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.

(The New York Times)   The Keystone pipeline will rely on the latest leak-detection and prevention equipment available: people calling in to complain about the 865,000 gallons that just got dumped on their front lawn   (nytimes.com) divider line 74
    More: Scary, detections, North Dakota, prevention, Bakken shale, Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, pressure sensor, equipment  
•       •       •

1858 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Oct 2013 at 2:13 PM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



74 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-24 02:15:17 PM  
Thanks, Obama.

/might as well start this thread right
 
2013-10-24 02:15:22 PM  
But how else will they ship canadian oil to china if not through our aquifers?
 
2013-10-24 02:18:24 PM  
Is oil really a bad thing to have in water? You all like fish oil, right? It's the same thing, isn't it? I don't know jack shiat in chemistry or health but that's not going to stop me.
 
2013-10-24 02:21:19 PM  
Lives quite close to Mayflower, AR, so I'm getting a kick out of this.
 
2013-10-24 02:21:47 PM  
Get the paper towels!
 
2013-10-24 02:22:59 PM  

WizardofToast: Is oil really a bad thing to have in water? You all like fish oil, right? It's the same thing, isn't it? I don't know jack shiat in chemistry or health but that's not going to stop me.


Sounds like you are qualified to be a GOP representative to the Science and Technology Committee.
 
2013-10-24 02:24:19 PM  
The pipeline is dead.  The Canadians have already found another solution. Republicans are arguing for a pipeline to nowhere at this point.
 
2013-10-24 02:25:58 PM  
I love how it's 2013 and we are still wasting all this time, energy and money into an antiquated energy source.

Oh but there isn't such a thing as "Big Oil." Wind and solar power "isn't there yet." I wonder where you heard that and why you believe such a powerful "indefensible" statement.

www.whitehouse.gov
 
2013-10-24 02:26:48 PM  

James!: The pipeline is dead.  The Canadians have already found another solution. Republicans are arguing for a pipeline to nowhere at this point.


Also, i do believe Obama said he'd veto it anyway. So that's still 3 more years that it's not gonna happen.
 
2013-10-24 02:27:13 PM  
FTFA: "Recently, a Tesoro executive sat down with Mr. Jensen at his home over hot apple pie. The executive said the company would not abandon his land before the oil was gone, Mr. Jensen recalled: "They promised to make it right." "

Well if that isn't just the most Rockwellian portrait of modern Americana then I don't know what is.
 
2013-10-24 02:29:35 PM  

James!: The pipeline is dead.  The Canadians have already found another solution. Republicans are arguing for a pipeline to nowhere at this point.


fark that. Build the damned pipeline, offer them whatever incentives are necessary to get them to use it rather than the proposed pipeline through Eastern Canada. Because jobs and freedom and energy independence and furthermore!

/Eastern Canadian.
 
2013-10-24 02:30:48 PM  

Albino Squid: James!: The pipeline is dead.  The Canadians have already found another solution. Republicans are arguing for a pipeline to nowhere at this point.

fark that. Build the damned pipeline, offer them whatever incentives are necessary to get them to use it rather than the proposed pipeline through Eastern Canada. Because jobs and freedom and energy independence and furthermore!

/Eastern Canadian.


No, Canada, pump your oil through your own damn yard.
 
2013-10-24 02:31:08 PM  
lolwut?  How did they make the leap to the Keystone pipeline?

And if we already have these pipelines, why is anyone complaining about Keystone?

And why don't we just get rid of the bureaucratic red tape for Nuclear Reactors and place lots of them in remote, geologically stable areas in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Nevada?   When North Korea and Iran can build nuke plants faster than the U.S., something is broken in our process.   Then, we could replace Keystone Pipelines of oil with pipelines of water.
 
2013-10-24 02:31:09 PM  

whidbey: I love how it's 2013 and we are still wasting all this time, energy and money into an antiquated energy source.

Oh but there isn't such a thing as "Big Oil." Wind and solar power "isn't there yet." I wonder where you heard that and why you believe such a powerful "indefensible" statement.

[www.whitehouse.gov image 615x346]


There's an economic empire that's been sitting on oil for over a century. It's not going to be given up easily when there's still black gold in the ground. It's what's going to hose us over in the end.
 
2013-10-24 02:33:00 PM  

tbeatty: lolwut?  How did they make the leap to the Keystone pipeline?

And if we already have these pipelines, why is anyone complaining about Keystone?

And why don't we just get rid of the bureaucratic red tape for Nuclear Reactors and place lots of them in remote, geologically stable areas in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Nevada?   When North Korea and Iran can build nuke plants faster than the U.S., something is broken in our process.   Then, we could replace Keystone Pipelines of oil with pipelines of water.


Yes, we should absolutely take a lesson from two dictatorships on building nuclear power plants.  That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. And I'm pro nuclear power.
 
2013-10-24 02:34:07 PM  

WizardofToast: whidbey: I love how it's 2013 and we are still wasting all this time, energy and money into an antiquated energy source.

Oh but there isn't such a thing as "Big Oil." Wind and solar power "isn't there yet." I wonder where you heard that and why you believe such a powerful "indefensible" statement.

[www.whitehouse.gov image 615x346]

There's an economic empire that's been sitting on oil for over a century. It's not going to be given up easily when there's still black gold in the ground. It's what's going to hose us over in the end.


Again, like many issues, it just comes down to apathy.

People feel they don't have the time or inclination to even fight an unsustainable top-heavy system like the petroleum industry's hold on our society. Apparently even if they have the knowledge that we waste shiat-tons of money and resources keeping it in place.
 
2013-10-24 02:34:14 PM  
If he digs a "well" 10 feet from the leak and just happened to "discover" oil on his propery would it be stealing?

 I'm sure they would drag his ass through court and he'd lose... but while he apparently would have the legal duty to report them hemmoraging oil all over his property they have no legal duty to insure it doesnt happen or is caught quickly.
 
2013-10-24 02:35:01 PM  
tbeatty:

And why don't we just get rid of the bureaucratic red tape for Nuclear Reactors and place lots of them in remote, geologically stable areas in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Nevada?   When North Korea and Iran can build nuke plants faster than the U.S., something is broken in our process.   Then, we could replace Keystone Pipelines of oil with pipelines of water.

Why the hell should those four states have to house nuclear reactors and waste for the assholes in the "non-remote" areas of the country?
 
2013-10-24 02:36:47 PM  

WizardofToast: Is oil really a bad thing to have in water? You all like fish oil, right? It's the same thing, isn't it? I don't know jack shiat in chemistry or health but that's not going to stop me.


Oil is never really in the water. It just kind of floats on top. Acts kind of like a barrier to keep the water fresh from the contaminates in the air above it. Just skim off the crude and you've got a fresh glass of H2O
 
2013-10-24 02:39:55 PM  

kidgenius: Oil is never really in the water.


Not until it hits the anus, anyway.
 
2013-10-24 02:40:05 PM  
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57607081/

Because the oil and gas industry is just good clean American technology and jobs.
 
2013-10-24 02:43:35 PM  

tbeatty: And if we already have these pipelines, why is anyone complaining about Keystone?


The Keystone is different than other pipelines for a few reasons, one of the most important of which is what it is transporting.

1) The transport of increasing volumes tar sands on the U.S. pipeline system is a recent development.
2) Tar sands pipelines operate at higher temperatures than conventional crude pipelines.
3) Tar sands pipelines have greater risk of corrosion than conventional pipelines.
4) When spilled, tar sands diluted bitumen is significantly more damaging and difficult to clean than conventional crude, particularly in water bodies.
5) TransCanada's Keystone XL tar sands pipeline brings significant risks to American communities and water resources.

Link
 
2013-10-24 02:45:20 PM  

Fizpez: If he digs a "well" 10 feet from the leak and just happened to "discover" oil on his propery would it be stealing?

 I'm sure they would drag his ass through court and he'd lose... but while he apparently would have the legal duty to report them hemmoraging oil all over his property they have no legal duty to insure it doesnt happen or is caught quickly.


You sound like one of those 47%-ers who doesn't understand his place...
 
2013-10-24 02:50:57 PM  
If the oil isn't economically worthwhile to just ship and refine where it is, then why the hell should we go through all the time and effort and expense (including the cost of lost land/environment) to allow it to be produced this way?  Make them refine it in Canada.  If it can't be, then don't produce it at all.
 
2013-10-24 02:51:58 PM  
Plus we get to keep the worst of the slag and the pollution right here in America, while the oil companies export the end products out of the country tax free.
 
2013-10-24 02:53:48 PM  

tbeatty: lolwut? How did they make the leap to the Keystone pipeline?


It's probably because they're aren't going to be new safety regulations written just for the Keystone pipes.  Instead, it would have to live up to the same high quality, safety, and reliability requirements the pipe in TFA already meets.
 
2013-10-24 02:54:34 PM  
The country is crisscrossed with pipelines, are we going to shut them ALL down? I'd be a lot more trustful of a brand new one with modern technology than one of the old ones that periodically spill or blow up entire towns.
 
2013-10-24 02:57:58 PM  

jjorsett: are we going to shut them ALL down?


Eventually, let's hope.
 
2013-10-24 02:58:45 PM  

jjorsett: The country is crisscrossed with pipelines, are we going to shut them ALL down? I'd be a lot more trustful of a brand new one with modern technology than one of the old ones that periodically spill or blow up entire towns.


What's the "modern technology" in Keystone?

Also, what other pipeline goes over the biggest aquifer in the country?
 
2013-10-24 03:01:34 PM  

jjorsett: The country is crisscrossed with pipelines, are we going to shut them ALL down? I'd be a lot more trustful of a brand new one with modern technology than one of the old ones that periodically spill or blow up entire towns.


Karac: tbeatty: lolwut? How did they make the leap to the Keystone pipeline?

It's probably because they're aren't going to be new safety regulations written just for the Keystone pipes.  Instead, it would have to live up to the same high quality, safety, and reliability requirements the pipe in TFA already meets.


(Same answer for both of you)
Lower in some cases. You know the phrase "they don't make 'em like they used to," right? Apparently, that is especially true of the modern pipeline segments brought in from China compared to the old domestic versions.

Cornell did a study confirming that... someone with more energy can find the link.
 
2013-10-24 03:01:59 PM  

jjorsett: The country is crisscrossed with pipelines, are we going to shut them ALL down? I'd be a lot more trustful of a brand new one with modern technology than one of the old ones that periodically spill or blow up entire towns.


The 35-mile-long Tesoro pipeline, which carries oil from Tioga to a rail depot near Columbus, N.D., was laid 20 years ago, meaning it is relatively new. But a pipeline's age has little bearing on reliability, with leaks more often linked to soil conditions and maintenance, said Carl Weimer, executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust, a watchdog group in Bellingham, Wash.

There may be more than 'relatively new' technology available (and if so, I'm sure you'll be able to enlighten us in detail on what's known today about how to shove oil down a tube that wasn't known in 1993), but there's no reason to believe it would be used, or that the maintenance they don't perform on existing pipelines would be performed on the Keystone ones.
 
2013-10-24 03:02:25 PM  
Oh please.  In all of these libbo fearmongering stories, no one ever talks about all the good things oil spills do like increased wildlife viscosity for maximum performance and durability.
 
2013-10-24 03:02:45 PM  
 
2013-10-24 03:07:32 PM  

Rapmaster2000: Oh please.  In all of these libbo fearmongering stories, no one ever talks about all the good things oil spills do like increased wildlife viscosity for maximum performance and durability.


An oiled duck is 75% more insert-able than a non-oiled duck.
 
2013-10-24 03:23:00 PM  
Part of me hopes that the operators of the pipeline performed a calculation at some point where they subtracted the average cost of monitoring the pipeline over time by the average frequency and cost of dealing with a leak and came out with a positive number. In any case this kind of thing would be awful, but at least they would be competent enough to know exactly what they are doing. The thought of them constructing a length of pipeline and just saying "Spend money monitoring for leaks? Fark that!" is terrifying in its disregard for not only the well-being of the environment and public, but to their own company as well.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-10-24 03:35:16 PM  
Eh... it's not on the front lawn of the CEO or the front lawns of the board members... so who gives a shiat?
 
2013-10-24 03:40:18 PM  
Because losing as much of your product as possible is a solid business strategry.
 
2013-10-24 03:43:14 PM  

exPFCWintergreen: Part of me hopes that the operators of the pipeline performed a calculation at some point where they subtracted the average cost of monitoring the pipeline over time by the average frequency and cost of dealing with a leak and came out with a positive number. In any case this kind of thing would be awful, but at least they would be competent enough to know exactly what they are doing. The thought of them constructing a length of pipeline and just saying "Spend money monitoring for leaks? Fark that!" is terrifying in its disregard for not only the well-being of the environment and public, but to their own company as well.


3.bp.blogspot.com
Take the number of pipelines in the ground, A, multiply by the probably rate of leakage, B, multiply by the cost of cleanup, C.
A x B x C = X.  If X is less than the cost of being responsible, then fark you.
 
2013-10-24 03:47:14 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: Because losing as much of your product as possible is a solid business strategry.


Right, I'm sure they deliberately caused the leak.
 
2013-10-24 03:48:26 PM  

qorkfiend: Right, I'm sure they deliberately caused the leak.


So I'm led to believe by the fine folks here on Fark. Hell, the headline speaks for itself.
 
2013-10-24 03:52:44 PM  

Albino Squid: James!: The pipeline is dead.  The Canadians have already found another solution. Republicans are arguing for a pipeline to nowhere at this point.

fark that. Build the damned pipeline, offer them whatever incentives are necessary to get them to use it rather than the proposed pipeline through Eastern Canada. Because jobs and freedom and energy independence and furthermore!

/Eastern Canadian.


Create a plant in Fort McMurray that just burns billions of barrels of oil each year.  In 10 years the entire arctic will be melted because of greenhouse gases and we will have access to the world's largest shipping lanes just north of the oil sands.

By then the US will be basically be a dessert hellscape and we can build the pipeline for fresh water which will cost $1,000 a barrel.  The only way we lose is if the invade us.

/they will invade us
 
2013-10-24 03:53:31 PM  

mrshowrules: Albino Squid: James!: The pipeline is dead.  The Canadians have already found another solution. Republicans are arguing for a pipeline to nowhere at this point.

fark that. Build the damned pipeline, offer them whatever incentives are necessary to get them to use it rather than the proposed pipeline through Eastern Canada. Because jobs and freedom and energy independence and furthermore!

/Eastern Canadian.

Create a plant in Fort McMurray that just burns billions of barrels of oil each year.  In 10 years the entire arctic will be melted because of greenhouse gases and we will have access to the world's largest shipping lanes just north of the oil sands.

By then the US will be basically be a dessert hellscape and we can build the pipeline for fresh water which will cost $1,000 a barrel.  The only way we lose is if the invade us.

/they will invade us


Oh, you better believe that's an invading.
 
2013-10-24 04:10:30 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: qorkfiend: Right, I'm sure they deliberately caused the leak.

So I'm led to believe by the fine folks here on Fark. Hell, the headline speaks for itself.


Curious: how does the headline say that they caused the leak?  I read it as saying that they would never have know about the leak except for the fact that a farmer called them when the oil started making it difficult for him to drive a combine across his wheat field.
 
2013-10-24 04:55:05 PM  
"This section of the pipeline was not required to have leak monitoring or pressure sensors," said Kris Roberts, an environmental geologist with the North Dakota Department of Health, who is leading the state's response to the spill. "And it didn't."

Well, there's your problem.  Over regulation.  Micro management by the government.  I bet this poor pipeline company fought tooth and nail to put monitors in that area, but since they weren't required, it;'s practically criminal to waste money like that.
 
2013-10-24 04:58:30 PM  

James!: mrshowrules: Albino Squid: James!: The pipeline is dead.  The Canadians have already found another solution. Republicans are arguing for a pipeline to nowhere at this point.

fark that. Build the damned pipeline, offer them whatever incentives are necessary to get them to use it rather than the proposed pipeline through Eastern Canada. Because jobs and freedom and energy independence and furthermore!

/Eastern Canadian.

Create a plant in Fort McMurray that just burns billions of barrels of oil each year.  In 10 years the entire arctic will be melted because of greenhouse gases and we will have access to the world's largest shipping lanes just north of the oil sands.

By then the US will be basically be a dessert hellscape and we can build the pipeline for fresh water which will cost $1,000 a barrel.  The only way we lose is if the invade us.

/they will invade us

Oh, you better believe that's an invading.


We won't invade, we will just migrate north. US citizens will move into Canada, naturalize and then demand Canada become Americanized.
 
2013-10-24 04:58:34 PM  
Just mention how this pipeline would increase gas prices by moving the supply that would've already stayed in the US overseas, and then you'll have popular support against it.

Why should I support something that will raise my gas prices?
 
2013-10-24 05:12:28 PM  
Teddy Roosevelt is rolling in his grave.
 
2013-10-24 05:35:23 PM  

phaseolus: Marcus Aurelius: Plus we get to keep the worst of the slag and the pollution right here in America, while the oil companies export the end products out of the country tax free.


BP oil refinery waste piles up on Southeast Side

Petroleum coke a dusty eyesore and a high-sulfur, high-carbon risk

Just south of the Chicago Skyway bridge, a dusty byproduct of the Canadian oil boom is piling up in huge black mountains along the Calumet River.

More is on the way. A lot more...


Started to read, came here to say that Whiting, IN is not "southeast Chicago" no matter how much it wants to be, then kept reading and saw that no, they're just hauling it over the state line to get around pollution laws in IN.

Also, this: "BP will produce more than 2.2 million tons of petcoke a year at Whiting, up from about 700,000 tons before the refinery was overhauled to process oil from the tar sands region of Alberta. "

I dunno how they were handling their waste sites before, but if they're more than tripling their mountain of pollutants, perhaps somewhere other than "inside the personal space of the second-largest city in the nation" is in order for it. Especially if they wanna not get in all kinds of trouble (PR if not legal).

Also, does anyone in the midwest know how to store chemicals other than "in a giant-ass mountain in the middle of the damn place"? when my dad worked for Stauffer in the 80s, I remember there always being a HUGE yellow smelly pile of what he said was sulfur. Right there by the bridge. Almost in the parking lot. Surely there's a smarter way than just "eh, drop it over there".

/used to live in Lake county
//there's a goddamn winery in Whiting, on rte 41
///mom brought me a bottle from one of her visits back
/i am never, ever, ever drinking that wine
 
2013-10-24 05:37:22 PM  

The Bananadragon: Surely there's a smarter way than just "eh, drop it over there".


Yeah, but the smarter way usually costs money.
 
2013-10-24 05:41:57 PM  

mrshowrules: Albino Squid: James!: The pipeline is dead.  The Canadians have already found another solution. Republicans are arguing for a pipeline to nowhere at this point.

fark that. Build the damned pipeline, offer them whatever incentives are necessary to get them to use it rather than the proposed pipeline through Eastern Canada. Because jobs and freedom and energy independence and furthermore!

/Eastern Canadian.

Create a plant in Fort McMurray that just burns billions of barrels of oil each year.  In 10 years the entire arctic will be melted because of greenhouse gases and we will have access to the world's largest shipping lanes just north of the oil sands.

By then the US will be basically be a dessert hellscape and we can build the pipeline for fresh water which will cost $1,000 a barrel.  The only way we lose is if the invade us.

/they will invade us


American Flag Cakes. AMERICAN FLAG CAKES EVERYWHERE.

/what a delicious postapocalyptic nightmare
 
Displayed 50 of 74 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report