Obama/Democrats will create jobs if NO Keystone built... here is how..

It is simple. No Keystone means 1 million barrels by tanker to China.
With the below spill the cleanup required about 10,000 workers,
1,000 boats and roughly 100 airplanes and helicopters.

On March 23, 1989, at 9:12 pm the Exxon Valdez oil tanker left the Alyeska Pipeline to cross Prince William Sound carrying approximately 53 million gallons of crude oil. The tanker was headed for Long Beach, California. Three hours later, just after midnight on March 24th, the Exxon Valdez ran into Bligh Reef, spilling 10.8 million gallons of oil into the sound.

Here are some of the most startling statistics about the effects of the Exxon Valdez spill on marine wildlife, fisheries and the region's economy:

  • The amount of oil spilled could fill 125 Olympic-sized swimming pools.
  • As many as 2,800 sea otters, 300 harbor seals, 900 bald eagles and 250,000 seabirds died in the days following the disaster.
  • 1,300 miles of coastline were hit by the oil spill.
  • 1,000 harlequin ducks were killed by the oil spill, in addition to many chronic injuries that occurred as a result of the long term effects of the spill.
  • The cleanup required about 10,000 workers, 1,000 boats and roughly 100 airplanes and helicopters.
  • Four deaths were directly associated with cleanup efforts.
  • The spill caused over $300 million of economic harm to more than 32 thousand people whose livelihoods depended on commercial fishing.
  • Tourism spending decreased by eight percent in south central Alaska and by 35 percent in southwest Alaska in the year after the spill.
  • There was a loss of 9,400 visitors and $5.5 million in state spending.
  • Many fish populations were harmed during the spill. For example, sand lance populations went down in 1989 and 1990, herring returns were significantly fewer in 1992 and 1994 and adult fish had high rates of viral infections.
  • Pink salmon embryos continued to be harmed and killed by oil that remained on stones and gravel of stream banks through at least 1993. As a result, the southwestern part of Prince William Sound lost 1.9 million or 28 percent of its potential stock of wild pink salmon. By 1992, this part of the sound still had 6 percent less of the wild pink salmon stock than was estimated to have existed if the spill had not occurred.
  • Two years following the Exxon Valdez spill, the economic losses to recreational fishing were estimated to be $31 million.
  • Twelve years after the spill, oil could still be found on half of the 91 randomly selected beaches surveyed.

How do you propose to get an oil tanker into Alberta?

keystone-xl-pipeline-map.gif
I DON"T! I'm making FUN of those ANTI-KEYSTONE idiots!
My point is simple!
Which is more dangerous, more risk of greater damage to the environment..
SHIPPING 1 million barrels one mile in one tanker on the open ocean OR
Moving 700 BARRELS one mile in one mile of pipeline on the dry land?
WHICH is the bigger number?
Which would cause the most damage if there was an accident? 1 million barrels on the open ocean? OR at the most 1,500 barrels over 2 miles
of dry land?
That is MY simple point that is seemingly going WAY over the heads of truly dumb people!

Your point is stupid because Canada wants to ship its oil overseas.

Canada. like any producer, wants to ship their excess oil to the highest bidder at the lowest cost. You do understand the concept of supply and demand, right?

So? Why is it up to us to facilitate that?
You'd rather have 1 million barrels of oil in tankers in the Pacific Arctic travel one mile then 700 barrels travel one mile on dry land?
WOW! No wonder Gruber was right "stupidity of American voters" is perfectly exemplified by you!
You obviously don't know the risks of shipping 1 million barrels one mile i.e. REMEMBER THE VALDEZ.. vs 700 barrels in one mile of pipe on dry land!
Good grief you guys are STUPID!
 
How do you propose to get an oil tanker into Alberta?

keystone-xl-pipeline-map.gif
I DON"T! I'm making FUN of those ANTI-KEYSTONE idiots!
My point is simple!
Which is more dangerous, more risk of greater damage to the environment..
SHIPPING 1 million barrels one mile in one tanker on the open ocean OR
Moving 700 BARRELS one mile in one mile of pipeline on the dry land?
WHICH is the bigger number?
Which would cause the most damage if there was an accident? 1 million barrels on the open ocean? OR at the most 1,500 barrels over 2 miles
of dry land?
That is MY simple point that is seemingly going WAY over the heads of truly dumb people!

Your point is stupid because Canada wants to ship its oil overseas.

Canada. like any producer, wants to ship their excess oil to the highest bidder at the lowest cost. You do understand the concept of supply and demand, right?

So? Why is it up to us to facilitate that?
You'd rather have 1 million barrels of oil in tankers in the Pacific Arctic travel one mile then 700 barrels travel one mile on dry land?
WOW! No wonder Gruber was right "stupidity of American voters" is perfectly exemplified by you!
You obviously don't know the risks of shipping 1 million barrels one mile i.e. REMEMBER THE VALDEZ.. vs 700 barrels in one mile of pipe on dry land!
Good grief you guys are STUPID!

Weather was not a cited cause of the Valdez spill. Your argument is based entirely on a false premise.
 
It is simple. No Keystone means 1 million barrels by tanker to China.
Is the Keystone pipeline going all the way to China? Are you mentally retarded?
I'm genuinely curious about the answer to either of those questions.

Good point! Obviously despite all the hubbub, that Canandian oil will serve the nearest demand. So what users will be closest to Louisiana?

Canada wants increased capacity access to foreign overseas markets to get world market prices.
We are currently buying Canadian oil at a discount because Canada can't get to those markets.

Are we paying less than the cost of piping Canadian oil to the Gulf of Mexico and then shipping it to foreign markets?
 
It is simple. No Keystone means 1 million barrels by tanker to China.
Is the Keystone pipeline going all the way to China? Are you mentally retarded?
I'm genuinely curious about the answer to either of those questions.

Good point! Obviously despite all the hubbub, that Canandian oil will serve the nearest demand. So what users will be closest to Louisiana?

Canada wants increased capacity access to foreign overseas markets to get world market prices.
We are currently buying Canadian oil at a discount because Canada can't get to those markets.

Are we paying less than the cost of piping Canadian oil to the Gulf of Mexico and then shipping it to foreign markets?

We are currently buying Canadian oil at a discount.
 
And right there you are wrong. More oil from the Americas means less demand for OPEC's. Guess what happens to the price when desperate suppliers need - and OPEC nations desperately need - to sell their oil? Even if the only benefit was to fuck OPEC where the sun don't shine, I'd go build that pipeline with my own two hands.
And how does that help us when gas prices here go up when the oil refineries in Ohio, Illinois, etc are no longer getting oil?

OMG. Where on earth did you get the idea that mid west refineries will no longer be getting Canadian crude?

Trans Canada didn't just build pipelines to the mid west only to redirect crude ONLY to the Gulf.

That's crazy shit right there.
 
And right there you are wrong. More oil from the Americas means less demand for OPEC's. Guess what happens to the price when desperate suppliers need - and OPEC nations desperately need - to sell their oil? Even if the only benefit was to fuck OPEC where the sun don't shine, I'd go build that pipeline with my own two hands.
And how does that help us when gas prices here go up when the oil refineries in Ohio, Illinois, etc are no longer getting oil?

OMG. Where on earth did you get the idea that mid west refineries will no longer be getting Canadian crude?

Trans Canada didn't just build pipelines to the mid west only to redirect crude ONLY to the Gulf.

That's crazy shit right there.

They won't get it at a discount. Canada wants the pipeline to increase access to world oil market prices.
 
And right there you are wrong. More oil from the Americas means less demand for OPEC's. Guess what happens to the price when desperate suppliers need - and OPEC nations desperately need - to sell their oil? Even if the only benefit was to fuck OPEC where the sun don't shine, I'd go build that pipeline with my own two hands.
And how does that help us when gas prices here go up when the oil refineries in Ohio, Illinois, etc are no longer getting oil?

OMG. Where on earth did you get the idea that mid west refineries will no longer be getting Canadian crude?

Trans Canada didn't just build pipelines to the mid west only to redirect crude ONLY to the Gulf.

That's crazy shit right there.

They won't get it at a discount. Canada wants the pipeline to increase access to world oil market prices.
And you don't think that as part of the deal the US will still get favorable treatment?
 
And right there you are wrong. More oil from the Americas means less demand for OPEC's. Guess what happens to the price when desperate suppliers need - and OPEC nations desperately need - to sell their oil? Even if the only benefit was to fuck OPEC where the sun don't shine, I'd go build that pipeline with my own two hands.
And how does that help us when gas prices here go up when the oil refineries in Ohio, Illinois, etc are no longer getting oil?

OMG. Where on earth did you get the idea that mid west refineries will no longer be getting Canadian crude?

Trans Canada didn't just build pipelines to the mid west only to redirect crude ONLY to the Gulf.

That's crazy shit right there.

They won't get it at a discount. Canada wants the pipeline to increase access to world oil market prices.
And you don't think that as part of the deal the US will still get favorable treatment?

Canadian Oil Discount Seen Shrinking on U.S. Re-Exports - Bloomberg
 
I will not agree to a single drop of Canadian oil crossing our land until they repeal their Communist healthcare plan
 
There is no rhyme or reason as to why the KXL is not already built and operational.

We've been functioning under the thumb of a President that lies, is not in the least transparent, and who could give a flying fuck rat's ass about the United States of America.

He also has the full unquestioning support of multi-billion dollar media outlets, and a voting public that has long been placated by the trinkets of welfare.

Fuck that Arab.

Because BC doesn't want it in their back yard either.
 
There is no rhyme or reason as to why the KXL is not already built and operational.

We've been functioning under the thumb of a President that lies, is not in the least transparent, and who could give a flying fuck rat's ass about the United States of America.

He also has the full unquestioning support of multi-billion dollar media outlets, and a voting public that has long been placated by the trinkets of welfare.

Fuck that Arab.

Because BC doesn't want it in their back yard either.

What are you talking about?

Kinder Morgan already has Trans Mountain to the BC coast from Alberta. And they are looking to expand.

Steyer the bullshit "green billionaire" as far as I know has not divested himself of his fossil fuel investments in Kinder Morgan and he stands to gain if the Northern Gateway is blocked.
 
Again folks which would cause more damage?
This is such an instructive thread in that the simple question of which is more 1 million barrels traveling one mile or 700 barrels traveling one mile and there is a discussion about that!!!
 
Again folks which would cause more damage?
This is such an instructive thread in that the simple question of which is more 1 million barrels traveling one mile or 700 barrels traveling one mile and there is a discussion about that!!!

What causes more damage ?
An oil tanker sinking off the Puget Sound or an oil tanker sinking off of Texas?
 
Again folks which would cause more damage?
This is such an instructive thread in that the simple question of which is more 1 million barrels traveling one mile or 700 barrels traveling one mile and there is a discussion about that!!!

What causes more damage ?
An oil tanker sinking off the Puget Sound or an oil tanker sinking off of Texas?
Oil tanker off Puget sound idiot!
How much oil experience does state of Washington people have? GEEZ give me Texans who've been raised on oil handling anyday!

How many days of rain does Seattle get in a year?
About 150.

How many days of sun?
On average, about 58 per year.

Average rainfall in Seattle?
37 inches
 
Again folks which would cause more damage?
This is such an instructive thread in that the simple question of which is more 1 million barrels traveling one mile or 700 barrels traveling one mile and there is a discussion about that!!!

You can't run a tanker from Alberta to the coast. How many times do you have to hear that, Grandpa?
 
Again folks which would cause more damage?
This is such an instructive thread in that the simple question of which is more 1 million barrels traveling one mile or 700 barrels traveling one mile and there is a discussion about that!!!

What causes more damage ?
An oil tanker sinking off the Puget Sound or an oil tanker sinking off of Texas?
Oil tanker off Puget sound idiot!
How much oil experience does state of Washington people have? GEEZ give me Texans who've been raised on oil handling anyday!

How many days of rain does Seattle get in a year?
About 150.

How many days of sun?
On average, about 58 per year.

Average rainfall in Seattle?
37 inches

Texas with oil stooge Rick Perry (or latest big oil puppet governor) looking the other way?

Never saw a ship sink in the rain.
How many hurricanes does the Gulf see in a decade vs Puget Sound?
<Hint: Puget Sound does not see any>
 

Forum List

Back
Top