Skip to main content

View Diary: A 'carbon bomb' at the top of Keystone XL Pipeline (63 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I can't even think of something to say... (17+ / 0-)

    about that photo.

    Good lord.

    Please proceed, governor

    by Senor Unoball on Mon Feb 04, 2013 at 03:35:39 PM PST

    •  i was wondering if the connection is well known (22+ / 0-)

      between the Tar Sands ecocide and the Keystone XL pipeline. Blocking the XL will definite slow down the manic pace of the Tar Sands project.

      Canadian Pacific railway is ready to shipt the stuff by rail, so they are getting a back-up plan in case the pipeline does not go through. It's a $35 billion dollar project with hundred of billions more expected to be invested. It's not going to be easy.
      Report: Alberta oil sands expected to draw $364 billion in new investment

      To thine ownself be true

      by Agathena on Mon Feb 04, 2013 at 04:07:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The tar sands (9+ / 0-)

        oil is already moving by rail, just not in the volumes that a pipeline can handle.

        Orly, it isn't evidence just because you downloaded it from the internet.

        by 6412093 on Mon Feb 04, 2013 at 04:25:30 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Believe it or not... (4+ / 0-)

          a pipeline into the US isn't the only way to export oil from Alberta.  Worst comes to worst, they'll build an internal pipeline to a port and export oil to China or India.

          The only way to stop the Alberta tar sands from being developed is to get Canada to outlaw it.  And that's not going to happen.

          And even if it did disappear tomorrow, similar, less efficient projects would just spring up elsewhere in the world to replace it.  People produce oil in order from simplest and cheapest to most expensive and complex.  The latter generally means "dirtier".  So you just move the world one step down the line.  And each step down the line you go, the orders of magnitude larger the reserves (for example, look at the scale of the tar sands compared to your average oil field - and the Alberta tar sands are just one of many tar sands, which are themselves outnumbered orders of magnitude by coal fields which can be converted to oil, which are themselves outnumbered orders of magnitude by shale which can be converted, and on and on).  And when you're measuring your cost of production in 10-30 a barrel for Canadian tar sands, you have a LOT of production price increase you can soak before you even begin to dent demand.  Even shale production is rapidly becoming economical.  Do you have any concept of how much shale there is on the planet?  I mean, it's just unfathomable.  Different forms of shale have different amounts of carbon, but all black-colored shale has carbon from which you can produce oil.

          There's no shortage of "carbon" on the planet, and pretty much any form of combustible carbon can be produced as oil (non-combustible carbon too, although that takes energy input).  The crust of our planet is packed with carbon, most of it combustible.  The solution to the problem has to be demand-side.  We have to undercut the demand or someone, somewhere will produce supply.  If there's a profit to be made, they'll make it.

      •  Muskeag destruction is enormous (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Agathena, blueoasis, Senor Unoball

        And the Muskeag cant be replaced.

        FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

        by Roger Fox on Mon Feb 04, 2013 at 07:19:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Where are they gonna put the extra trains without (5+ / 0-)

        driving up the costs and availability of other goods that need that rail space?
        A rhetorical question of course, but If it could be done they would have already made it double track thru Fraser Canyon ,which other than the northern route to Prince Rupert (CNR has that line) happens to be the ONLY route.
        As a brakeman for CPR the first time I worked on the coast I was impressed  (& I'm sure it applies to most people riding the passenger train) with their ability to get 'single' track laid thru it, forget two. What that means is that all those sidings up the Canyon (China Bar, Spuzzum-I love that name) will be full of trains getting out of the way because money gets the green light.
        That means more products shipped by trucks, lots of them and it increases the price of shipping.
        Running out of Roberts Bank we never went into a siding coming west (which means with loads of coal) and when I was assigned to the mixed freight trains out of Port Coquitlam (Poco) our trains always went into the 'hole' to make way, and that included passenger trains which as a Class A train were supposed to have the right of way.

        I don't know how they feed that much thru that crowded route without harming all other freight traffic and I wonder how CPR will deal with other shippers, Wheat Pool trains anyone? Those are critical unit trains, for what they deliver and for the economies involved in shipping it. They can't move that much grain by any other manner and plugging up the coastal lines will negatively domino back to the source.
        I didn't mean to rant but only between Mission BC and Roberts Bank will it not be directly in the way of all other rail traffic , but indirectly ALL other traffic will get dispatchers juggling the movement of anything else.

        without the ants the rainforest dies

        by aliasalias on Mon Feb 04, 2013 at 10:11:35 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site