I really hit a nerve there, didn't I?
Thanks for your support btw - but gvt just doesn't pay enough to get my interest
Thanks for your support btw - but gvt just doesn't pay enough to get my interest
Who is Harper really working for.
- Thread starter Cobalt_Kid
- Start date
Well it sounds like you better buy a horse. No need for any of that pesky oil.
There's more than enough fissile and fertile elements to provide for our energy needs for millenia if not longer. There are also reactor designs from the 1960s that are far safer, cleaner and efficient than pressurized and boiling water reactors.
How about we enter the 21st. century and leave the industrial age mentality where it belongs, in the previous two centuries.
Suggest Reading up on the purchase of the cF101 voodoo for 750,000.00 each in 1963, to replace the cancelled twelve million dollar Avro Arrows.
The Arrows was an ambitious project, too ambitious. They wanted the capacity to lock and kill six targets at once with a high degree of certainty, something that didn't really show up until recently in technology. The weapons system is what killed the Arrow, I think it alone made up more than half the cost of each aircraft.
Yep. They attempted to meet the "Deif request' to eliminate supersonic bomber kills with nuclear warheads.
The Voodoo was a superb purchase, at the price.
Noper. Nothing you come out with really affects me. Sorry. that's life.
I
From CanWest, 2010, with the authors permission:
This fear had triggered a rapid expansion of Canada's strategic radar net (the Distant Early Warning, Pine Tree and Mid Canada lines). The RCAF acquired both a massive domestic air infrastructure, and an indigenous long-range interceptor, the CF-100.
Thus, the RCAF became accustomed to the so-called
replacement syndrome -- the desire for the best supersonic interceptors, within a familiar mission envelope.
The Avro Arrow climbed rapidly to more than 50,000 feet, accelerated to Mach 2, then fired four unguided
nuclear missiles designed to destroy Soviet bombers within about 10 kilometres of each explosion. The price paid for the Arrow's performance was a short range of 640 kilometres.
And they were expensive. Each Arrow cost $12 million, eight times as much as the late 1950s average for supersonic interceptors.
Meanwhile the Canadian Navy, sailing triple-expansion steam engine frigates at the end of their useful lives, faced off against Soviet nuclear submarines. The 18-knot frigates were floating ducks.
Pearkes foresaw five major threats to Canada's peace.
- Nuclear missiles were unstoppable and required deterrence.
- The Soviet submarine force off the east coast was growing.
- The long-range Soviet
maritime air force had new stand-off weapons.
- Defending Europe against a Soviet bloc land invasion, hinged on convoy escort to England.
- The bomber-gap threat was rated fifth, and the Arrow was expendable
Past redux. the F35 is a product of 1956 thinking.
If Stephen Harper fails to get his Keystone pipeline, he'll have Tom Steyer to blame almost as much as Barack Obama.
Because the anti-pipeline billionaire has just produced a devastating poll that could kill the project dead.
By reminding his fellow Americans that Harper's bitumen won't be fuelling their country, it will be fuelling China.
For years, a majority of Americans have been telling pollsters they favour building the long-delayed Keystone XL pipeline. But if asked whether it makes a difference that Alberta’s oil sands crude could be exported to China then sentiment turns negative, according to the project’s opponents.
According to the poll, overwhelming majorities of Americans want Congress to “make sure” it knows where the oil is going and want TransCanada executives to testify under oath that the oil will stay in the United States.
Which pulls the carpet out from under Harper and his oil pimps.
TransCanada, backed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and a slew of Canadian premiers, have pitched Keystone XL as a reliable source of much-needed oil from a trusted ally.
But environmentalists and other anti-Keystone XL groups claim the oil is no longer needed in the United States where domestic production has soared and that what Canada really wants is an export route to finance vast new development of the oil sands.
And undermines the support of even some of the pipeline's strongest backers.
Consider, for instance, the responses to this question: “Would it concern you a lot, a little, or not at all, if oil flowing through the Keystone XL pipeline ended up in China?”
Overall, 87 per cent agree that would concern them, with the concern greatest among conservatives – who otherwise tend to back the pipeline most strongly.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... d/follows/
Because the anti-pipeline billionaire has just produced a devastating poll that could kill the project dead.
By reminding his fellow Americans that Harper's bitumen won't be fuelling their country, it will be fuelling China.
For years, a majority of Americans have been telling pollsters they favour building the long-delayed Keystone XL pipeline. But if asked whether it makes a difference that Alberta’s oil sands crude could be exported to China then sentiment turns negative, according to the project’s opponents.
According to the poll, overwhelming majorities of Americans want Congress to “make sure” it knows where the oil is going and want TransCanada executives to testify under oath that the oil will stay in the United States.
Which pulls the carpet out from under Harper and his oil pimps.
TransCanada, backed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and a slew of Canadian premiers, have pitched Keystone XL as a reliable source of much-needed oil from a trusted ally.
But environmentalists and other anti-Keystone XL groups claim the oil is no longer needed in the United States where domestic production has soared and that what Canada really wants is an export route to finance vast new development of the oil sands.
And undermines the support of even some of the pipeline's strongest backers.
Consider, for instance, the responses to this question: “Would it concern you a lot, a little, or not at all, if oil flowing through the Keystone XL pipeline ended up in China?”
Overall, 87 per cent agree that would concern them, with the concern greatest among conservatives – who otherwise tend to back the pipeline most strongly.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... d/follows/
God lets cut out the middleman and ship direct from Canada.If Stephen Harper fails to get his Keystone pipeline, he'll have Tom Steyer to blame almost as much as Barack Obama.
Because the anti-pipeline billionaire has just produced a devastating poll that could kill the project dead.
By reminding his fellow Americans that Harper's bitumen won't be fuelling their country, it will be fuelling China.
For years, a majority of Americans have been telling pollsters they favour building the long-delayed Keystone XL pipeline. But if asked whether it makes a difference that Alberta’s oil sands crude could be exported to China then sentiment turns negative, according to the project’s opponents.
According to the poll, overwhelming majorities of Americans want Congress to “make sure” it knows where the oil is going and want TransCanada executives to testify under oath that the oil will stay in the United States.
Which pulls the carpet out from under Harper and his oil pimps.
TransCanada, backed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and a slew of Canadian premiers, have pitched Keystone XL as a reliable source of much-needed oil from a trusted ally.
But environmentalists and other anti-Keystone XL groups claim the oil is no longer needed in the United States where domestic production has soared and that what Canada really wants is an export route to finance vast new development of the oil sands.
And undermines the support of even some of the pipeline's strongest backers.
Consider, for instance, the responses to this question: “Would it concern you a lot, a little, or not at all, if oil flowing through the Keystone XL pipeline ended up in China?”
Overall, 87 per cent agree that would concern them, with the concern greatest among conservatives – who otherwise tend to back the pipeline most strongly.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... d/follows/
Rail accidents spill thinly over wide areas. Pipelines spill more in fewer areas. Sulphur dioxide still spews in tons from Sudbury smelters - but the stack spreads it out. Pick your poison....
I'll take pipelines. In BC rails tend to follow major river valleys making the potential for major ecological damage far greater. Also rail tends to run mixed loads so there is no telling what kind of a disaster you might be dealing with.
In rail and pipelines I see the business darling of deferred maintenance. Unit trains spill a known quantity. Pipelines spill until someone notices. The only advantage I can really see in a pipeline is "out-of-sight-out-of-mind". The stuff's got to get to market somehow.
BTW:
Transportation Safety Board of Canada - Pipeline Investigation Report P09H0074
This is the same pipeline TCP wants converted to move crude east
Tell the guys/gals who work in the oil and related industries how they are "starving" on the wages they make! They'd laugh you out of town. Don't 'cha know that the wage anyone makes is based on their skill, knowledge and experience? Not everyone makes "slave" wages yuh know!!
OMG, I forgot, people with little knowhow and experience (much less education) want to start at the top! My bad!
JMHO