Mar 3rd 2014, 2:33:32
[quote poster=H4xOr WaNgEr; 30190; 543536][quote poster=Unsympathetic; 30190; 542875]The pipeline will create zero jobs.
The pipeline will not be maintained at all, because that would cost money.
When the pipeline breaks [not if], the crude will seep into the Ogallala aquifer, the chief resource in the midwest for our farmland.
When the pipeline breaks, the company responsible for the cleanup will not fund it with the dollars they "assert" they will spend to legislatures in order to achieve passage.
Creating energy is a nasty business. But pipeline operators must be held to significantly stricter regulation and oversight than they are now.
Until those regulations are in place and judges are willing to issue multi-million dollar fines because of them, keystone is a bad idea. [/quote]
You have to examine the counter factual.
In this case the counter factual is rail. If the pipeline doesn't get built then the oil will be transported by rail instead, this is well known.
Rail is statistically far less safe and spills far more oil per barrel transported than pipelines.
Seems silly to me to block pipelines on the basis of safety when they are the safest mode of transport. [/quote]
It is also worth noting that the US does not have sufficient rail infrastructure to handle significant increases in oil transportation. Lines will be super clogged. Passengers will suffer first.
The pipeline will not be maintained at all, because that would cost money.
When the pipeline breaks [not if], the crude will seep into the Ogallala aquifer, the chief resource in the midwest for our farmland.
When the pipeline breaks, the company responsible for the cleanup will not fund it with the dollars they "assert" they will spend to legislatures in order to achieve passage.
Creating energy is a nasty business. But pipeline operators must be held to significantly stricter regulation and oversight than they are now.
Until those regulations are in place and judges are willing to issue multi-million dollar fines because of them, keystone is a bad idea. [/quote]
You have to examine the counter factual.
In this case the counter factual is rail. If the pipeline doesn't get built then the oil will be transported by rail instead, this is well known.
Rail is statistically far less safe and spills far more oil per barrel transported than pipelines.
Seems silly to me to block pipelines on the basis of safety when they are the safest mode of transport. [/quote]
It is also worth noting that the US does not have sufficient rail infrastructure to handle significant increases in oil transportation. Lines will be super clogged. Passengers will suffer first.