Amazing! Idiots Keystone opponents WANT 1 million barrel spills!!

[bripat9643]

and you want a huge ******* pipe line ran through half the country.

Yes, we do.

Its a fading industry and you want this country left behind by the rest of the world so you can kiss the asses of the Haliburton kingdom.

Jesus you people REALLY think this country is all about oil.

You mean, you would like it to be a "fading industry," and this is just another episode in the environmental wacko crusade to destroy it. However, intelligent people want gas in their cars and their homes to stay nice and warm.

 

[Crackerjack]

You mean, you would like it to be a "fading industry," and this is just another episode in the environmental wacko crusade to destroy it. However, intelligent people want gas in their cars and their homes to stay nice and warm.

She gets her gas from a gas station and not a pipeline, so she's not too concerned about it.

 

[bripat9643]

Let me point out something else to you. Pipelines are like trains, they run between two points. There isn't a pipeline from the oil fields where the Keystone would begin. Also, you can't run two trains on the same track. Trying to dump the oil from Keystone into existing pipelines doesn't work because there is already oil flowing in those lines from other places. You really don't understand how many things work do you?

No, TM doesn't understand a thing. That's why everything she posts is so idiotic.

 

[bripat9643]

Tar sand spilling from the Keystone SpillLine is not the same as the light sweet crude spilling from a tanker in the ocean. Tar sand is almost solid and has to be treated with toxic chemical solvents to get it diluted enough to be pumped through a pipeline and only under very high pressure. The pipeline reaches temperatures of 150 degrees or higher from the friction against the inner walls. In the summer of 2010, a pipeline near Marshall, Mich., operated by Enbridge Energy spewed 843,000 gallons of tar sands crude into the Kalamazoo River. More than a year later, 35 miles of the river remain closed, and estimates of the costs are at half a billion dollars and rising.

A tar sand spill is therefore not like any other oil spill because it puts the local fresh water supply at risk from the toxic chemical solvents. A spill of light sweet crude into the ocean does not put the fresh water supply at risk.

The "toxic chemicals" you refer to are no more toxic than the oil is itself. Most chemicals are made from oil, especially solvents. Furthermore, the solvent they use to extract the oil is recycled. If they left it in the product, they would consume as much solvent as they amount of oil produced. So-called "tar sand crude" is no more toxic than any other crude. It just happens to be more viscous.

I was working in Battle Creek Michigan when the spill you referred to occurred. The river the oil spilled into runs right though the middle of town. All the local hotels filled up with clean up crews. You could smell the oil for a few days after the spill, but it wasn't long before you didn't notice a thing. I have no idea what it means for "35 miles of river to remain closed," other than the fact that the pipeline company is still engaged in cleanup operations. They are doing everything they can to return the entire length the spill to it's original condition. However, natural processes would return the stream to it's original condition in a few years anyway. Remember, we are talking about a small stream here, not a major river.

This spill was only a problem because the oil went into a waterway. If it had occurred on dry land, the damage would have been trivial. If anything this incident should serve only to indicate the increased danger of shipping oil by water way.

 

[skookerasbil]

You mean, you would like it to be a "fading industry," and this is just another episode in the environmental wacko crusade to destroy it. However, intelligent people want gas in their cars and their homes to stay nice and warm.

She gets her gas from a gas station and not a pipeline, so she's not too concerned about it.

Is that a she..........TRUTHMATTERS is a fcukking she????

No shit?

I always suspected she was a miserable feminist bulldog. Holy shit.........you know, I actually feel alot better knowing that..........fcukking miserable bulldog. And how many posts does she have now?

Fcukking miserable social invalid k00k..............

 

[skookerasbil]

42,000 posts........................42 fcukking thousand!!!!!!!!!!


Somebody convince me she's not this miserable fcukkikng hermit that bays at the moon when its full and leaves the house to go get Chinese food twice a week.


Hey Bripat/Crackerjack..........wanna see Truthmatters sister?? Check out this video...........you'll laugh your balls off. Heres an exact replica of TRUTHMATTERS..........a miserable ***** who hates the world and everybody who doesnt agree with her.............

Angry Woman Confronts Truck Owner and other Videos on StupidVideos.com

 

[edthecynic]

Tar sand spilling from the Keystone SpillLine is not the same as the light sweet crude spilling from a tanker in the ocean. Tar sand is almost solid and has to be treated with toxic chemical solvents to get it diluted enough to be pumped through a pipeline and only under very high pressure. The pipeline reaches temperatures of 150 degrees or higher from the friction against the inner walls. In the summer of 2010, a pipeline near Marshall, Mich., operated by Enbridge Energy spewed 843,000 gallons of tar sands crude into the Kalamazoo River. More than a year later, 35 miles of the river remain closed, and estimates of the costs are at half a billion dollars and rising.

A tar sand spill is therefore not like any other oil spill because it puts the local fresh water supply at risk from the toxic chemical solvents. A spill of light sweet crude into the ocean does not put the fresh water supply at risk.

The "toxic chemicals" you refer to are no more toxic than the oil is itself. Most chemicals are made from oil, especially solvents. Furthermore, the solvent they use to extract the oil is recycled. If they left it in the product, they would consume as much solvent as they amount of oil produced. So-called "tar sand crude" is no more toxic than any other crude. It just happens to be more viscous.

I was working in Battle Creek Michigan when the spill you referred to occurred. The river the oil spilled into runs right though the middle of town. All the local hotels filled up with clean up crews. You could smell the oil for a few days after the spill, but it wasn't long before you didn't notice a thing. I have no idea what it means for "35 miles of river to remain closed," other than the fact that the pipeline company is still engaged in cleanup operations. They are doing everything they can to return the entire length the spill to it's original condition. However, natural processes would return the stream to it's original condition in a few years anyway. Remember, we are talking about a small stream here, not a major river.

This spill was only a problem because the oil went into a waterway. If it had occurred on dry land, the damage would have been trivial. If anything this incident should serve only to indicate the increased danger of shipping oil by water way.

CON$ always pretend to be just plain dumb! The solvents cannot be removed to be recycled until the tar sand is at the refinery at the end of the pipeline otherwise the nearly solid tar sand could not flow through the pipe. So any spill along the way to the refinery will spill both tar sand and solvents.
Sheesh!

 

[Old Rocks]

and you want a huge ******* pipe line ran through half the country.

Its a fading industry and you want this country left behind by the rest of the world so you can kiss the asses of the Haliburton kingdom.

Jesus you people REALLY think this country is all about oil.

You are aware that we already have pieplines crisscrossing the country aren't you?
Here's a map to help you.

United States Pipelines map - Crude Oil (petroleum) pipelines - Natural Gas pipelines - Products pipelines

How many problems do you hear about with these pipelines on a daily basis?

Fading industry? Seriously? Assuming you aren't using a donkey cart when you go rag picking at the local trash heap, how do you get around? Do you turn your lights on at night or turn the heat on? How do you do that? With a windmill or a solar panel? Fading.....

Oil spills hit on land, too: Aging pipelines imperil Midwest - CSMonitor.com

U.S. pipelines at a crossroads | MNN - Mother Nature Network

But not everyone is so impressed with that record. According to the PHMSA's own statistics, pipeline accidents kill or hospitalize at least one person in the U.S. every 6.9 days on average, and cause more than $272 million in property damage per year. Critics often blame weak regulations as well as lax enforcement

Regulators weigh more rules for natural gas pipelines | Reuters

Many pipelines date to the 1960s or earlier and old lines are rarely retired. The overall length of active U.S. pipelines has grown more than 20-fold since the 1920s.

As part of its safety push, the department is also asking for feedback about the need to reduce operating pressure for some pipelines that are more than 40 years old.

Pipeline safety has actually improved sharply over the past 20 years. But from 2006 through 2009 U.S. oil and gas pipeline accidents killed 56 people, caused $1.2 billion in property damage and spilled 381,000 barrels of oil, government data shows.

Recent oil spills from TransCanada's Keystone pipeline, as well as Exxon Mobil's Silvertip line, have also raised concerns about the environmental risks posed by crude oil pipelines.Earlier this year, the Senate commerce committee approved legislation that would raise fines against reckless operators of petroleum and natural gas lines and require automatic shut-off valves to prevent oil spills and gas explosions.