High Court Rejects Gas Company's Pipeline Stay Request

Ignorance is a curable problem. Stupidity is chronic. Not attempting to cure your ignorance is stupid.
You have nothing of value to me. You have no good insight and no useful perspective. Almost none of you do. As if I would come to this place to expand my understanding of the world.

LOL

Please...
 
Last edited:
Yes companies build pipelines they don't need just because......enviro wackos sound as wacko as ever.
 
How did this get in here? Does the pipe come out of his butt, pumping flatulence?

He's eco-terrorist, like the ones who wanted to stop the pipeline. Unlike Kaczynski, they prefer to work within the system and use the courts, instead of bombs.
 
He's eco-terrorist, like the ones who wanted to stop the pipeline. Unlike Kaczynski, they prefer to work within the system and use the courts, instead of bombs.
Kaczynski a credit to ADX, Florence (I'm sure), where he shouldn't bother normal people, through the end of his existence on this plane, only allowed to breath the air as an over-indulgence of a modern genteel enlightened society. But, that is just my opinion and some consider me a hard case asshole, throwback kind of guy.
 
You have nothing of value to me. You have no good insight and no useful perspective. Almost none of you do. As if I would come to this place to expand my understanding of the world.

LOL

Please...
More gibberish? What are you kids on this morning?
 
What am I missing? The pipeline is up and operational, right? Is it causing some existing or new problem that warrants removing it? Does it pose some sort of danger? Is it just because some group thinks pipelines are evil in some way? Why does somebody want it shut down?
Its a real question, neither the op nor Google has been able to provide and answer. I can find some issues with questionable accounting "self dealing" as the complaint put it, but no environmental concerns.
 
Its a real question, neither the op nor Google has been able to provide and answer. I can find some issues with questionable accounting "self dealing" as the complaint put it, but no environmental concerns.
Same here. When Dana posted, I did my look-up and didn't find jack, anywhere, either. Sounds like either really lousy reporting over a long period to get it that far up the legal trail, or somebody with better connected serious money interests, wants somebody else to be making money supply natural or lp gas to that area. With nothing more apparent, kind of surprised Roberts accepted it for consideration. Somebody went to the lick log, but kept it undercover until they got their way?
 
Ah, I see. The complaint isn't environmental in nature at all. It centers on the utility building unnecessary capacity so it can shift it's supply from an existing pipeline to one owned by it's affiliate, one created for this specific purpose, to increase profits all while charging it's customers for the new, unneeded infrastructure. The "self dealing" I mentioned in a previous post.
 
What am I missing? The pipeline is up and operational, right? Is it causing some existing or new problem that warrants removing it? Does it pose some sort of danger? Is it just because some group thinks pipelines are evil in some way? Why does somebody want it shut down?


I think you're missing reading the article.

From the article:

The Environmental Defense Fund contended in a lawsuit that the pipeline harms land in its path, and that taxpayers will foot the bill for decades to come.

In June, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that FERC “failed to adequately balance public benefits and adverse impacts” in approving the pipeline. The panel also wrote that evidence showed the pipeline “is not being built to serve increasing load demand and that there is no indication the new pipeline will lead to cost savings.”
 

Forum List

Back
Top