Train carrying crude oil derails in Canada..explodes...THANKS Obuma for NO PIPELINE!!!

[Vigilante]

Thanks, persons on the right for having nothing but fallacy for your Cause, instead of alternative solutions like maglev that cannot derail as long as there is power to it.

Then why are they NOT using it?

 

[bripat9643]

Thanks, persons on the right for having nothing but fallacy for your Cause, instead of alternative solutions like maglev that cannot derail as long as there is power to it.

The pipeline is the best "alternative" solution. Pipelines can't derail either.

 

[danielpalos]

Thanks, persons on the right for having nothing but fallacy for your Cause, instead of alternative solutions like maglev that cannot derail as long as there is power to it.

The pipeline is the best "alternative" solution. Pipelines can't derail either.

there are already existing rights of way on railroads that could merely be upgraded.

 

[bripat9643]

Thanks, persons on the right for having nothing but fallacy for your Cause, instead of alternative solutions like maglev that cannot derail as long as there is power to it.

The pipeline is the best "alternative" solution. Pipelines can't derail either.

there are already existing rights of way on railroads that could merely be upgraded.

Pipelines are cheaper and safer. Why wouldn't anyone prefer to ship oil by rail?

 

[danielpalos]

Thanks, persons on the right for having nothing but fallacy for your Cause, instead of alternative solutions like maglev that cannot derail as long as there is power to it.

The pipeline is the best "alternative" solution. Pipelines can't derail either.

there are already existing rights of way on railroads that could merely be upgraded.

Pipelines are cheaper and safer. Why wouldn't anyone prefer to ship oil by rail?

if that is the case, why does the private sector need any bailout by the public sector?

 

[bripat9643]

Thanks, persons on the right for having nothing but fallacy for your Cause, instead of alternative solutions like maglev that cannot derail as long as there is power to it.

The pipeline is the best "alternative" solution. Pipelines can't derail either.

there are already existing rights of way on railroads that could merely be upgraded.

Pipelines are cheaper and safer. Why wouldn't anyone prefer to ship oil by rail?

if that is the case, why does the private sector need any bailout by the public sector?

Only turds like you claim it does. However, the federal government fucks over private corporations on a daily basis.

 

[rdean]

Hello. Knock knock. Why should we build shit in Canada???? Wasn't Iraq enough? From the border to wherever in the US is OK. But Canada has the money to build their OWN pipeline.

If it DEAD ENDS at the border, instead of going to the Gulf, as required, and if the scumbag President refuses to OK it, AFTER 5 YEARS of investigating environmental concerns, and IF ONE OF THE DemocRATS largest donors MAKES $2 Billion a year If that pipeline isn't done, now child, even YOU with that IQ about as bright as a 10W. bulb should be able to add these together!...Or am I OVERESTIMATING your ability?

The last I read, oil on the international market was 60 bucks a barrel. But it cost 78 bucks a barrel to get the oil ouf of tar sands. Think you can figure out the math?

Can you link to that $78 a barrel quote of yours?

I hate the ignorance that comes from these idiot right wingers. One five second search is all it takes. And if these morons had read it the first 50 times it was posted, they wouldn't need to ask for a link. What is it with this determined ignorance? And yet, they will say I'm a "mean" person.

tar sands 78 dollars a barrel - Google Search

 

[rdean]

Thanks, persons on the right for having nothing but fallacy for your Cause, instead of alternative solutions like maglev that cannot derail as long as there is power to it.

The pipeline is the best "alternative" solution. Pipelines can't derail either.

there are already existing rights of way on railroads that could merely be upgraded.

Pipelines are cheaper and safer. Why wouldn't anyone prefer to ship oil by rail?

if that is the case, why does the private sector need any bailout by the public sector?

Only turds like you claim it does. However, the federal government fucks over private corporations on a daily basis.

No it doesn't. That's a stupid ass thing to say. The government wants business to succeed so it can get more money. Where do these guys get this shit????

 

[Vigilante]

Hello. Knock knock. Why should we build shit in Canada???? Wasn't Iraq enough? From the border to wherever in the US is OK. But Canada has the money to build their OWN pipeline.

If it DEAD ENDS at the border, instead of going to the Gulf, as required, and if the scumbag President refuses to OK it, AFTER 5 YEARS of investigating environmental concerns, and IF ONE OF THE DemocRATS largest donors MAKES $2 Billion a year If that pipeline isn't done, now child, even YOU with that IQ about as bright as a 10W. bulb should be able to add these together!...Or am I OVERESTIMATING your ability?

The last I read, oil on the international market was 60 bucks a barrel. But it cost 78 bucks a barrel to get the oil ouf of tar sands. Think you can figure out the math?

Can you link to that $78 a barrel quote of yours?

I hate the ignorance that comes from these idiot right wingers. One five second search is all it takes. And if these morons had read it the first 50 times it was posted, they wouldn't need to ask for a link. What is it with this determined ignorance? And yet, they will say I'm a "mean" person.

tar sands 78 dollars a barrel - Google Search

That's in Canadian dollars.....

 

[boedicca]

Thanks, persons on the right for having nothing but fallacy for your Cause, instead of alternative solutions like maglev that cannot derail as long as there is power to it.

The pipeline is the best "alternative" solution. Pipelines can't derail either.

there are already existing rights of way on railroads that could merely be upgraded.

Pipelines are cheaper and safer. Why wouldn't anyone prefer to ship oil by rail?

Well, if you're Warren Buffet Railroad Owner, you are very happy to see the Government squash the pipeline competition for you.

 

[bripat9643]

The pipeline is the best "alternative" solution. Pipelines can't derail either.

there are already existing rights of way on railroads that could merely be upgraded.

Pipelines are cheaper and safer. Why wouldn't anyone prefer to ship oil by rail?

if that is the case, why does the private sector need any bailout by the public sector?

Only turds like you claim it does. However, the federal government fucks over private corporations on a daily basis.

No it doesn't. That's a stupid ass thing to say. The government wants business to succeed so it can get more money. Where do these guys get this shit????

Of course it does. Just consider the coal industry. The EPA is in the process of a campaign to destroy it. Now Obama is threatening to repeal, by executive action, a series of tax exemption that will seriously damage quite a few corporations. I could go on and on. The government my want more money, but it's populated by too many morons like you who think you can whip and starve the mule as much as you want and it will continue to carry the load for you.

 

[bripat9643]

Thanks, persons on the right for having nothing but fallacy for your Cause, instead of alternative solutions like maglev that cannot derail as long as there is power to it.

The pipeline is the best "alternative" solution. Pipelines can't derail either.

there are already existing rights of way on railroads that could merely be upgraded.

Pipelines are cheaper and safer. Why wouldn't anyone prefer to ship oil by rail?

Well, if you're Warren Buffet Railroad Owner, you are very happy to see the Government squash the pipeline competition for you.

That should have said "why would anyone prefer to ship oil by rail?"

 

[danielpalos]

Thanks, persons on the right for having nothing but fallacy for your Cause, instead of alternative solutions like maglev that cannot derail as long as there is power to it.

The pipeline is the best "alternative" solution. Pipelines can't derail either.

there are already existing rights of way on railroads that could merely be upgraded.

Pipelines are cheaper and safer. Why wouldn't anyone prefer to ship oil by rail?

if that is the case, why does the private sector need any bailout by the public sector?

Only turds like you claim it does. However, the federal government fucks over private corporations on a daily basis.

that doesn't explain why fullers of fallacy like You, can't explain why the private sector isn't simply building those structures with which to engage in Commerce--instead of asking Congress for their social blessing for a bailout with the (other) Peoples tax monies.

 

[Vigilante]

T. Boone Pickens: Calgary, I’m so sorry about the Keystone pipeline

CalgaryHerald ^ | 13 Mar 2015 | T. Boone Pickens

To my friends in Calgary and across Canada: I apologize on behalf of my fellow Americans for the United States government’s actions. Why? Because after years of poring over the engineering, design, geology and the contents of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, President Barack Obama chose to make a political statement and vetoed a bill to allow construction to begin. I feel bad about this. I lived in Canada in the 1960s. You have a great country, and it’s a great place to operate in the oil and gas sector. We should have done better by you. You may not...

 

[Toro]

Hey environuts... how often does THIS have to happen for you to realize the PIPELINES are the way to do this?????

Fuel Fix ^
A CN Rail train carrying crude oil derailed early Saturday in northern Ontario, causing numerous tank cars to catch fire and spill into a local river system, officials said. It was the third CN oil train derailment in northern Ontario in less than a month, and the second in the same area, renewing concerns about the safety of shipping crude oil by train and further suggesting that new safety requirements for tank cars carrying flammable liquids are inadequate. CN said the cars had been retrofitted with protective shields to meet a higher safety standard known as the 1232. The new...

MAYBE this is a sign from gawd that we should not be using this tar sands oil crapola?

who needs this explosive stuff in pipelines or on trains? It needs to be refined where it comes out of the ground, or better yet....keep it in the ground until the world really needs it.

And why are there so many train wrecks? What's up with THAT?

Have there always been tons of train wrecks and we just didn't hear about them because they were not carrying this explosive tar sands crud?

I mean, don't you think it's weird to have so many train wrecks and explosions?

No, not really. Trains are the most dangerous way of transporting energy.

I don't believe that had Obama approved Keystone, this would not have happened. But this has become an emotional symbolic issue for the Left, one of which has little to do with pipelines. The American Left doesn't want Keystone built because they don't want the Canadian oil sands mined. We have thousands of miles of pipelines. No one is advocating not building any more pipelines in the Bakken for example. That IS happening, and will happen in a big way.

But it is meaningless symbolism. A good friend is the Controller of one of the big Calgary firms, one of which has purchased capacity on Keystone. He has told me that if Keystone is not built, it will be shipped via pipeline to eastern Canada, then sailed down the US east coast in oil tankers, and docked in Louisiana and shipped to Gulf Coast refineries where oil sands crude will be refined anyways. The incremental cost to Canadian producers? A mere $2 per barrel more than Keystone.

It's going to happen. You can't stop it. It will make no difference.

And I'm not an engineer, but I don't think that refining the crude would lessen the danger of transporting it. Besides, that's not how the economics work.

 

[danielpalos]

T. Boone Pickens: Calgary, I’m so sorry about the Keystone pipeline

CalgaryHerald ^ | 13 Mar 2015 | T. Boone Pickens

To my friends in Calgary and across Canada: I apologize on behalf of my fellow Americans for the United States government’s actions. Why? Because after years of poring over the engineering, design, geology and the contents of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, President Barack Obama chose to make a political statement and vetoed a bill to allow construction to begin. I feel bad about this. I lived in Canada in the 1960s. You have a great country, and it’s a great place to operate in the oil and gas sector. We should have done better by you. You may not...

I don't; we should be advancing fusion (an energy with a portable future).

 

[rdean]

Hello. Knock knock. Why should we build shit in Canada???? Wasn't Iraq enough? From the border to wherever in the US is OK. But Canada has the money to build their OWN pipeline.

If it DEAD ENDS at the border, instead of going to the Gulf, as required, and if the scumbag President refuses to OK it, AFTER 5 YEARS of investigating environmental concerns, and IF ONE OF THE DemocRATS largest donors MAKES $2 Billion a year If that pipeline isn't done, now child, even YOU with that IQ about as bright as a 10W. bulb should be able to add these together!...Or am I OVERESTIMATING your ability?

The last I read, oil on the international market was 60 bucks a barrel. But it cost 78 bucks a barrel to get the oil ouf of tar sands. Think you can figure out the math?

Can you link to that $78 a barrel quote of yours?

I hate the ignorance that comes from these idiot right wingers. One five second search is all it takes. And if these morons had read it the first 50 times it was posted, they wouldn't need to ask for a link. What is it with this determined ignorance? And yet, they will say I'm a "mean" person.

tar sands 78 dollars a barrel - Google Search

That's in Canadian dollars.....

You don't get it, do you fool? It's all relative. Oil from discrete pools is cheaper than oil from sand that has to be processed. Even shipping oil sands through a pipeline means it has to be heated and high pressured to flow which is why leaks in such pipelines are so devastating. You are such an idiot like so many right wingernuts on the USMB. You think you've found your "ah ha" moment and instead, you been exposed as a first degree moron. Pity. For you.

---------------------------------

The global oil industry is gripped with the cost-cutting fever amid shareholder pressure, but the oil sands are particularly vulnerable given their baked-in higher development costs, high wages, remote location and infrastructure challenges. In May, France’s Total SA shelved an $11-billion oil sands mine project planned with joint venture partners Suncor, Occidental Petroleum and Inpex Canada.

“Oil sands are economically challenging in terms of returns,” said Jeff Lyons, a partner at Deloitte Canada. “Cost escalation is causing oil sands participants to rethink the economics of projects. That’s why you’re not seeing a lot of new capital flowing into oil sands.”

Cost-cutting fever grips oil sands players as economics called into question Financial Post

 

[Vigilante]

If it DEAD ENDS at the border, instead of going to the Gulf, as required, and if the scumbag President refuses to OK it, AFTER 5 YEARS of investigating environmental concerns, and IF ONE OF THE DemocRATS largest donors MAKES $2 Billion a year If that pipeline isn't done, now child, even YOU with that IQ about as bright as a 10W. bulb should be able to add these together!...Or am I OVERESTIMATING your ability?

The last I read, oil on the international market was 60 bucks a barrel. But it cost 78 bucks a barrel to get the oil ouf of tar sands. Think you can figure out the math?

Can you link to that $78 a barrel quote of yours?

I hate the ignorance that comes from these idiot right wingers. One five second search is all it takes. And if these morons had read it the first 50 times it was posted, they wouldn't need to ask for a link. What is it with this determined ignorance? And yet, they will say I'm a "mean" person.

tar sands 78 dollars a barrel - Google Search

That's in Canadian dollars.....

You don't get it, do you fool? It's all relative. Oil from discrete pools is cheaper than oil from sand that has to be processed. Even shipping oil sands through a pipeline means it has to be heated and high pressured to flow which is why leaks in such pipelines are so devastating. You are such an idiot like so many right wingernuts on the USMB. You think you've found your "ah ha" moment and instead, you been exposed as a first degree moron. Pity. For you.

---------------------------------

The global oil industry is gripped with the cost-cutting fever amid shareholder pressure, but the oil sands are particularly vulnerable given their baked-in higher development costs, high wages, remote location and infrastructure challenges. In May, France’s Total SA shelved an $11-billion oil sands mine project planned with joint venture partners Suncor, Occidental Petroleum and Inpex Canada.

“Oil sands are economically challenging in terms of returns,” said Jeff Lyons, a partner at Deloitte Canada. “Cost escalation is causing oil sands participants to rethink the economics of projects. That’s why you’re not seeing a lot of new capital flowing into oil sands.”

Cost-cutting fever grips oil sands players as economics called into question Financial Post

You do realize that the pipeline has safety valves every 1/4 mile, or less in some terrain, thus keeping any kind of SPILL minimal compared to a train disaster. Now, how long will the price of oil be this cheap? Ask the Saudi's when!

 

[JQPublic1]

I asked you who YOU thought owned the trains, Buffet doesn't own CN,

Are you that dishonest as to make such a blatant attempt to deny what you asked only a few short posts ago?
In Post #9, you asked:

Who do you think OWNS the crashed trains?

Then without missing a beat you continue with:

IF the pipeline isn't built, do you have proof that Buffett won't make $2+ billion a years... Show me I'm wrong, and I'll concede..

You falsely implicated Buffet and now you are trying to gloss it over as if you never meant to. You never mentioned Bill Gates until after you read my links

Your op begins with a lie and ends with one. For the record, however, the foul pathology generated in your op is revealed for all to see. Yet, you continue...walking to and fro to see whom you can devour.

No, you simply don't know how to read! I'm sorry you have difficulty! I see by the articles I posted Buffett would certainly want the pipeline to obstructed by our Socialist president who he give millions to! Can't deny the TRUTH!

Oh, I know how to read just fine. I also know a con artist liar when I see one. You began this op with the startling insinuation that Obama was responsible for the CN derailment because he refuses to approve the KXL pipeline. That silliness, I thought, couldn't be matched; you fooled me. Your lack of understanding and incompetent research quickly became evident when I realized you did not have a clue as to who owned CN.
Nice try...but you failed, as usual!

 

[Vigilante]

I asked you who YOU thought owned the trains, Buffet doesn't own CN,

Are you that dishonest as to make such a blatant attempt to deny what you asked only a few short posts ago?
In Post #9, you asked:

Who do you think OWNS the crashed trains?

Then without missing a beat you continue with:

IF the pipeline isn't built, do you have proof that Buffett won't make $2+ billion a years... Show me I'm wrong, and I'll concede..

You falsely implicated Buffet and now you are trying to gloss it over as if you never meant to. You never mentioned Bill Gates until after you read my links

Your op begins with a lie and ends with one. For the record, however, the foul pathology generated in your op is revealed for all to see. Yet, you continue...walking to and fro to see whom you can devour.

No, you simply don't know how to read! I'm sorry you have difficulty! I see by the articles I posted Buffett would certainly want the pipeline to obstructed by our Socialist president who he give millions to! Can't deny the TRUTH!

Oh, I know how to read just fine. I also know a con artist liar when I see one. You began this op with the startling insinuation that Obama was responsible for the CN derailment because he refuses to approve the KXL pipeline. That silliness, I thought, couldn't be matched; you fooled me. Your lack of understanding and incompetent research quickly became evident when I realized you did not have a clue as to who owned CN.
Nice try...but you failed, as usual!

I did ask you if YOU knew! Next time I'll see if I can find a picture so you don't get lost!