Obama/Democrats will create jobs if NO Keystone built... here is how..

[healthmyths]

It is simple. No Keystone means 1 million barrels by tanker to China.
With the below spill the cleanup required about 10,000 workers,
1,000 boats and roughly 100 airplanes and helicopters.

On March 23, 1989, at 9:12 pm the Exxon Valdez oil tanker left the Alyeska Pipeline to cross Prince William Sound carrying approximately 53 million gallons of crude oil. The tanker was headed for Long Beach, California. Three hours later, just after midnight on March 24th, the Exxon Valdez ran into Bligh Reef, spilling 10.8 million gallons of oil into the sound.

Here are some of the most startling statistics about the effects of the Exxon Valdez spill on marine wildlife, fisheries and the region's economy:

• The amount of oil spilled could fill 125 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

• As many as 2,800 sea otters, 300 harbor seals, 900 bald eagles and 250,000 seabirds died in the days following the disaster.

• 1,300 miles of coastline were hit by the oil spill.

• 1,000 harlequin ducks were killed by the oil spill, in addition to many chronic injuries that occurred as a result of the long term effects of the spill.

• The cleanup required about 10,000 workers, 1,000 boats and roughly 100 airplanes and helicopters.

• Four deaths were directly associated with cleanup efforts.

• The spill caused over $300 million of economic harm to more than 32 thousand people whose livelihoods depended on commercial fishing.

• Tourism spending decreased by eight percent in south central Alaska and by 35 percent in southwest Alaska in the year after the spill.

• There was a loss of 9,400 visitors and $5.5 million in state spending.

• Many fish populations were harmed during the spill. For example, sand lance populations went down in 1989 and 1990, herring returns were significantly fewer in 1992 and 1994 and adult fish had high rates of viral infections.

• Pink salmon embryos continued to be harmed and killed by oil that remained on stones and gravel of stream banks through at least 1993. As a result, the southwestern part of Prince William Sound lost 1.9 million or 28 percent of its potential stock of wild pink salmon. By 1992, this part of the sound still had 6 percent less of the wild pink salmon stock than was estimated to have existed if the spill had not occurred.

• Two years following the Exxon Valdez spill, the economic losses to recreational fishing were estimated to be $31 million.

• Twelve years after the spill, oil could still be found on half of the 91 randomly selected beaches surveyed.

• Three species of cormorant, the common loon, the harbor seal, the harlequin duck, the pacific herring and the pigeon guillemot still have not fully recovered.
• Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Facts

no Keystone ... by tanker to China

LMAO !

how do you imagine a million barrels of oil get to China from Houston ?

please explain your transportation solutions ..

go ahead, show the people on the internet exactly how stupid you really are?

So you would prefer 1 million barrels in a tanker bouncing around the frigid, arctic pacific ocean over 700 barrels traveling one mile to Houston then
bouncing around in the quieter less damaging Gulf of Mexico?
Remember the Exxon Valdez happened in the same shipping lanes this additional million barrels a day will be traveling if no Keystone!
It is the less risk of an accident and smaller damages going to Houston by pipeline THEN on a tanker but in the calmer Gulf of Mexico.
Any dangers of tankers in the Gulf are mitigated by the expertise, the more conducive climate and the smaller area involved.

You need to stop lying. The Valdez spill occurred in Prince William Sound, a sheltered coastal area.

OH GEEZ!!!! How terrible! Doesn't alter the FACT when you put another 1 million barrel tanker a DAY coming out of Canada to China there
will be another Exxon Valdez!
So I was wrong. Am I wrong that 1 million barrels in a tanker going one mile on the open ocean has a GREATER chance and would do a larger area
of destruction then 700 barrels flowing one mile in pipeline on dry land?
That is the major point here !

 

[MaxGrit]

That is conspiracy theory BS. The plunge is being driven by decreased demand in Asia, increased supply from North America and the loss of market pricing control by the international price-fixing cartel: OPEC.

Keep thinking that and you'll die dumb.

The market is fixed. Putin is bad. When you shoot down a commercial aircraft and promote cyber-terrorism among other bad things, you tend to piss-off VERY influential and powerful people in this world and must pay.

crazy and ignorant

 

[SAYIT]

That is conspiracy theory BS. The plunge is being driven by decreased demand in Asia, increased supply from North America and the loss of market pricing control by the international price-fixing cartel: OPEC.

Keep thinking that and you'll die dumb.

The market is fixed. Putin is bad. When you shoot down a commercial aircraft and promote cyber-terrorism among other bad things, you tend to piss-off VERY influential and powerful people in this world and must pay.

In order to reach your level of intelligence I'd need a radical lobotomy ... maybe two.
Just because you think there is some American/Saudi conspiracy to force oil price declines just to punish Russia & Iran doesn't make it so. That silly shit exists only in your (pin) head, Princess. Lower energy prices certainly help Americans but Saudis live off their major export commodity and need higher prices to carry their oil-production based economy.

 

[SAYIT]

Another far left propaganda post based on the far left religious belief..

Although these far left drones continue to show that they are irony impaired.

Energy

Your answer is what fools believe? Really?

Typical far left drone to deny reality when it is shown to them..

Polls show Americans support the Keystone pipeline. Thus the far left went against what the people want yet again.

I guess the "non-stupid American voters" have a grasp on the difference in higher risk and greater damage from 1 million barrels in a tanker floating on
ocean traveling one mile versus 700 barrels traveling one mile in a pipeline on dry land. With 185,000 miles of oil pipeline already in the USA the "non-stupid American voter" grasps the lesser of two evils, i.e. one million barrels versus 700 barrels! I know it isn't tough but the Anti-Keystone crowd have a problem with simple arithmetic. These are the same "stupid American voters" that believe Obama there are 46 million uninsured Americans when in fact
10 million are not citizens but counted as part of the 46 million... 14 million should have been enrolled Medicaid/SCHIP but aren't due to Obama inefficiencies and 18 million don't want our need health insurance as they are under 34 making over $50,000...yet they were bogusly counted!
So it goes with the territory of 'stupid American voters" that bought the ACA and now buying the ignorant arithmetic of Keystone!

I get the impression that the anti-pipeliners don't worship that POV - their arguments seem specious at best - but rather they worship our President.
If Obama was pro-pipeline, they would also.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It is simple. No Keystone means 1 million barrels by tanker to China.
With the below spill the cleanup required about 10,000 workers,
1,000 boats and roughly 100 airplanes and helicopters.

On March 23, 1989, at 9:12 pm the Exxon Valdez oil tanker left the Alyeska Pipeline to cross Prince William Sound carrying approximately 53 million gallons of crude oil. The tanker was headed for Long Beach, California. Three hours later, just after midnight on March 24th, the Exxon Valdez ran into Bligh Reef, spilling 10.8 million gallons of oil into the sound.

Here are some of the most startling statistics about the effects of the Exxon Valdez spill on marine wildlife, fisheries and the region's economy:

• The amount of oil spilled could fill 125 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

• As many as 2,800 sea otters, 300 harbor seals, 900 bald eagles and 250,000 seabirds died in the days following the disaster.

• 1,300 miles of coastline were hit by the oil spill.

• 1,000 harlequin ducks were killed by the oil spill, in addition to many chronic injuries that occurred as a result of the long term effects of the spill.

• The cleanup required about 10,000 workers, 1,000 boats and roughly 100 airplanes and helicopters.

• Four deaths were directly associated with cleanup efforts.

• The spill caused over $300 million of economic harm to more than 32 thousand people whose livelihoods depended on commercial fishing.

• Tourism spending decreased by eight percent in south central Alaska and by 35 percent in southwest Alaska in the year after the spill.

• There was a loss of 9,400 visitors and $5.5 million in state spending.

• Many fish populations were harmed during the spill. For example, sand lance populations went down in 1989 and 1990, herring returns were significantly fewer in 1992 and 1994 and adult fish had high rates of viral infections.

• Pink salmon embryos continued to be harmed and killed by oil that remained on stones and gravel of stream banks through at least 1993. As a result, the southwestern part of Prince William Sound lost 1.9 million or 28 percent of its potential stock of wild pink salmon. By 1992, this part of the sound still had 6 percent less of the wild pink salmon stock than was estimated to have existed if the spill had not occurred.

• Two years following the Exxon Valdez spill, the economic losses to recreational fishing were estimated to be $31 million.

• Twelve years after the spill, oil could still be found on half of the 91 randomly selected beaches surveyed.

• Three species of cormorant, the common loon, the harbor seal, the harlequin duck, the pacific herring and the pigeon guillemot still have not fully recovered.
• Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Facts

no Keystone ... by tanker to China

LMAO !

how do you imagine a million barrels of oil get to China from Houston ?

please explain your transportation solutions ..

go ahead, show the people on the internet exactly how stupid you really are?

So you would prefer 1 million barrels in a tanker bouncing around the frigid, arctic pacific ocean over 700 barrels traveling one mile to Houston then
bouncing around in the quieter less damaging Gulf of Mexico?
Remember the Exxon Valdez happened in the same shipping lanes this additional million barrels a day will be traveling if no Keystone!
It is the less risk of an accident and smaller damages going to Houston by pipeline THEN on a tanker but in the calmer Gulf of Mexico.
Any dangers of tankers in the Gulf are mitigated by the expertise, the more conducive climate and the smaller area involved.

You need to stop lying. The Valdez spill occurred in Prince William Sound, a sheltered coastal area.

OH GEEZ!!!! How terrible! Doesn't alter the FACT when you put another 1 million barrel tanker a DAY coming out of Canada to China there
will be another Exxon Valdez!
So I was wrong. Am I wrong that 1 million barrels in a tanker going one mile on the open ocean has a GREATER chance and would do a larger area
of destruction then 700 barrels flowing one mile in pipeline on dry land?
That is the major point here !

You have to cross an ocean to get to China. Are you retarded?

 

[OnePercenter]

Here are the FACTS...
How much does it cost to produce crude oil and natural gas - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration EIA
The below EIA web page doesn't support your GUESS!
Isn't the Internet wonderful... Took me less then 2 minutes to find THE F...KING FACTS! NOT guesses!
View attachment 34187

Market price for oil in 1999 was $12.00/bbl. Why the increase in cost of production?

 

[healthmyths]

Here are the FACTS...
How much does it cost to produce crude oil and natural gas - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration EIA
The below EIA web page doesn't support your GUESS!
Isn't the Internet wonderful... Took me less then 2 minutes to find THE F...KING FACTS! NOT guesses!
View attachment 34187

Market price for oil in 1999 was $12.00/bbl. Why the increase in cost of production?

Little thing called inflation..
Remember the table I put up CAME from the U.S. Energy... so why do you doubt it unless you are confused.
The chart shows costs of finding and producing(lifting) the raw oil. BEFORE shipping to the refineries,etc.
Do you understand now?

 

[healthmyths]

It is simple. No Keystone means 1 million barrels by tanker to China.
With the below spill the cleanup required about 10,000 workers,
1,000 boats and roughly 100 airplanes and helicopters.

On March 23, 1989, at 9:12 pm the Exxon Valdez oil tanker left the Alyeska Pipeline to cross Prince William Sound carrying approximately 53 million gallons of crude oil. The tanker was headed for Long Beach, California. Three hours later, just after midnight on March 24th, the Exxon Valdez ran into Bligh Reef, spilling 10.8 million gallons of oil into the sound.

Here are some of the most startling statistics about the effects of the Exxon Valdez spill on marine wildlife, fisheries and the region's economy:

• The amount of oil spilled could fill 125 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

• As many as 2,800 sea otters, 300 harbor seals, 900 bald eagles and 250,000 seabirds died in the days following the disaster.

• 1,300 miles of coastline were hit by the oil spill.

• 1,000 harlequin ducks were killed by the oil spill, in addition to many chronic injuries that occurred as a result of the long term effects of the spill.

• The cleanup required about 10,000 workers, 1,000 boats and roughly 100 airplanes and helicopters.

• Four deaths were directly associated with cleanup efforts.

• The spill caused over $300 million of economic harm to more than 32 thousand people whose livelihoods depended on commercial fishing.

• Tourism spending decreased by eight percent in south central Alaska and by 35 percent in southwest Alaska in the year after the spill.

• There was a loss of 9,400 visitors and $5.5 million in state spending.

• Many fish populations were harmed during the spill. For example, sand lance populations went down in 1989 and 1990, herring returns were significantly fewer in 1992 and 1994 and adult fish had high rates of viral infections.

• Pink salmon embryos continued to be harmed and killed by oil that remained on stones and gravel of stream banks through at least 1993. As a result, the southwestern part of Prince William Sound lost 1.9 million or 28 percent of its potential stock of wild pink salmon. By 1992, this part of the sound still had 6 percent less of the wild pink salmon stock than was estimated to have existed if the spill had not occurred.

• Two years following the Exxon Valdez spill, the economic losses to recreational fishing were estimated to be $31 million.

• Twelve years after the spill, oil could still be found on half of the 91 randomly selected beaches surveyed.

• Three species of cormorant, the common loon, the harbor seal, the harlequin duck, the pacific herring and the pigeon guillemot still have not fully recovered.
• Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Facts

no Keystone ... by tanker to China

LMAO !

how do you imagine a million barrels of oil get to China from Houston ?

please explain your transportation solutions ..

go ahead, show the people on the internet exactly how stupid you really are?

So you would prefer 1 million barrels in a tanker bouncing around the frigid, arctic pacific ocean over 700 barrels traveling one mile to Houston then
bouncing around in the quieter less damaging Gulf of Mexico?
Remember the Exxon Valdez happened in the same shipping lanes this additional million barrels a day will be traveling if no Keystone!
It is the less risk of an accident and smaller damages going to Houston by pipeline THEN on a tanker but in the calmer Gulf of Mexico.
Any dangers of tankers in the Gulf are mitigated by the expertise, the more conducive climate and the smaller area involved.

You need to stop lying. The Valdez spill occurred in Prince William Sound, a sheltered coastal area.

OH GEEZ!!!! How terrible! Doesn't alter the FACT when you put another 1 million barrel tanker a DAY coming out of Canada to China there
will be another Exxon Valdez!
So I was wrong. Am I wrong that 1 million barrels in a tanker going one mile on the open ocean has a GREATER chance and would do a larger area
of destruction then 700 barrels flowing one mile in pipeline on dry land?
That is the major point here !

You have to cross an ocean to get to China. Are you retarded?

Duh... no shit beaver! My point though you dumb f...k is why have 1 million barrels in a tanker on the open Arctic ocean/wild "Pacific" Northwest
when you can send to Houston where they HAVE all the expertise,etc. to put on 1 million barrel tankers that have little problems with the Gulf of Mexico.
Then from there to Panama and on the way to China..
REMEMBER dummy... Canada is going to ship it most likely to China... so numb nuts... which would be better 1 million barrels floating on the ocean
that saw exxon valdez?? Of course that has no bearing on idiots who don't learn their lesson!

 

[SAYIT]

Here are the FACTS...
How much does it cost to produce crude oil and natural gas - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration EIA
The below EIA web page doesn't support your GUESS!
Isn't the Internet wonderful... Took me less then 2 minutes to find THE F...KING FACTS! NOT guesses!
View attachment 34187

Market price for oil in 1999 was $12.00/bbl. Why the increase in cost of production?

Childish question. You just had your mendacious, $10/bbl ass handed to you and now your butt hurts. Perhaps you should ask your question of those who published the info, Princess: How much does it cost to produce crude oil and natural gas - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration EIA

 

[tinydancer]

What are you talking about?

Kinder Morgan already has Trans Mountain to the BC coast from Alberta. And they are looking to expand.

Steyer the bullshit "green billionaire" as far as I know has not divested himself of his fossil fuel investments in Kinder Morgan and he stands to gain if the Northern Gateway is blocked.

Is it big enough to supply ships bound for China?

And right there you are wrong. More oil from the Americas means less demand for OPEC's. Guess what happens to the price when desperate suppliers need - and OPEC nations desperately need - to sell their oil? Even if the only benefit was to fuck OPEC where the sun don't shine, I'd go build that pipeline with my own two hands.

And how does that help us when gas prices here go up when the oil refineries in Ohio, Illinois, etc are no longer getting oil?

Yeah, 'cause we have no oil in any nearby states.

Where do you think the refineries that process the oil are located meathead? It is part of the Keystone plan to eliminate midwest refinery usage. That raises prices.

Jesus I think there's like three folks in this thread who appear to have any understanding of the topic.

Holy toledo! Where do you get this garbage from?

To say Keystone has this ultimate plan to divert oil to the Gulf is insane. Look Keystone is a pipeline provided by Trans Canada.

TransCanada does NOT drill for oil. TransCanada does NOT refine oil.

They just deliver the freaking stuff like a moving company.

They have no power to redirect jack shit. And a quick aside why the hell would anyone deprive the midwest refineries of anything? A sale of Canadian crude is a good sale to anyone.

Besides considering TransCanada spent the money only a couple of years ago to build Keystone I and Keystone II to Illinois and to Oklahoma and have contracts with refineries in those locations, why in hell would they stop shipments to those locations?

Aye carumba!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stop buying into total bullshit.

Keystone is just a pipeline. TransCanada is just an infrastructure company who in simple terms is a moving company for crude.

Nothing more.

 

[Kosh]

Here are the FACTS...
How much does it cost to produce crude oil and natural gas - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration EIA
The below EIA web page doesn't support your GUESS!
Isn't the Internet wonderful... Took me less then 2 minutes to find THE F...KING FACTS! NOT guesses!
View attachment 34187

Market price for oil in 1999 was $12.00/bbl. Why the increase in cost of production?

Then the far left drones can not understand why the OIL companies gets tax breaks and subsidies.
.

 

[NYcarbineer]

no Keystone ... by tanker to China

LMAO !

how do you imagine a million barrels of oil get to China from Houston ?

please explain your transportation solutions ..

go ahead, show the people on the internet exactly how stupid you really are?

So you would prefer 1 million barrels in a tanker bouncing around the frigid, arctic pacific ocean over 700 barrels traveling one mile to Houston then
bouncing around in the quieter less damaging Gulf of Mexico?
Remember the Exxon Valdez happened in the same shipping lanes this additional million barrels a day will be traveling if no Keystone!
It is the less risk of an accident and smaller damages going to Houston by pipeline THEN on a tanker but in the calmer Gulf of Mexico.
Any dangers of tankers in the Gulf are mitigated by the expertise, the more conducive climate and the smaller area involved.

You need to stop lying. The Valdez spill occurred in Prince William Sound, a sheltered coastal area.

OH GEEZ!!!! How terrible! Doesn't alter the FACT when you put another 1 million barrel tanker a DAY coming out of Canada to China there
will be another Exxon Valdez!
So I was wrong. Am I wrong that 1 million barrels in a tanker going one mile on the open ocean has a GREATER chance and would do a larger area
of destruction then 700 barrels flowing one mile in pipeline on dry land?
That is the major point here !

You have to cross an ocean to get to China. Are you retarded?

Duh... no shit beaver! My point though you dumb f...k is why have 1 million barrels in a tanker on the open Arctic ocean/wild "Pacific" Northwest
when you can send to Houston where they HAVE all the expertise,etc. to put on 1 million barrel tankers that have little problems with the Gulf of Mexico.
Then from there to Panama and on the way to China..
REMEMBER dummy... Canada is going to ship it most likely to China... so numb nuts... which would be better 1 million barrels floating on the ocean
that saw exxon valdez?? Of course that has no bearing on idiots who don't learn their lesson!

Can you list the tanker spills that have occurred in open water in the north Pacific?

 

[healthmyths]

So you would prefer 1 million barrels in a tanker bouncing around the frigid, arctic pacific ocean over 700 barrels traveling one mile to Houston then
bouncing around in the quieter less damaging Gulf of Mexico?
Remember the Exxon Valdez happened in the same shipping lanes this additional million barrels a day will be traveling if no Keystone!
It is the less risk of an accident and smaller damages going to Houston by pipeline THEN on a tanker but in the calmer Gulf of Mexico.
Any dangers of tankers in the Gulf are mitigated by the expertise, the more conducive climate and the smaller area involved.

You need to stop lying. The Valdez spill occurred in Prince William Sound, a sheltered coastal area.

OH GEEZ!!!! How terrible! Doesn't alter the FACT when you put another 1 million barrel tanker a DAY coming out of Canada to China there
will be another Exxon Valdez!
So I was wrong. Am I wrong that 1 million barrels in a tanker going one mile on the open ocean has a GREATER chance and would do a larger area
of destruction then 700 barrels flowing one mile in pipeline on dry land?
That is the major point here !

You have to cross an ocean to get to China. Are you retarded?

Duh... no shit beaver! My point though you dumb f...k is why have 1 million barrels in a tanker on the open Arctic ocean/wild "Pacific" Northwest
when you can send to Houston where they HAVE all the expertise,etc. to put on 1 million barrel tankers that have little problems with the Gulf of Mexico.
Then from there to Panama and on the way to China..
REMEMBER dummy... Canada is going to ship it most likely to China... so numb nuts... which would be better 1 million barrels floating on the ocean
that saw exxon valdez?? Of course that has no bearing on idiots who don't learn their lesson!

Can you list the tanker spills that have occurred in open water in the north Pacific?

Pacific Northwest ports are being increasingly used to ship oil and coal to Asia.
Unfortunately,Northwest inland and coastal waters are some of the most dangerous in the world, with strong winds, powerful currents, rocky shores and river bars.
Unstable, steep slopes threaten train traffic heading to coal/oil ports, and a huge fishery and shellfish industry is at risk if a spill occurs.
With coal and oil shipping potentially increasing substantially over the next decade, the threat of major or catastrophic environmental damage is substantial. This blog will discuss many of these dangers and will suggest that they pose an unacceptable risk for the Northwest.

The Pacific coastal water from south of the Columbia River outfall to the tip of Vancouver Island to the north (see map below), is commonly known as the Graveyard of the Pacific, and for good reason. You start with abruptly rising rocky coasts, add strong winds, and mix in low visibility from incessant fog and rain.

The blue region on the map is known as the Graveyard of the Pacific

Strong winds, sometimes reaching hurricane strength, batter the Washington and Oregon coasts in winter and the foggiest location in the continental U.S. is Cape Disappointment on the northern terminus of the Columbia River (with 106 days a year of dense fog!). The interaction of the westward moving flow of the Columbia River and incoming waves produces the dangerous Columbia Bar (see picture), with large waves and threatening shoals. Strong easterly winds exit the Strait of Juan de Fuca, frequently reaching 60-80 mph.
Cliff Mass Weather Blog Are Pacific Northwest Waters Too Risky for Oil And Coal Ships

 

[healthmyths]

And so YOU idiots against Keystone...
Want to double down now for the Pacific Northwest for another Exxon Valdez?

I really don't understand you environmental-wackos... so willing to put nails in trees to murder lumberjacks, or to burn buildings that these wackos think endanger the environment WANT MORE OIL flowing through the Pacific Northwest i.e. Remember the Valdez... and
now you WANT 1 million barrels of oil per day floating on l waters that are some of the most dangerous in the world BUT you fight a 700 barrel per mile pipeline? A pipeline that will be
less then 1% of the 185,000 already existing oil pipelines in the USA!
Dummies!

 

[Siete]

And so YOU idiots against Keystone...
Want to double down now for the Pacific Northwest for another Exxon Valdez?

I really don't understand you environmental-wackos... so willing to put nails in trees to murder lumberjacks, or to burn buildings that these wackos think endanger the environment WANT MORE OIL flowing through the Pacific Northwest i.e. Remember the Valdez... and
now you WANT 1 million barrels of oil per day floating on l waters that are some of the most dangerous in the world BUT you fight a 700 barrel per mile pipeline? A pipeline that will be
less then 1% of the 185,000 already existing oil pipelines in the USA!
Dummies!

ahhh, if it isn't Mr Calm Water Hoston ... LMAO

go away you idiot or I'll list all the Houston Ship Channel tanker wrecks ..

 

[NYcarbineer]

You need to stop lying. The Valdez spill occurred in Prince William Sound, a sheltered coastal area.

OH GEEZ!!!! How terrible! Doesn't alter the FACT when you put another 1 million barrel tanker a DAY coming out of Canada to China there
will be another Exxon Valdez!
So I was wrong. Am I wrong that 1 million barrels in a tanker going one mile on the open ocean has a GREATER chance and would do a larger area
of destruction then 700 barrels flowing one mile in pipeline on dry land?
That is the major point here !

You have to cross an ocean to get to China. Are you retarded?

Duh... no shit beaver! My point though you dumb f...k is why have 1 million barrels in a tanker on the open Arctic ocean/wild "Pacific" Northwest
when you can send to Houston where they HAVE all the expertise,etc. to put on 1 million barrel tankers that have little problems with the Gulf of Mexico.
Then from there to Panama and on the way to China..
REMEMBER dummy... Canada is going to ship it most likely to China... so numb nuts... which would be better 1 million barrels floating on the ocean
that saw exxon valdez?? Of course that has no bearing on idiots who don't learn their lesson!

Can you list the tanker spills that have occurred in open water in the north Pacific?

Pacific Northwest ports are being increasingly used to ship oil and coal to Asia.
Unfortunately,Northwest inland and coastal waters are some of the most dangerous in the world, with strong winds, powerful currents, rocky shores and river bars.
Unstable, steep slopes threaten train traffic heading to coal/oil ports, and a huge fishery and shellfish industry is at risk if a spill occurs.
With coal and oil shipping potentially increasing substantially over the next decade, the threat of major or catastrophic environmental damage is substantial. This blog will discuss many of these dangers and will suggest that they pose an unacceptable risk for the Northwest.

The Pacific coastal water from south of the Columbia River outfall to the tip of Vancouver Island to the north (see map below), is commonly known as the Graveyard of the Pacific, and for good reason. You start with abruptly rising rocky coasts, add strong winds, and mix in low visibility from incessant fog and rain.
View attachment 34230
The blue region on the map is known as the Graveyard of the Pacific

Strong winds, sometimes reaching hurricane strength, batter the Washington and Oregon coasts in winter and the foggiest location in the continental U.S. is Cape Disappointment on the northern terminus of the Columbia River (with 106 days a year of dense fog!). The interaction of the westward moving flow of the Columbia River and incoming waves produces the dangerous Columbia Bar (see picture), with large waves and threatening shoals. Strong easterly winds exit the Strait of Juan de Fuca, frequently reaching 60-80 mph.
Cliff Mass Weather Blog Are Pacific Northwest Waters Too Risky for Oil And Coal Ships

I asked for a list of spills.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And so YOU idiots against Keystone...
Want to double down now for the Pacific Northwest for another Exxon Valdez?

I really don't understand you environmental-wackos... so willing to put nails in trees to murder lumberjacks, or to burn buildings that these wackos think endanger the environment WANT MORE OIL flowing through the Pacific Northwest i.e. Remember the Valdez... and
now you WANT 1 million barrels of oil per day floating on l waters that are some of the most dangerous in the world BUT you fight a 700 barrel per mile pipeline? A pipeline that will be
less then 1% of the 185,000 already existing oil pipelines in the USA!
Dummies!

Yesterday you admitted you were wrong about the Valdez spill.

 

[Siete]

In 1989, the Exxon Valdez gushed 10.8 million gallons of oil onto the shoreline of Alaska, which lacked an adequate response plan. Then in 1990, Texas had its own environmental scare when the tanker Mega Borg spilled 5.1 million gallons of oil 57 miles southeast of Galveston while offloading crude onto another tanker. The next year, the Texas Legislature created the Oil Spill Prevention and Response Program at the Texas General Land Office.

 

[Politico]

Holy toledo! Where do you get this garbage from?

To say Keystone has this ultimate plan to divert oil to the Gulf is insane. Look Keystone is a pipeline provided by Trans Canada.

TransCanada does NOT drill for oil. TransCanada does NOT refine oil.

They just deliver the freaking stuff like a moving company.

They have no power to redirect jack shit. And a quick aside why the hell would anyone deprive the midwest refineries of anything? A sale of Canadian crude is a good sale to anyone.

Besides considering TransCanada spent the money only a couple of years ago to build Keystone I and Keystone II to Illinois and to Oklahoma and have contracts with refineries in those locations, why in hell would they stop shipments to those locations?

Aye carumba!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stop buying into total bullshit.

Keystone is just a pipeline. TransCanada is just an infrastructure company who in simple terms is a moving company for crude.

Nothing more.

From the people building the thing who state it will increase oil by around $6.50 here. Why? To make more money by their own admission. It is what it is.

Nothing more..

 

[Skull Pilot]

They won't get it at a discount. Canada wants the pipeline to increase access to world oil market prices.

And you don't think that as part of the deal the US will still get favorable treatment?

Those of us who have actually been following this rather than getting disinformation from FOX and your MessiahRushie know that Senator Schumer tried to get Canada to accept language that would continue to give the USA favorable treatment, and Canada flat out refused. Canada is counting on increasing the cost to the USA by $3.8 billion to justify the expense of building the pipeline!!!!!

Gee imagine that a business wants to cover its costs.

And you listen to Rush I don't. As a matter of fact I don't watch news on the idiot box because I don't want to be just another idiot like you.

I still know how to read and that's how I get my news.