Tar sands - Harper's Folly

Will Obama ok the keystone pipeline?


  • Total voters
    14
  • Poll closed .

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
Exxon spared from having to pay any money for Arkansas leak


Exxon has confirmed that the pipeline was carrying “low-quality Wabasca Heavy crude oil from Alberta.” This oil comes from the region of Alberta where the controversial tar sands are located. Heavy crude is strip mined or boiled loose from dense underground formations that often contain a large amount of bitumen. This oil is very thick and needs to be diluted with lighter fluids in order to flow through pipelines. Reports have stated that at least 12,000 barrels of oil and water spilled into the town.

A 1980 law ensures that diluted bitumen is not classified as oil, and companies transporting it in pipelines do not have to pay into the federal Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. Other conventional crude producers pay 8 cents a barrel to ensure the fund has resources to help clean up some of the 54,000 barrels of pipeline oil that spilled 364 times last year.


http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/04/02/1810571/exxons-duck-killing-pipeline-doesnt-pay-taxes-to-oil-spill-cleanup-fund/




Exxon Is Threatening to Arrest Reporters But Otherwise Telling Nobody Nothing



A week after crude oil inundated an Arkansas neighborhood, on-site observers describe a Walking-Dead-like scene, reeking and empty but for men in Hazmat suits, where Exxon has imposed something like martial law - taking over every task from wildlife and environmental officials, enforcing a no-fly zone overseen only by an Exxon official, telling residents panicked about their sick kids and plummeting property values nothing at all, virtually banning media coverage of the damage and, today, threatening to arrest an InsideClimate News reporter for criminal trespass when she entered their Command Headquarters looking for information. Her evidently big mistake: Walking up to a table with a sign that said "Public Affairs."


Reporters Say Exxon Is Impeding Spill Coverage in Arkansas | Mother Jones
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,735
11,572
113
Low Earth Orbit
What good is it to lie to people?

People are going to distance themselves from any form of a belief in the movement or any other that comes along begging for spare change when they discover the truth which has been staring them in the face all along.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
What good is it to lie to people?

Money and power

People are going to distance themselves from any form of a belief in the movement or any other that comes along begging for spare change when they discover the truth which has been staring them in the face all along.

The population in general is starting to do just that.... You'll notice that the UN/IPCC are now only throwing Hail Mary passes in an attempt to rally the globe again.... Seems to me that it ain't working
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,735
11,572
113
Low Earth Orbit
They need to find new unifying angles other than green or terrorism to divide and conquer the masses.

It's time to kick off the alien invasion.
 

wulfie68

Council Member
Mar 29, 2009
2,014
24
38
Calgary, AB
Exxon spared from having to pay any money for Arkansas leak


Exxon has confirmed that the pipeline was carrying “low-quality Wabasca Heavy crude oil from Alberta.” This oil comes from the region of Alberta where the controversial tar sands are located. Heavy crude is strip mined or boiled loose from dense underground formations that often contain a large amount of bitumen. This oil is very thick and needs to be diluted with lighter fluids in order to flow through pipelines. Reports have stated that at least 12,000 barrels of oil and water spilled into the town.

You need to find better sources, Tay, ones that actually research what they are reporting on, rather than rely on regurgitated half truth and speculation.

Wabasca crude is not strip-mined or oil sands. It is HEAVY OIL which is different from oil sands. It is recovered via a steam injection process, via the wellbore, similar to the Steam-Assisted-Gravity-Drain processes used in the Cold Lake area. (I grew up and hr and half away and Dad worked on Gulf's pilot project up there for a few years).

Now I agree its BS that Exxon is dodging liability on this, as it should be on them: their pipeline, their product, their fault.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Biggest thing is getting people to stop buying useless crap they don't need.


right, because living a subsistence life style is what everyone should be aiming for. In reality, 3rd world countries have it made.


seriously cliffy, when are you going to stop being a hypocrite and get off this bandwagon?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,735
11,572
113
Low Earth Orbit
The same looking process is 100% legal in mining because oil sands is mining.

Land reclamation. You've heard of it right?




Funny thing.... On any other mine site, 1 drop of engine or hydraulic oil requires clean up or fines are levied/operation licenses suspended until cleaned up.
 

Liberalman

Senate Member
Mar 18, 2007
5,623
35
48
Toronto
Exactly. But Tar Sands sounds much dirtier, so that is the term used by those who oppose it.

Here's another example:


It is illegal in Canada to hunt newborn harp seals, but heck this little fellow could melt Robert Pickton's icy heart.

Those cute seals killed the fishing industry on the east coast. The government should get the seal hunters to bring back the meat so the rest of Canada can eat it. If it's good for the eskimos then it's good for the rest
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
To start with the economy does not want to grow for the sake of profit alone.
If we do not have profit and growth we would be travelling on wooden wheel
carts like Albania did for decades.
We need growth we need profit and investment. The country needs the money
for programs like medicare. The companies need investment money in order to
provide more products, and safer products through research and development.
In addition many who protest against these companies are heavily invested in
them through mutual funds. No profit no retirement money.
Now here is where many will differ with my position. I don't want the Asian line
because I don't want to trade or sell energy to nations that could be our enemy
in the drop of a hat. I don't want to sell to China so they can supply nut cases
like North Korea, and we have no way of controlling that.
I am in favour of east/west pipelines, and sales of Finished Product to America
and Europe for that matter. At one time I didn't even like that however I also
understand we need to protect the interests of our allies in Europe and America.
Together we can cut dependency on the Middle East for energy.
The way the oil sands are developed now compared to some years ago I think they
are making progress and stricter rules should always keep pace with the development.
The people of BC are not in favor of the pipeline or rail transport Enbridge is not to
be trusted and CN is the worst choice to haul anything.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
T
The people of BC are not in favor of the pipeline or rail transport Enbridge is not to
be trusted and CN is the worst choice to haul anything.


Exactly how do you think that you'll get gas for your car if 'the people of BC' refuse to accept products delivered by pipelines or rail?

Come to think of it, there are hundreds of vehicular accidents each day in Canada.. Maybe the ROC should speak-up in refusing products from BC as the risks with rail are egregious and the highways are paved with the blood innocents because of the truck traffic from the Western most port in Canada