leak, cuz, you know, it costs money. There are a lot of pipelines, they work fine.

Suggesting that the Keystone pipeline might contaminate the groundwater or aquifer is either ignorant of mendacious.
 
2013-08-02 10:12:33 PM  

sheep snorter: Hey Sweatervest....... Build some Oil refineries in Canada and you can make your own Diesel or dirty gasoline, instead of having to import it from the U.S. from the oil sands oil you send south.


Know how i know you didn't read the article? Or know anything about Canada?

FTA: The Energy East pipeline would deliver up to 1.1 million barrels per day from Western Canada to refineries and export terminals in Quebec in late 2017 and New Brunswick one year later.
 
2013-08-03 12:00:12 AM  

LargeCanine: Crude oil pipelines are no threat to aquifers. Crude floats in water and soil. even if it leaks, it won't penetrate the ground more than a foot. Its easy to clean up and you shut off the pipeline if there is a leak, cuz, you know, it costs money. There are a lot of pipelines, they work fine.

Suggesting that the Keystone pipeline might contaminate the groundwater or aquifer is either ignorant of mendacious.


With over 25 years of doing groundwater remediation at refineries, bulk plants and under pipelines, I can reliably say that you know absolutely nothing of which you speak.  Tell ya what bucko, fill a glass half full of water and then pour on some motor oil.  Let it sit a couple of weeks then poke a straw in and drink the water.  Let us all know what you think afterward.
 
2013-08-03 12:19:58 AM  

ordinarysteve: HotIgneous Intruder: We can take you in less than a day, Canada.
Pray that doesn't become necessary.

Last time you tried you got a new white house out of it (it used to be pink)

meat0918: Tell you what Canada.

We'll consider building the Keystone XL as soon as you farking figure out what to do with the shiat like these you're leaving here in America.

[graphics8.nytimes.com image 600x316]

That's the leftovers, sitting in Detroit, from refining oil from tar sands.

Take it back, then we'll talk.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that Michigan got some sort of monetary compensation for this.

/Apparently no one read the article anyways as this is about a proposed pipeline from Alberta to New Brunswick (those are both in Canada). Hopefully we start refining our oil as well.


Refining our own oil is kid of the whole point of piping it to New Brunswick. Even says so in the article.
 
2013-08-03 01:07:50 AM  

Curious: fark em. run the pipeline to Canada's west coast and they can have all the jobs, all the profit and all the problems.

there will be problems.


Except that oil will still continue coming to the US via rail, a far more problematic and inefficient means of transport. All denying XL would do is ensure that more of it will travel that way.
 
2013-08-03 01:09:18 AM  

sheep snorter: Hey Sweatervest....... Build some Oil refineries in Canada and you can make your own Diesel or dirty gasoline, instead of having to import it from the U.S. from the oil sands oil you send south.

I see that Northern Alberta's air has a nice tinge of brown from just refining the sand to oil and the Natives love that thing called cancer that they get from the rivers, caused by accidental damn breaches of the refining effluent..

/British Columbia is banking on Natural gas condensing and shipping that to Asia. Charge $20 instead of local $2.
//A blowout on a natural gas line makes less of a mess as it only kills fish until the blowout is sealed.
///blowout under one of many many rivers would diffuse into the water, bla bla bla.


We do some some:

    North Atlantic Refinery, located in Come by Chance, (North Atlantic Refining), 115,000 bbl/d (18,300 m3/d)
    Imperial Oil Refinery - Dartmouth, (Imperial Oil), 89,000 bbl/d (14,100 m3/d)
    Saint John, (Irving Oil), 300,000 bbl/d (48,000 m3/d)
    Montreal-East, (Shell Canada), 161,000 bbl/d (25,600 m3/d). Montreal East Refinery (Shell Canada).
    Montreal, (Suncor Energy), 140,000 bbl/d (22,000 m3/d). Formerly Petro-Canada
    Lévis, (Ultramar(Valero)), 265,000 bbl/d (42,100 m3/d)[11]
    Nanticoke Refinery, Nanticoke - (Imperial Oil), 112,000 bbl/d (17,800 m3/d)
    Sarnia, (Imperial Oil), 115,000 bbl/d (18,300 m3/d)
    Sarnia, (Suncor Energy), 85,000 bbl/d (13,500 m3/d)
    Corunna, (Shell Canada), 72,000 bbl/d (11,400 m3/d)
    Mississauga, (Suncor Energy), 15,600 bbl/d (2,480 m3/d) - aka Clarkson Refinery - base oil production is 13,600 bbl/d (2,160 m3/d) of API Group II capacity and 2,000 bbl/d (320 m3/d) of API Group III capacity.
    CCRL Refinery Complex, Regina (CRC)), 145,000 bbl/d (23,100 m3/d)
    Husky Lloydminster Refinery, Lloydminster, (Husky Energy), 25,000 bbl/d (4,000 m3/d)
    Husky Lloydminster Upgrader Lloydminster, (Husky Energy), 75,000 bbl/d (11,900 m3/d)
    Strathcona Refinery, Edmonton, (Imperial Oil), 187,000 bbl/d (29,700 m3/d)
    Scotford Refinery, Scotford, (Shell Canada), 100,000 bbl/d (16,000 m3/d)
    Edmonton, (Suncor Energy), 135,000 bbl/d (21,500 m3/d). Formerly Petro-Canada (before Aug 2009).
    Burnaby Refinery, Burnaby, (Chevron Corporation), 52,000 bbl/d (8,300 m3/d)
    Prince George Refinery, Prince George, (Husky Energy), 12,000 bbl/d (1,900 m3/d)

Bitumen Upgraders (turn bitumen into synthetic crude, which then must be further refined)
    Scotford Upgrader, Scotford, (AOSP - Shell Canada 60%, Chevron Corporation 20%, Marathon Oil 20%), 250,000 bbl/d (40,000 m3/d) (located next to Shell Refinery) raw bitumen
    Horizon Oil Sands, Fort McMurray, (Canadian Natural Resources Limited), 110,000 bbl/d (17,000 m3/d) raw bitumen
    Long Lake, Fort McMurray, (OPTI Canada Inc. 35% and Nexen Inc. 65%), 70,000 bbl/d (11,000 m3/d) raw bitumen
    Syncrude, Fort McMurray, (Canadian Oil Sands Trust, Imperial Oil, Suncor, Nexen, Conoco Phillips, Mocal Energy and Murphy Oil), 350,000 bbl/d (56,000 m3/d) raw bitumen
    Suncor, Fort McMurray, (Suncor), 350,000 bbl/d (56,000 m3/d) raw bitumen
 
2013-08-03 01:16:04 AM  

LargeCanine: Crude oil pipelines are no threat to aquifers. Crude floats in water and soil. even if it leaks, it won't penetrate the ground more than a foot. Its easy to clean up and you shut off the pipeline if there is a leak, cuz, you know, it costs money. There are a lot of pipelines, they work fine.

Suggesting that the Keystone pipeline might contaminate the groundwater or aquifer is either ignorant of mendacious.


You're just a wealth of knowledge!

Maybe you should go talk to those naive people in Michigan... They're having some trouble cleaning up this stuff you say is no threat...Its only been THREE YEARS and they still cannot get rid of it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalamazoo_River_oil_spill

http://www.freep.com/article/20130730/NEWS06/307300120/New-round-of- dr edging-in-Kalamazoo-River-after-2010-oil-spill
 
2013-08-03 03:07:07 AM  
And all this time there's actual oil under the St.Lawrence River and the Quebec government has knee-jerk reactions on allowing drilling...
 
2013-08-03 08:43:03 AM  

firemanbuck: LargeCanine: Crude oil pipelines are no threat to aquifers. Crude floats in water and soil. even if it leaks, it won't penetrate the ground more than a foot. Its easy to clean up and you shut off the pipeline if there is a leak, cuz, you know, it costs money. There are a lot of pipelines, they work fine.

Suggesting that the Keystone pipeline might contaminate the groundwater or aquifer is either ignorant of mendacious.

With over 25 years of doing groundwater remediation at refineries, bulk plants and under pipelines, I can reliably say that you know absolutely nothing of which you speak.  Tell ya what bucko, fill a glass half full of water and then pour on some motor oil.  Let it sit a couple of weeks then poke a straw in and drink the water.  Let us all know what you think afterward.


*Two weeks later*

i1162.photobucket.com
 
2013-08-03 10:12:38 AM  
a: We Want Infrastructure!!!!eleventy!!

b: Ok, here is a pipeline that will carry oil clear across the country

a:  Ohh dirty oil?  We don't want that.  Stop the Infrastructure!!!

b: Really?  I will create quite a few jobs...

a:  We don't want that.  Stop the Infrastructure!!!

b:  *Sigh*
 
2013-08-03 10:55:05 AM  
One thing you may not know is that down here at the South end of Keystone it runs into Free Trade Zones so essentially the oil just passes right through the US and the refined products on to export without ever being taxed.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/03/do-republicans-real iz e-that-keystone-pipeline-won-t-bring-gas-to-u-s.html

There is no real oil shortage in the US right now, our imports are down and we are just starting to exploit our own oil shales. So we would be helping Canada exploit the dirtiest, most polluting oil on Earth, risking our own water supplies for very few jobs and almost no tax income, promoting global warming, and delaying the implementation of renewable energies.

Let them pipe it through the Rockies and sell it to China. Oil is a world commodity anyway, the overall supply is what effects the price.
 
2013-08-03 03:42:41 PM  
Send it east? Oh hells yeah.

From BC. Fark the new pipeline.

The short term gain is not worth the long term pain.

Also fark PM Sweatervest on general principles.
 
Displayed 42 of 42 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report