Keystone is over

[Star]

There has never been a better time for our nation to invest in infrastructure

Historically low interest rates and a large number of construction workers out of work

so true. Too bad the Repubs are against investment and are more interested in give-aways to the special interests & well-connected

Just think if we used the money lost in tax cuts for the wealthy on infrastructure.....or the money we spent on invasions

What the hell?

Trans Canada is paying for the whole shebang.

'cept for; you're overlooking the cost of clean-up for the inevitable spill/train wreck...

<snip>

Tar Sands Exempt from Oil Spill Insurance Fund; Taxpayers at Risk

With costs for cleaning up spills so staggeringly high, one might reasonably assume that oil pipeline operators have insurance of some sort to cover costs they cannot afford to pay. And it is true; pipeline operators pay a few cents per barrel into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to defray cleanup costs. And given that dilbit is so much more difficult clean up, since its density causes it to separate and sink in water rather than float on the surface, one might reasonably assume that tar sands pipeline operators would be required to pay a little bit more.

However, one would be wrong. They are, in fact, not required to pay into the fund at all. Thanks to an interpretation of the law creating the liability fund by the Internal Revenue Service, bitumen is exempted because it is not "conventional oil."

Regardless of who pays for it, the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional.

"Whether it's the BP oil disaster or the Kalamazoo spill or what happened up in Alaska 20 years ago [the Exxon Valdez spill], it takes decades and decades for that ecosystem to recover, if it ever does," says Colarulli. "Experts who work on those types of spills and disasters will tell you it never recovers. Long-term effects generally aren't felt until 10 or 20 years later when the buildup of toxins in the lower organisms in the soil start to collect in larger animals, such as humans."

The potential risk, Colarulli says, cannot be overstated: "This is a 1700-mile Superfund site that were talking about."

There are conflicting opinions as to whether dilbit is more or less likely to cause pipeline ruptures. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council reported that dill bit is no more likely than conventional oil to cause damaged pipelines. However, as Swift wrote in his NRDC blog, "The NAS literature review compared tar sands to similar heavy thick crudes coming from Canada that have similar properties and risks, rather than comparing them to the lighter oils historically transported in the US pipeline system." So the NAS review found that tar sands oil behaves very much like oil that's very much like tar sands oil.

<snip>


EPA's Situation Reports [PDF]).

Left, in August of 2011, cleanup workers drove a special tracked vehicle back and forth across the bottom sediments in Morrow Lake (a reservoir along the Kalamazoo River) to release oil trapped in the mud. Right, shown in August of 2011, these heavy chains and other equipment were involved in agitating submerged oil from the sediments of the Kalamazoo River following the Enbridge oil spill. (NOAA)​

As of November 05, 2014 the Kalamazoo spill has cost more than $1.21 billion.
We still don't know how to remove all the submerged oil.

"the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional." ​

.

 

[Dot Com]

There has never been a better time for our nation to invest in infrastructure

Historically low interest rates and a large number of construction workers out of work

so true. Too bad the Repubs are against investment and are more interested in give-aways to the special interests & well-connected

Just think if we used the money lost in tax cuts for the wealthy on infrastructure.....or the money we spent on invasions

What the hell?

Trans Canada is paying for the whole shebang.

'cept for; you're overlooking the cost of clean-up for the inevitable spill/train wreck...

<snip>

Tar Sands Exempt from Oil Spill Insurance Fund; Taxpayers at Risk

With costs for cleaning up spills so staggeringly high, one might reasonably assume that oil pipeline operators have insurance of some sort to cover costs they cannot afford to pay. And it is true; pipeline operators pay a few cents per barrel into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to defray cleanup costs. And given that dilbit is so much more difficult clean up, since its density causes it to separate and sink in water rather than float on the surface, one might reasonably assume that tar sands pipeline operators would be required to pay a little bit more.

However, one would be wrong. They are, in fact, not required to pay into the fund at all. Thanks to an interpretation of the law creating the liability fund by the Internal Revenue Service, bitumen is exempted because it is not "conventional oil."

Regardless of who pays for it, the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional.

"Whether it's the BP oil disaster or the Kalamazoo spill or what happened up in Alaska 20 years ago [the Exxon Valdez spill], it takes decades and decades for that ecosystem to recover, if it ever does," says Colarulli. "Experts who work on those types of spills and disasters will tell you it never recovers. Long-term effects generally aren't felt until 10 or 20 years later when the buildup of toxins in the lower organisms in the soil start to collect in larger animals, such as humans."

The potential risk, Colarulli says, cannot be overstated: "This is a 1700-mile Superfund site that were talking about."

There are conflicting opinions as to whether dilbit is more or less likely to cause pipeline ruptures. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council reported that dill bit is no more likely than conventional oil to cause damaged pipelines. However, as Swift wrote in his NRDC blog, "The NAS literature review compared tar sands to similar heavy thick crudes coming from Canada that have similar properties and risks, rather than comparing them to the lighter oils historically transported in the US pipeline system." So the NAS review found that tar sands oil behaves very much like oil that's very much like tar sands oil.

<snip>


EPA's Situation Reports [PDF]).

Left, in August of 2011, cleanup workers drove a special tracked vehicle back and forth across the bottom sediments in Morrow Lake (a reservoir along the Kalamazoo River) to release oil trapped in the mud. Right, shown in August of 2011, these heavy chains and other equipment were involved in agitating submerged oil from the sediments of the Kalamazoo River following the Enbridge oil spill. (NOAA)​

As of November 05, 2014 the Kalamazoo spill has cost more than $1.21 billion.
We still don't know how to remove all the submerged oil.

"the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional." ​

.

thank you Star

 

[tinydancer]

There has never been a better time for our nation to invest in infrastructure

Historically low interest rates and a large number of construction workers out of work

so true. Too bad the Repubs are against investment and are more interested in give-aways to the special interests & well-connected

Just think if we used the money lost in tax cuts for the wealthy on infrastructure.....or the money we spent on invasions

What the hell?

Trans Canada is paying for the whole shebang.

'cept for; you're overlooking the cost of clean-up for the inevitable spill/train wreck...

<snip>

Tar Sands Exempt from Oil Spill Insurance Fund; Taxpayers at Risk

With costs for cleaning up spills so staggeringly high, one might reasonably assume that oil pipeline operators have insurance of some sort to cover costs they cannot afford to pay. And it is true; pipeline operators pay a few cents per barrel into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to defray cleanup costs. And given that dilbit is so much more difficult clean up, since its density causes it to separate and sink in water rather than float on the surface, one might reasonably assume that tar sands pipeline operators would be required to pay a little bit more.

However, one would be wrong. They are, in fact, not required to pay into the fund at all. Thanks to an interpretation of the law creating the liability fund by the Internal Revenue Service, bitumen is exempted because it is not "conventional oil."

Regardless of who pays for it, the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional.

"Whether it's the BP oil disaster or the Kalamazoo spill or what happened up in Alaska 20 years ago [the Exxon Valdez spill], it takes decades and decades for that ecosystem to recover, if it ever does," says Colarulli. "Experts who work on those types of spills and disasters will tell you it never recovers. Long-term effects generally aren't felt until 10 or 20 years later when the buildup of toxins in the lower organisms in the soil start to collect in larger animals, such as humans."

You are a liar.

Trans Canada is fully responsible for a break in the line.

STOP FUCKING LYING.

The potential risk, Colarulli says, cannot be overstated: "This is a 1700-mile Superfund site that were talking about."

There are conflicting opinions as to whether dilbit is more or less likely to cause pipeline ruptures. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council reported that dill bit is no more likely than conventional oil to cause damaged pipelines. However, as Swift wrote in his NRDC blog, "The NAS literature review compared tar sands to similar heavy thick crudes coming from Canada that have similar properties and risks, rather than comparing them to the lighter oils historically transported in the US pipeline system." So the NAS review found that tar sands oil behaves very much like oil that's very much like tar sands oil.

<snip>


EPA's Situation Reports [PDF]).

Left, in August of 2011, cleanup workers drove a special tracked vehicle back and forth across the bottom sediments in Morrow Lake (a reservoir along the Kalamazoo River) to release oil trapped in the mud. Right, shown in August of 2011, these heavy chains and other equipment were involved in agitating submerged oil from the sediments of the Kalamazoo River following the Enbridge oil spill. (NOAA)​

As of November 05, 2014 the Kalamazoo spill has cost more than $1.21 billion.
We still don't know how to remove all the submerged oil.

"the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional." ​

.

 

[tinydancer]

There has never been a better time for our nation to invest in infrastructure

Historically low interest rates and a large number of construction workers out of work

so true. Too bad the Repubs are against investment and are more interested in give-aways to the special interests & well-connected

Just think if we used the money lost in tax cuts for the wealthy on infrastructure.....or the money we spent on invasions

What the hell?

Trans Canada is paying for the whole shebang.

'cept for; you're overlooking the cost of clean-up for the inevitable spill/train wreck...

<snip>

Tar Sands Exempt from Oil Spill Insurance Fund; Taxpayers at Risk

With costs for cleaning up spills so staggeringly high, one might reasonably assume that oil pipeline operators have insurance of some sort to cover costs they cannot afford to pay. And it is true; pipeline operators pay a few cents per barrel into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to defray cleanup costs. And given that dilbit is so much more difficult clean up, since its density causes it to separate and sink in water rather than float on the surface, one might reasonably assume that tar sands pipeline operators would be required to pay a little bit more.

However, one would be wrong. They are, in fact, not required to pay into the fund at all. Thanks to an interpretation of the law creating the liability fund by the Internal Revenue Service, bitumen is exempted because it is not "conventional oil."

Regardless of who pays for it, the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional.

"Whether it's the BP oil disaster or the Kalamazoo spill or what happened up in Alaska 20 years ago [the Exxon Valdez spill], it takes decades and decades for that ecosystem to recover, if it ever does," says Colarulli. "Experts who work on those types of spills and disasters will tell you it never recovers. Long-term effects generally aren't felt until 10 or 20 years later when the buildup of toxins in the lower organisms in the soil start to collect in larger animals, such as humans."

The potential risk, Colarulli says, cannot be overstated: "This is a 1700-mile Superfund site that were talking about."

There are conflicting opinions as to whether dilbit is more or less likely to cause pipeline ruptures. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council reported that dill bit is no more likely than conventional oil to cause damaged pipelines. However, as Swift wrote in his NRDC blog, "The NAS literature review compared tar sands to similar heavy thick crudes coming from Canada that have similar properties and risks, rather than comparing them to the lighter oils historically transported in the US pipeline system." So the NAS review found that tar sands oil behaves very much like oil that's very much like tar sands oil.

<snip>


EPA's Situation Reports [PDF]).

Left, in August of 2011, cleanup workers drove a special tracked vehicle back and forth across the bottom sediments in Morrow Lake (a reservoir along the Kalamazoo River) to release oil trapped in the mud. Right, shown in August of 2011, these heavy chains and other equipment were involved in agitating submerged oil from the sediments of the Kalamazoo River following the Enbridge oil spill. (NOAA)​

As of November 05, 2014 the Kalamazoo spill has cost more than $1.21 billion.
We still don't know how to remove all the submerged oil.

"the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional." ​

.

thank you Star

Now you sure you want me on your back backing STAR?

Are you nuts?

Game on baby.

 

[tinydancer]

There has never been a better time for our nation to invest in infrastructure

Historically low interest rates and a large number of construction workers out of work

so true. Too bad the Repubs are against investment and are more interested in give-aways to the special interests & well-connected

Just think if we used the money lost in tax cuts for the wealthy on infrastructure.....or the money we spent on invasions

What the hell?

Trans Canada is paying for the whole shebang.

'cept for; you're overlooking the cost of clean-up for the inevitable spill/train wreck...

<snip>

Tar Sands Exempt from Oil Spill Insurance Fund; Taxpayers at Risk

With costs for cleaning up spills so staggeringly high, one might reasonably assume that oil pipeline operators have insurance of some sort to cover costs they cannot afford to pay. And it is true; pipeline operators pay a few cents per barrel into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to defray cleanup costs. And given that dilbit is so much more difficult clean up, since its density causes it to separate and sink in water rather than float on the surface, one might reasonably assume that tar sands pipeline operators would be required to pay a little bit more.

However, one would be wrong. They are, in fact, not required to pay into the fund at all. Thanks to an interpretation of the law creating the liability fund by the Internal Revenue Service, bitumen is exempted because it is not "conventional oil."

Regardless of who pays for it, the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional.

"Whether it's the BP oil disaster or the Kalamazoo spill or what happened up in Alaska 20 years ago [the Exxon Valdez spill], it takes decades and decades for that ecosystem to recover, if it ever does," says Colarulli. "Experts who work on those types of spills and disasters will tell you it never recovers. Long-term effects generally aren't felt until 10 or 20 years later when the buildup of toxins in the lower organisms in the soil start to collect in larger animals, such as humans."

The potential risk, Colarulli says, cannot be overstated: "This is a 1700-mile Superfund site that were talking about."

There are conflicting opinions as to whether dilbit is more or less likely to cause pipeline ruptures. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council reported that dill bit is no more likely than conventional oil to cause damaged pipelines. However, as Swift wrote in his NRDC blog, "The NAS literature review compared tar sands to similar heavy thick crudes coming from Canada that have similar properties and risks, rather than comparing them to the lighter oils historically transported in the US pipeline system." So the NAS review found that tar sands oil behaves very much like oil that's very much like tar sands oil.

<snip>


EPA's Situation Reports [PDF]).

Left, in August of 2011, cleanup workers drove a special tracked vehicle back and forth across the bottom sediments in Morrow Lake (a reservoir along the Kalamazoo River) to release oil trapped in the mud. Right, shown in August of 2011, these heavy chains and other equipment were involved in agitating submerged oil from the sediments of the Kalamazoo River following the Enbridge oil spill. (NOAA)​

As of November 05, 2014 the Kalamazoo spill has cost more than $1.21 billion.
We still don't know how to remove all the submerged oil.

"the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional." ​

.

Star no pipeline. Star shipped by rail. Star check out lac megantic. Get back to me you idiot.

 

[Star]

so true. Too bad the Repubs are against investment and are more interested in give-aways to the special interests & well-connected

Just think if we used the money lost in tax cuts for the wealthy on infrastructure.....or the money we spent on invasions

What the hell?

Trans Canada is paying for the whole shebang.

'cept for; you're overlooking the cost of clean-up for the inevitable spill/train wreck...

<snip>

Tar Sands Exempt from Oil Spill Insurance Fund; Taxpayers at Risk

With costs for cleaning up spills so staggeringly high, one might reasonably assume that oil pipeline operators have insurance of some sort to cover costs they cannot afford to pay. And it is true; pipeline operators pay a few cents per barrel into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to defray cleanup costs. And given that dilbit is so much more difficult clean up, since its density causes it to separate and sink in water rather than float on the surface, one might reasonably assume that tar sands pipeline operators would be required to pay a little bit more.

However, one would be wrong. They are, in fact, not required to pay into the fund at all. Thanks to an interpretation of the law creating the liability fund by the Internal Revenue Service, bitumen is exempted because it is not "conventional oil."

Regardless of who pays for it, the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional.

"Whether it's the BP oil disaster or the Kalamazoo spill or what happened up in Alaska 20 years ago [the Exxon Valdez spill], it takes decades and decades for that ecosystem to recover, if it ever does," says Colarulli. "Experts who work on those types of spills and disasters will tell you it never recovers. Long-term effects generally aren't felt until 10 or 20 years later when the buildup of toxins in the lower organisms in the soil start to collect in larger animals, such as humans."

The potential risk, Colarulli says, cannot be overstated: "This is a 1700-mile Superfund site that were talking about."

There are conflicting opinions as to whether dilbit is more or less likely to cause pipeline ruptures. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council reported that dill bit is no more likely than conventional oil to cause damaged pipelines. However, as Swift wrote in his NRDC blog, "The NAS literature review compared tar sands to similar heavy thick crudes coming from Canada that have similar properties and risks, rather than comparing them to the lighter oils historically transported in the US pipeline system." So the NAS review found that tar sands oil behaves very much like oil that's very much like tar sands oil.

<snip>


EPA's Situation Reports [PDF]).

Left, in August of 2011, cleanup workers drove a special tracked vehicle back and forth across the bottom sediments in Morrow Lake (a reservoir along the Kalamazoo River) to release oil trapped in the mud. Right, shown in August of 2011, these heavy chains and other equipment were involved in agitating submerged oil from the sediments of the Kalamazoo River following the Enbridge oil spill. (NOAA)​

As of November 05, 2014 the Kalamazoo spill has cost more than $1.21 billion.
We still don't know how to remove all the submerged oil.

"the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional." ​

.

thank you Star

Now you sure you want me on your back backing STAR?

Are you nuts?

Game on baby.

If all you have left is playing ad hominem games, go play with yourself, but if you want to talk about the United States' IRS tar sands insurance exemption I'm in. How does the Canadian Lac-Mégantic disaster affect the lazy/do nothing/incompetent US Congress' inability to act on the tar sands exemption?

I love Canada but I wonder how a Canadian like yourself can conflate a strictly Canadian disaster with the United States IRS re: United States Congress' exemption for the dirty Mackenzie and Athabasca destroying crud Trans-Canada wants to ship by pipeline, train, truck and barge across the United States?
.

 

[tinydancer]

Just think if we used the money lost in tax cuts for the wealthy on infrastructure.....or the money we spent on invasions

What the hell?

Trans Canada is paying for the whole shebang.

'cept for; you're overlooking the cost of clean-up for the inevitable spill/train wreck...

<snip>

Tar Sands Exempt from Oil Spill Insurance Fund; Taxpayers at Risk

With costs for cleaning up spills so staggeringly high, one might reasonably assume that oil pipeline operators have insurance of some sort to cover costs they cannot afford to pay. And it is true; pipeline operators pay a few cents per barrel into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to defray cleanup costs. And given that dilbit is so much more difficult clean up, since its density causes it to separate and sink in water rather than float on the surface, one might reasonably assume that tar sands pipeline operators would be required to pay a little bit more.

However, one would be wrong. They are, in fact, not required to pay into the fund at all. Thanks to an interpretation of the law creating the liability fund by the Internal Revenue Service, bitumen is exempted because it is not "conventional oil."

Regardless of who pays for it, the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional.

"Whether it's the BP oil disaster or the Kalamazoo spill or what happened up in Alaska 20 years ago [the Exxon Valdez spill], it takes decades and decades for that ecosystem to recover, if it ever does," says Colarulli. "Experts who work on those types of spills and disasters will tell you it never recovers. Long-term effects generally aren't felt until 10 or 20 years later when the buildup of toxins in the lower organisms in the soil start to collect in larger animals, such as humans."

The potential risk, Colarulli says, cannot be overstated: "This is a 1700-mile Superfund site that were talking about."

There are conflicting opinions as to whether dilbit is more or less likely to cause pipeline ruptures. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council reported that dill bit is no more likely than conventional oil to cause damaged pipelines. However, as Swift wrote in his NRDC blog, "The NAS literature review compared tar sands to similar heavy thick crudes coming from Canada that have similar properties and risks, rather than comparing them to the lighter oils historically transported in the US pipeline system." So the NAS review found that tar sands oil behaves very much like oil that's very much like tar sands oil.

<snip>


EPA's Situation Reports [PDF]).

Left, in August of 2011, cleanup workers drove a special tracked vehicle back and forth across the bottom sediments in Morrow Lake (a reservoir along the Kalamazoo River) to release oil trapped in the mud. Right, shown in August of 2011, these heavy chains and other equipment were involved in agitating submerged oil from the sediments of the Kalamazoo River following the Enbridge oil spill. (NOAA)​

As of November 05, 2014 the Kalamazoo spill has cost more than $1.21 billion.
We still don't know how to remove all the submerged oil.

"the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional." ​

.

thank you Star

Now you sure you want me on your back backing STAR?

Are you nuts?

Game on baby.

If all you have left is playing ad hominem games, go play with yourself, but if you want to talk about the United States' IRS tar sands insurance exemption I'm in. How does the Canadian Lac-Mégantic disaster affect the lazy/do nothing/incompetent US Congress' inability to act on the tar sands exemption?

I love Canada but I wonder how a Canadian like yourself can conflate a strictly Canadian disaster with the United States IRS re: United States Congress' exemption for the dirty Mackenzie and Athabasca destroying crud Trans-Canada wants to ship by pipeline, train, truck and barge across the United States?
.

I've chosen wisely.

Look this really hurts my parts.

I'm trying to kill Bi Pole out here. Getting in all the players over what is going to be a disaster on a mega scale.

Here's the deal. I am a true blue conservationist. I believe in ethical oil.

And no one on can beat me up on oil.

 

[tinydancer]

Just think if we used the money lost in tax cuts for the wealthy on infrastructure.....or the money we spent on invasions

What the hell?

Trans Canada is paying for the whole shebang.

'cept for; you're overlooking the cost of clean-up for the inevitable spill/train wreck...

<snip>

Tar Sands Exempt from Oil Spill Insurance Fund; Taxpayers at Risk

With costs for cleaning up spills so staggeringly high, one might reasonably assume that oil pipeline operators have insurance of some sort to cover costs they cannot afford to pay. And it is true; pipeline operators pay a few cents per barrel into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to defray cleanup costs. And given that dilbit is so much more difficult clean up, since its density causes it to separate and sink in water rather than float on the surface, one might reasonably assume that tar sands pipeline operators would be required to pay a little bit more.

However, one would be wrong. They are, in fact, not required to pay into the fund at all. Thanks to an interpretation of the law creating the liability fund by the Internal Revenue Service, bitumen is exempted because it is not "conventional oil."

Regardless of who pays for it, the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional.

"Whether it's the BP oil disaster or the Kalamazoo spill or what happened up in Alaska 20 years ago [the Exxon Valdez spill], it takes decades and decades for that ecosystem to recover, if it ever does," says Colarulli. "Experts who work on those types of spills and disasters will tell you it never recovers. Long-term effects generally aren't felt until 10 or 20 years later when the buildup of toxins in the lower organisms in the soil start to collect in larger animals, such as humans."

The potential risk, Colarulli says, cannot be overstated: "This is a 1700-mile Superfund site that were talking about."

There are conflicting opinions as to whether dilbit is more or less likely to cause pipeline ruptures. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council reported that dill bit is no more likely than conventional oil to cause damaged pipelines. However, as Swift wrote in his NRDC blog, "The NAS literature review compared tar sands to similar heavy thick crudes coming from Canada that have similar properties and risks, rather than comparing them to the lighter oils historically transported in the US pipeline system." So the NAS review found that tar sands oil behaves very much like oil that's very much like tar sands oil.

<snip>


EPA's Situation Reports [PDF]).

Left, in August of 2011, cleanup workers drove a special tracked vehicle back and forth across the bottom sediments in Morrow Lake (a reservoir along the Kalamazoo River) to release oil trapped in the mud. Right, shown in August of 2011, these heavy chains and other equipment were involved in agitating submerged oil from the sediments of the Kalamazoo River following the Enbridge oil spill. (NOAA)​

As of November 05, 2014 the Kalamazoo spill has cost more than $1.21 billion.
We still don't know how to remove all the submerged oil.

"the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional." ​

.

thank you Star

Now you sure you want me on your back backing STAR?

Are you nuts?

Game on baby.

If all you have left is playing ad hominem games, go play with yourself, but if you want to talk about the United States' IRS tar sands insurance exemption I'm in. How does the Canadian Lac-Mégantic disaster affect the lazy/do nothing/incompetent US Congress' inability to act on the tar sands exemption?

I love Canada but I wonder how a Canadian like yourself can conflate a strictly Canadian disaster with the United States IRS re: United States Congress' exemption for the dirty Mackenzie and Athabasca destroying crud Trans-Canada wants to ship by pipeline, train, truck and barge across the United States?
.

You can correct me but I do believe Lac Megantic was BSNF with Bakken.

 

[tinydancer]

Just think if we used the money lost in tax cuts for the wealthy on infrastructure.....or the money we spent on invasions

What the hell?

Trans Canada is paying for the whole shebang.

'cept for; you're overlooking the cost of clean-up for the inevitable spill/train wreck...

<snip>

Tar Sands Exempt from Oil Spill Insurance Fund; Taxpayers at Risk

With costs for cleaning up spills so staggeringly high, one might reasonably assume that oil pipeline operators have insurance of some sort to cover costs they cannot afford to pay. And it is true; pipeline operators pay a few cents per barrel into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to defray cleanup costs. And given that dilbit is so much more difficult clean up, since its density causes it to separate and sink in water rather than float on the surface, one might reasonably assume that tar sands pipeline operators would be required to pay a little bit more.

However, one would be wrong. They are, in fact, not required to pay into the fund at all. Thanks to an interpretation of the law creating the liability fund by the Internal Revenue Service, bitumen is exempted because it is not "conventional oil."

Regardless of who pays for it, the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional.

"Whether it's the BP oil disaster or the Kalamazoo spill or what happened up in Alaska 20 years ago [the Exxon Valdez spill], it takes decades and decades for that ecosystem to recover, if it ever does," says Colarulli. "Experts who work on those types of spills and disasters will tell you it never recovers. Long-term effects generally aren't felt until 10 or 20 years later when the buildup of toxins in the lower organisms in the soil start to collect in larger animals, such as humans."

The potential risk, Colarulli says, cannot be overstated: "This is a 1700-mile Superfund site that were talking about."

There are conflicting opinions as to whether dilbit is more or less likely to cause pipeline ruptures. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council reported that dill bit is no more likely than conventional oil to cause damaged pipelines. However, as Swift wrote in his NRDC blog, "The NAS literature review compared tar sands to similar heavy thick crudes coming from Canada that have similar properties and risks, rather than comparing them to the lighter oils historically transported in the US pipeline system." So the NAS review found that tar sands oil behaves very much like oil that's very much like tar sands oil.

<snip>


EPA's Situation Reports [PDF]).

Left, in August of 2011, cleanup workers drove a special tracked vehicle back and forth across the bottom sediments in Morrow Lake (a reservoir along the Kalamazoo River) to release oil trapped in the mud. Right, shown in August of 2011, these heavy chains and other equipment were involved in agitating submerged oil from the sediments of the Kalamazoo River following the Enbridge oil spill. (NOAA)​

As of November 05, 2014 the Kalamazoo spill has cost more than $1.21 billion.
We still don't know how to remove all the submerged oil.

"the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional." ​

.

thank you Star

Now you sure you want me on your back backing STAR?

Are you nuts?

Game on baby.

If all you have left is playing ad hominem games, go play with yourself, but if you want to talk about the United States' IRS tar sands insurance exemption I'm in. How does the Canadian Lac-Mégantic disaster affect the lazy/do nothing/incompetent US Congress' inability to act on the tar sands exemption?

I love Canada but I wonder how a Canadian like yourself can conflate a strictly Canadian disaster with the United States IRS re: United States Congress' exemption for the dirty Mackenzie and Athabasca destroying crud Trans-Canada wants to ship by pipeline, train, truck and barge across the United States?
.

Pick your poison baby. Lac Megantic was Bakken by the way. It was Bakken and Buffets rail that nuked that town.

I have a hard time with all of this. I've been a serious conservationist for decades. Mostly dealing with water issues. Grassy Narrows made me an activist. You can count on me for Ducks Unlimited even though I'll never hunt or eat a duck (had two as pets L'Orange and Aflac sp?)

I just love ducks so much.

 

[Star]

What the hell?

Trans Canada is paying for the whole shebang.

'cept for; you're overlooking the cost of clean-up for the inevitable spill/train wreck...

<snip>

Tar Sands Exempt from Oil Spill Insurance Fund; Taxpayers at Risk

With costs for cleaning up spills so staggeringly high, one might reasonably assume that oil pipeline operators have insurance of some sort to cover costs they cannot afford to pay. And it is true; pipeline operators pay a few cents per barrel into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to defray cleanup costs. And given that dilbit is so much more difficult clean up, since its density causes it to separate and sink in water rather than float on the surface, one might reasonably assume that tar sands pipeline operators would be required to pay a little bit more.

However, one would be wrong. They are, in fact, not required to pay into the fund at all. Thanks to an interpretation of the law creating the liability fund by the Internal Revenue Service, bitumen is exempted because it is not "conventional oil."

Regardless of who pays for it, the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional.

"Whether it's the BP oil disaster or the Kalamazoo spill or what happened up in Alaska 20 years ago [the Exxon Valdez spill], it takes decades and decades for that ecosystem to recover, if it ever does," says Colarulli. "Experts who work on those types of spills and disasters will tell you it never recovers. Long-term effects generally aren't felt until 10 or 20 years later when the buildup of toxins in the lower organisms in the soil start to collect in larger animals, such as humans."

The potential risk, Colarulli says, cannot be overstated: "This is a 1700-mile Superfund site that were talking about."

There are conflicting opinions as to whether dilbit is more or less likely to cause pipeline ruptures. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council reported that dill bit is no more likely than conventional oil to cause damaged pipelines. However, as Swift wrote in his NRDC blog, "The NAS literature review compared tar sands to similar heavy thick crudes coming from Canada that have similar properties and risks, rather than comparing them to the lighter oils historically transported in the US pipeline system." So the NAS review found that tar sands oil behaves very much like oil that's very much like tar sands oil.

<snip>


EPA's Situation Reports [PDF]).

Left, in August of 2011, cleanup workers drove a special tracked vehicle back and forth across the bottom sediments in Morrow Lake (a reservoir along the Kalamazoo River) to release oil trapped in the mud. Right, shown in August of 2011, these heavy chains and other equipment were involved in agitating submerged oil from the sediments of the Kalamazoo River following the Enbridge oil spill. (NOAA)​

As of November 05, 2014 the Kalamazoo spill has cost more than $1.21 billion.
We still don't know how to remove all the submerged oil.

"the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional." ​

.

thank you Star

Now you sure you want me on your back backing STAR?

Are you nuts?

Game on baby.

If all you have left is playing ad hominem games, go play with yourself, but if you want to talk about the United States' IRS tar sands insurance exemption I'm in. How does the Canadian Lac-Mégantic disaster affect the lazy/do nothing/incompetent US Congress' inability to act on the tar sands exemption?

I love Canada but I wonder how a Canadian like yourself can conflate a strictly Canadian disaster with the United States IRS re: United States Congress' exemption for the dirty Mackenzie and Athabasca destroying crud Trans-Canada wants to ship by pipeline, train, truck and barge across the United States?
.

Pick your poison baby. Lac Megantic was Bakken by the way. It was Bakken and Buffets rail that nuked that town.

I have a hard time with all of this. I've been a serious conservationist for decades. Mostly dealing with water issues. Grassy Narrows made me an activist. You can count on me for Ducks Unlimited even though I'll never hunt or eat a duck (had two as pets L'Orange and Aflac sp?)

I just love ducks so much.

You brought up Lac-Megantic.
I love Canada but I really don't care about how Canadian politicians regulate/ insure/or not, rickety oil trains inside Canada - it's none of my business...

OTOH, I do care about why the United States do nothing Congress chooses to want to give a free pass on insuring dirty/low energy yield/environmentally unfriendly/Canadian Crud to travel across an irreplaceable American aquifer and American soil - be it by rail, pipeline, barge, truck...whatever - even if it were to be transported by NBSR - is that "Buffetts (sic) rail"?
.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Basically. Yes

It is OK to collect taxes and it is not OK to confiscate someone's property so that another person can make a profit off of it

The constitution says basically you are incorrect

You must be reading the wrong Constitution

You need to look for the one that begins...."We the People"

libtards and their basic misunderstanding of the founding documents -sad really

eminent domain is clearly spelled out in the 5th Amendment

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The key word is "public use"

Taking property for the use of a foreign investor is not constitutional

No one is "taking" anyone's property.
A Canadian company, with the prior approval of the US Government is 'asking' landowners to lease a very small strip of their land. that's it.
If the landowner doesn't wish to lease a strip of their land the proposed pipeline moves. This has happened in a few instances. 99.99 of the landowners have signed lease agreements and look forward to their monthly cheques.
I like how you 'forgot' to add "without just compensation" although in this case as no one is 'taking' any land it's a moot point.

exactly

leftists have to lie and distort everything

it is who they are

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Woohoo
Just heard on TV.

That many on the right sought to make this a political issue was truly ridiculous and unwarranted.

 

[jon_berzerk]

infras

Crony Capitalism at work.

is it crony capitalism or is it just cronyism

Crony Capitalism is when you screw businesses while propping up business owners who support you screwing their competitors.

Cronyism is just showing favoritism to your buddies.

yes but it is not capitalistic at all

 

[Dot Com]

'cept for; you're overlooking the cost of clean-up for the inevitable spill/train wreck...

<snip>

Tar Sands Exempt from Oil Spill Insurance Fund; Taxpayers at Risk

With costs for cleaning up spills so staggeringly high, one might reasonably assume that oil pipeline operators have insurance of some sort to cover costs they cannot afford to pay. And it is true; pipeline operators pay a few cents per barrel into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to defray cleanup costs. And given that dilbit is so much more difficult clean up, since its density causes it to separate and sink in water rather than float on the surface, one might reasonably assume that tar sands pipeline operators would be required to pay a little bit more.

However, one would be wrong. They are, in fact, not required to pay into the fund at all. Thanks to an interpretation of the law creating the liability fund by the Internal Revenue Service, bitumen is exempted because it is not "conventional oil."

Regardless of who pays for it, the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional.

"Whether it's the BP oil disaster or the Kalamazoo spill or what happened up in Alaska 20 years ago [the Exxon Valdez spill], it takes decades and decades for that ecosystem to recover, if it ever does," says Colarulli. "Experts who work on those types of spills and disasters will tell you it never recovers. Long-term effects generally aren't felt until 10 or 20 years later when the buildup of toxins in the lower organisms in the soil start to collect in larger animals, such as humans."

The potential risk, Colarulli says, cannot be overstated: "This is a 1700-mile Superfund site that were talking about."

There are conflicting opinions as to whether dilbit is more or less likely to cause pipeline ruptures. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council reported that dill bit is no more likely than conventional oil to cause damaged pipelines. However, as Swift wrote in his NRDC blog, "The NAS literature review compared tar sands to similar heavy thick crudes coming from Canada that have similar properties and risks, rather than comparing them to the lighter oils historically transported in the US pipeline system." So the NAS review found that tar sands oil behaves very much like oil that's very much like tar sands oil.

<snip>


EPA's Situation Reports [PDF]).

Left, in August of 2011, cleanup workers drove a special tracked vehicle back and forth across the bottom sediments in Morrow Lake (a reservoir along the Kalamazoo River) to release oil trapped in the mud. Right, shown in August of 2011, these heavy chains and other equipment were involved in agitating submerged oil from the sediments of the Kalamazoo River following the Enbridge oil spill. (NOAA)​

As of November 05, 2014 the Kalamazoo spill has cost more than $1.21 billion.
We still don't know how to remove all the submerged oil.

"the notion of cleaning up of an oil spill is essentially delusional." ​

.

thank you Star

Now you sure you want me on your back backing STAR?

Are you nuts?

Game on baby.

If all you have left is playing ad hominem games, go play with yourself, but if you want to talk about the United States' IRS tar sands insurance exemption I'm in. How does the Canadian Lac-Mégantic disaster affect the lazy/do nothing/incompetent US Congress' inability to act on the tar sands exemption?

I love Canada but I wonder how a Canadian like yourself can conflate a strictly Canadian disaster with the United States IRS re: United States Congress' exemption for the dirty Mackenzie and Athabasca destroying crud Trans-Canada wants to ship by pipeline, train, truck and barge across the United States?
.

Pick your poison baby. Lac Megantic was Bakken by the way. It was Bakken and Buffets rail that nuked that town.

I have a hard time with all of this. I've been a serious conservationist for decades. Mostly dealing with water issues. Grassy Narrows made me an activist. You can count on me for Ducks Unlimited even though I'll never hunt or eat a duck (had two as pets L'Orange and Aflac sp?)

I just love ducks so much.

You brought up Lac-Megantic.
I love Canada but I really don't care about how Canadian politicians regulate/ insure/or not, rickety oil trains inside Canada - it's none of my business...

OTOH, I do care about why the United States do nothing Congress chooses to want to give a free pass on insuring dirty/low energy yield/environmentally unfriendly/Canadian Crud to travel across an irreplaceable American aquifer and American soil - be it by rail, pipeline, barge, truck...whatever - even if it were to be transported by NBSR - is that "Buffetts (sic) rail"?
.

Star is right. The USCongress is bought off

 

[Redfish]

Woohoo
Just heard on TV.

That many on the right sought to make this a political issue was truly ridiculous and unwarranted.

are you crazy? obama made it a political issue. he is a puppet of the left wing capitalists. The environmental risk of keystone was zero. But it would have cost Buffet money when the crude was no longer shiped on his railroad.

This was not about oil, pipelines, the environment, or the economy, it was about keeping the money flowing to obama supporters.

Wake up libs, your messiah is a fraud.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

With all our devotion to oil, it is totally hypocritical to have stonewalled the Keystone project, a great blow to America's image and standing.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

obama made it a political issue.

Or he is just stubborn.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

I still can't believe how the Republicans botched Keystone

They took a low priority public works project that nobody cared about and turned it into a political showdown with the President

Someone had to win, someone had to lose....Republicans lost

If the Republicans did nothing, the pipeline would have gone forward? lol

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Burning Fossil Fuels seems to bit ridiculous. We are mired in old technology for one reason, oil companies have managed to usurp the political process. Energy technology has stagnated for the last century or so.

Our love affair with oil will last about another half century.

 

[Redfish]

Burning Fossil Fuels seems to bit ridiculous. We are mired in old technology for one reason, oil companies have managed to usurp the political process. Energy technology has stagnated for the last century or so.

Our love affair with oil will last about another half century.

True, but the idiots on the left refuse to accept the reality that there is currently no substitute for fossil fuels. Someday there will be and those solutions will be found by the private capitalist market place, not governments.

We should be taking an "all of the above" approach to energy and stop the demonization of oil, coal, and gas.

If the libs want a cause, they should attack pollution rather that the hoax of global warming or man made climate change. Pollution of the planet is bad, but pollution is not causing the climate to change.

The AGW hoax is nothing but a socialist attempt to control more of our individual lives. Do you really want some GS9 sitting in DC to have control of your thermostat? Thats whats coming if these idiots have their way.