Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Yeah, if you don't need serious amounts of energy, borax is barely helpful.
It looks like you've forgotten your basic enthalapy.
Why aren't environmentalists upset that 1 million barrels will be traveling every day from Vancouver to Asia on the open ocean?
- Thread starter healthmyths
- Start date
Yeah, if you don't need serious amounts of energy, borax is barely helpful.
It looks like you've forgotten your basic enthalapy.
Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.
Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.yaleclimateconnections.org
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Still laughing at your ignorance of chemistry and economics.
Cheap, reliable energy is awesome. Feel free to put some borax in your car.
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,013
- 11,478
- 1,400
- Thread starter
- #145
The environmentalists ARE not at all upset about the environmental impact of 1 million barrels having to travel on the open ocean in an oil tanker versus a one mile of pipeline potentially leaking 700 barrels. That's the illogic of environmentalists who claim the pipeline causes environmental damages.Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
You know that is not true, healthmyths, yet you write it. You must have supported Trump.The environmentalists ARE not at all upset about the environmental impact of 1 million barrels having to travel on the open ocean in an oil tanker versus a one mile of pipeline potentially leaking 700 barrels. That's the illogic of environmentalists who claim the pipeline causes environmental damages.Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
The environmentalists ARE not at all upset about the environmental impact of 1 million barrels having to travel on the open ocean in an oil tanker versus a one mile of pipeline potentially leaking 700 barrels. That's the illogic of environmentalists who claim the pipeline causes environmental damages.Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
Don't be an idiot. It's not the pipeline, its the mining of oil sands. THAT is a fooking environmental disaster.
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,013
- 11,478
- 1,400
- Thread starter
- #149
Then what does a pipeline have to do with it? Protest Canada NOT USA. If no pipeline they'll ship by tanker. Simple.The environmentalists ARE not at all upset about the environmental impact of 1 million barrels having to travel on the open ocean in an oil tanker versus a one mile of pipeline potentially leaking 700 barrels. That's the illogic of environmentalists who claim the pipeline causes environmental damages.Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
Don't be an idiot. It's not the pipeline, its the mining of oil sands. THAT is a fooking environmental disaster.
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,013
- 11,478
- 1,400
- Thread starter
- #150
OK... simple common sense.You know that is not true, healthmyths, yet you write it. You must have supported Trump.The environmentalists ARE not at all upset about the environmental impact of 1 million barrels having to travel on the open ocean in an oil tanker versus a one mile of pipeline potentially leaking 700 barrels. That's the illogic of environmentalists who claim the pipeline causes environmental damages.Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
1 mile on the open ocean:1 million barrels in a oil tanker.
1 mile on dry land: 700 barrels.
Which would do more damage? Remember Exxon Valdez, March 1989 238,095 barrels damaging 1,200 miles
One accident in forty years? Nah.OK... simple common sense.You know that is not true, healthmyths, yet you write it. You must have supported Trump.The environmentalists ARE not at all upset about the environmental impact of 1 million barrels having to travel on the open ocean in an oil tanker versus a one mile of pipeline potentially leaking 700 barrels. That's the illogic of environmentalists who claim the pipeline causes environmental damages.Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
1 mile on the open ocean:1 million barrels in a oil tanker.
1 mile on dry land: 700 barrels.
Which would do more damage? Remember Exxon Valdez, March 1989 238,095 barrels damaging 1,200 miles
OK... simple common sense.You know that is not true, healthmyths, yet you write it. You must have supported Trump.The environmentalists ARE not at all upset about the environmental impact of 1 million barrels having to travel on the open ocean in an oil tanker versus a one mile of pipeline potentially leaking 700 barrels. That's the illogic of environmentalists who claim the pipeline causes environmental damages.Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
1 mile on the open ocean:1 million barrels in a oil tanker.
1 mile on dry land: 700 barrels.
Which would do more damage? Remember Exxon Valdez, March 1989 238,095 barrels damaging 1,200 miles
A break in the pipeline will not be limited to one mile's worth of oil. Here's a spill from Keystone of 400,000 gallons: Keystone oil spill casts doubt on the safety of proposed Keystone XL pipeline.
The environmentalists ARE not at all upset about the environmental impact of 1 million barrels having to travel on the open ocean in an oil tanker versus a one mile of pipeline potentially leaking 700 barrels. That's the illogic of environmentalists who claim the pipeline causes environmental damages.Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
Actually, its about 10 million bps transported in double walled tankers. Its much easier to clean up an ocean spill than one that spreads over rivers and creeks.
What do you mean "one mile of pipeline"?
The oil tankers and supertankers actually have a pretty good safety record. Modern pipelines are monitored in real time for pressure and flow rate.
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,013
- 11,478
- 1,400
- Thread starter
- #154
You wrote: "Its much easier to clean up an ocean spill than one that spreads over rivers and creeks."The environmentalists ARE not at all upset about the environmental impact of 1 million barrels having to travel on the open ocean in an oil tanker versus a one mile of pipeline potentially leaking 700 barrels. That's the illogic of environmentalists who claim the pipeline causes environmental damages.Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
Actually, its about 10 million bps transported in double walled tankers. Its much easier to clean up an ocean spill than one that spreads over rivers and creeks.
What do you mean "one mile of pipeline"?
The oil tankers and supertankers actually have a pretty good safety record. Modern pipelines are monitored in real time for pressure and flow rate.
The long-term plan for rehabilitating damaged resources has yet to be implemented a full quarter century after the Exxon Valdez oil tanker ran aground in Prince William Sound, Alaska, spewing more than 11 million gallons of crude oil into the surrounding ecosystem.
In summary, in the entire Keystone debacle, NOT one major MSM etc., has considered this simple fact:
of the 185,000 miles of oil pipelines less than 16,300 barrels per year have spilled.
Here's how much oil has spilled from US pipelines since 2010
After the North Dakota Access Pipeline faced months of contentious protests, the US Army Corps of...
So for example: 16,300 barrels or 896,500 gallons per year divided by 185,000 miles or about 5 gallons per mile!
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,013
- 11,478
- 1,400
- Thread starter
- #155
400,000 divided by 55 gallons per barrel is 7,272 barrels.OK... simple common sense.You know that is not true, healthmyths, yet you write it. You must have supported Trump.The environmentalists ARE not at all upset about the environmental impact of 1 million barrels having to travel on the open ocean in an oil tanker versus a one mile of pipeline potentially leaking 700 barrels. That's the illogic of environmentalists who claim the pipeline causes environmental damages.Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
1 mile on the open ocean:1 million barrels in a oil tanker.
1 mile on dry land: 700 barrels.
Which would do more damage? Remember Exxon Valdez, March 1989 238,095 barrels damaging 1,200 miles
A break in the pipeline will not be limited to one mile's worth of oil. Here's a spill from Keystone of 400,000 gallons: Keystone oil spill casts doubt on the safety of proposed Keystone XL pipeline.
Now how much oil by tankers spill each year: FACT:
The total volume of oil lost to the environment from tanker spills in 2020 was approximately 1,000 tonnes.
Oil Tanker Spill Statistics 2023 - ITOPF
Oil Tanker Spill Statistics 2023- ITOPF - Promoting Effective Spill Response
www.itopf.org
Annual lost in 2020 (1,000 tonnes (4.8 barrels ) 4,800 barrels.
OIL spills by 185,000 miles pipelines:5 gallons per mile.!
/----/ Because liberalism is a mental disorder.It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
danielpalos
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #157
//----//Conservativism is a moral hypocrisy disorder./----/ Because liberalism is a mental disorder.It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,013
- 11,478
- 1,400
- Thread starter
- #159
What ever you say but it doesn't alter reality...i.e. 1 million barrels of oil in an oil tanker on the open ocean//----//Conservativism is a moral hypocrisy disorder./----/ Because liberalism is a mental disorder.It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
can do more damage than 700 barrels traveling one mile on dry land.
NO way you can alter that reality.
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,013
- 11,478
- 1,400
- Thread starter
- #160
Here is the damage done by the 200,000 barrels versus the damage of 7,200 barrels.OK... simple common sense.You know that is not true, healthmyths, yet you write it. You must have supported Trump.The environmentalists ARE not at all upset about the environmental impact of 1 million barrels having to travel on the open ocean in an oil tanker versus a one mile of pipeline potentially leaking 700 barrels. That's the illogic of environmentalists who claim the pipeline causes environmental damages.Who says they are not upset?It would add 590,000 barrels per day to its existing capacity of 300,000 barrels per day.
From Vancouver, the oil could be shipped on tankers to Asia or elsewhere.
Keystone was to carry 700 barrels over 1 mile on dry land with 16 monitors detecting links.Canada's oil sands industry is taking a big hit » Yale Climate Connections
With the Biden administration cancellation of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a troubled industry seeks ways to transport its product.
But now to move the oil from Canada to Asia means 1 million barrels traveling one mil on the open ocean 24 hours a day.
1 million barrels per day on the open ocean.
Remember Exxon Valdez 1989 and this was just 200,000 barrels.
So where are the environmentalists?
View attachment 473213
View attachment 473212
View attachment 473211
1 mile on the open ocean:1 million barrels in a oil tanker.
1 mile on dry land: 700 barrels.
Which would do more damage? Remember Exxon Valdez, March 1989 238,095 barrels damaging 1,200 miles
A break in the pipeline will not be limited to one mile's worth of oil. Here's a spill from Keystone of 400,000 gallons: Keystone oil spill casts doubt on the safety of proposed Keystone XL pipeline.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
if you're a democrat you probably should avoid the movie Accountant 2- Started by tyroneweaver
- Replies: 0
-
Trump is working on making UAE great again, and Saudi Arabia, and Qatar- Started by ElmerMudd
- Replies: 16
-
-
