Court Blocks Keystone XL Construction

[Marina Schwarz + 1,576]

The neverending story never ends. A judge asked Washington to once again review the project.

"The court required the U.S. Department of State to revise the proposed project’s environmental impact statement to evaluate the extraordinary changes in oil markets that have occurred since the previous review was completed in 2014; to consider the combined climate impacts of approving both the Keystone XL and other tar sands pipelines; to study the many cultural resources along the pipeline’s route; and to examine the harmful risks of oil spills on nearby water and wildlife."

Extraordinary changes?

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

8 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Tom.  I think I know what and why, but that baby doesn't deserve to be depicted in such a way.  The baby, as I'm sure you are aware, is in "big eyes" stage, and it is one of the cutest things.  Sometimes real ladies are used in memes as well, also depicted to be stupid or air-headed and without a thought to "what if that was your daughter/lady in the picture".  I support you and most if not all of your arguments, but a little thought when it comes to depicting innocent people?

Edited November 9, 2018 by Dan Warnick

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

It is exasperating to have all aspects of life, including commercial construction, in effect being project-managed by the Courts, there is one aspect to Keystone XL that bears careful scrutiny.  And that is that the original pipeline route took that pipe directly over miles and miles of the Great Midwest Aquifer, known as the Ogallala.  That aquifer is absolutely massive, and is quite shallow under the soil level.  If you have a pipe break then you ruin the water supply for most of the Midwest, and thereby ruin all that cropland, in eight States.  The Ogallala Aquifer starts up on the Nebraska-South Dakota border and runs South deep into West Texas.  It absolutely cannot be contaminated. . 

Can the pipe be re-routed - and to the downstream side of the aquifer?  Of course it can.  And it must.  The pipe guys are totally, absolutely, utterly convinced that they can run a monster pipe right smack over the aquifer and absolutely nothing will ever go wrong.  That, my friends, is pure hubris, and is the mentality that sank the Titanic.  So we don't take that chance.

Edited November 9, 2018 by Jan van Eck

[Rodent + 1,424]

23 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

It is exasperating to have all aspects of life, including commercial construction, in effect being project-managed by the Courts,

YES.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

4 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Tom.  I think I know what and why, but that baby doesn't deserve to be depicted in such a way.  The baby, as I'm sure you are aware, is in "big eyes" stage, and it is one of the cutest things.  Sometimes real ladies are used in memes as well, also depicted to be stupid or air-headed and without a thought to "what if that was your daughter/lady in the picture".  I support you and most if not all of your arguments, but a little thought when it comes to depicting innocent people?

No problem, understood your point, it's just a "reaction" picture that I found amusing.  I added a few of my own words for humor.  It wasn't meant to be offensive.

[Howard340 + 1]

12 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said:

The neverending story never ends. A judge asked Washington to once again review the project.

"The court required the U.S. Department of State to revise the proposed project’s environmental impact statement to evaluate the extraordinary changes in oil markets that have occurred since the previous review was completed in 2014; to consider the combined climate impacts of approving both the Keystone XL and other tar sands pipelines; to study the many cultural resources along the pipeline’s route; and to examine the harmful risks of oil spills on nearby water and wildlife."

Extraordinary changes?

It's just more of the same ol bull why can't the left wingers just deal with it.. there's to much money to be made using the XL pipeline..if they are so concerned about the environment why don't they just mandate money from the oil producers to use for a better tomorrow 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

5 hours ago, Howard340 said:

It's just more of the same ol bull why can't the left wingers just deal with it.. there's to much money to be made using the XL pipeline..if they are so concerned about the environment why don't they just mandate money from the oil producers to use for a better tomorrow 

Here is a good article about the story, although I disagree with its slant. https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-keystone-xl-pipeline-environmental-review-20181109-story.html  The Supreme Court needs to rule that we have wasted enough time and gone through enough obstructionism by greenies already. They are trying to make Climate Change a reason to stop fossil fuel production. There is no evidence of climate change made by mankind. Ocean levels have not changed appreciably although they always have over geological time frames. 

Here is my Climate Change topic https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B7YYeQTmESPhjlS_dj4zMTxWOiJhmLjxN1I_1NJcJFY/edit?usp=drive_web&ouid=115021267467773684978 

[DA? + 301]

7 hours ago, Howard340 said:

It's just more of the same ol bull why can't the left wingers just deal with it.. there's to much money to be made using the XL pipeline..if they are so concerned about the environment why don't they just mandate money from the oil producers to use for a better tomorrow 

These oil pipes leak regularly, small leaks often aren't found for sometime meaning much oil is leaked in the end. Once the oil is leaked the damage is done and it would bankrupt the companies if they had to completely fix the damage. Transportation of oil is a dangerous pastime every year many accidents occur.

[Marina Schwarz + 1,576]

XL is a new project. And pipelines are generally way safer than trains.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

12 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

No problem, understood your point, it's just a "reaction" picture that I found amusing.  I added a few of my own words for humor.  It wasn't meant to be offensive.

Thanks Tom.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said:

XL is a new project. And pipelines are generally way safer than trains.

Not really.   Any pipeline is still a mechanical installation and ultimately will fail, somewhere, sometime. As  DA?  points out, the failure can have serious consequences.  A train failure involves a tankcar departing the rails, with either fire or spill the result.  if fire, at least the oil is not seeping into the water table.  If spilled, the amount spilled is finite, from the derailed cars that broke open.  You limit the ground exposure to contamination by limiting the number of tankcars in that oil train.  The RR can also add in a gondola car filled with sand at specific intervals, say each ten cars, the weight of which acts as a stabilizer for the other cars. Splice in a flatcar and the train breaks at that point, leaving the remaining cars on the rail.  Railroads don't do that because they are (not yet) not incentivized to structure their oil-by-rail trains to limit possible damage.  The current thrust is to design and build new tankcars that are resistant to being breached during an rail upset incident. Yet even that will have limitations. 

Running short trains at lower speeds with improved cars and sand-cars and flats in there will limit the damage in OBR.  You don't have the ability to do that with pipe.  I don't see pipe running across the Ogallala Aquifer and the rivers that traverse it as being a smart move.  Better not to tempt fate, now with the farmland of eight States at risk.