Skip to main content

View Diary: They're finding ways to increase delivery of tar sands crude to gulf without xl pipeline (205 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  i was in DC protesting the XL. (10+ / 0-)

    We have to understand that we must do EVERYTHING we can and that includes reduce supply AND demand.

    Macca's Meatless Monday

    by VL Baker on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 12:56:16 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Sorry, didn't mean for that to be (3+ / 0-)

      an attack on you.  I'm just frustrated at this sudden push back against stopping the pipeline and the fact that none of them seem to talk about the fact that this is the beginning of the fight.

      Stop all the pipelines!!!

      •  this isn't a pushback against stopping (7+ / 0-)

        the pipeline. It's a reality based post about our obstacles in this fight.   I understand your frustration..it's overwhelming at times.

        Macca's Meatless Monday

        by VL Baker on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 01:10:15 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I just see people pointing these same things (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Ginny in CO, A Siegel

          out as an excuse to give up on stopping the pipeline all the time, and recently more and more.  It was your ending that triggered it, because it simply isn't true that we focus more on supply than demand.  What happens is the second we focus on supply everyone pops up shouting about how we need to focus on demand, even though that is the primary focus of almost every climate action.  The primary focus has been on demand for years and years, and we're making progress.

          •  I'll be delighted if the pipeline is stopped (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Roger Fox, Roadbed Guy

            but I'll see it as being only a symbolic victory.

            I agree with (what I think is) the main premise of the diary: if the demand is there, then that oil will come to market. How are you proposing to stop that from happening? The only ways I can see to stop it would be through direct governmental regulation (which is extremely unlikely, especially since our government doesn't speak Canadian ;-) or by significant reductions in demand.

            It's not enough to be focused on reducing demand. We have to succeed.

            Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

            by Nowhere Man on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 03:34:29 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  This is why these sorts of arguments (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Nowhere Man, beach babe in fl

              are so pernicious.  If the environmental movement completely disappeared after KXL was defeated then you might be right, but this is the beginning of this fight, not the end. And what this diary does, if I'm understanding beach babe in fl correctly, is lay out what we have to deal with after we beat the pip line, not to say that we shouldn't fight it. Especially given that she was at the rally against the pipe line.

              •  Here is my belief (0+ / 0-)

                I do want to stress that it's my belief. I could well be wrong, but since we're talking about future events, it's hard to know whether anyone's right or wrong here.

                I believe that too many people in the movement will not understand what beach babe is saying in the diary. I believe that if the pipeline is stopped, it will be hailed as a real step in the effort to halt climate change. I believe that when the dirty oil starts flowing through some other route -- and I believe that it will -- people are going to feel betrayed, demoralized, and/or powerless.

                Hence I fear -- I wouldn't yet call it a belief -- that defeating the Keystone pipeline could turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory. It's very possible that I'm wrong. If it brings the movement together; if it helps to heighten public awareness that something needs to be done, and that we can do something -- these would be valuable outcomes, even if the dirty oil does flow. I'm just not that optimistic right now that it'll turn out that way. And I'm sorry about that; really I am.

                Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

                by Nowhere Man on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:19:11 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  Another time ... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Eyesbright, 4Freedom

          where I see (not only me) your framing off message -- from title through to end here.

          Implication is that fighting Keystone XL is useless because the oil industry is finding other ways around.  While that is not message you want to send, w/out question it is the message that title/discussion sends.

          Second implication is that, somehow, those battling against Keystone XL aren't battling on the demand side as well. Who was a (if not the) critical NGO related to CAFE standards? Sierra Club which was one of the major supporters of Forward on Climate protest.

          Do not believe that your beliefs are the message that this diary sends to readers.

          Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

          by A Siegel on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 03:16:16 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  If someone says that the tide will come in (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            A Siegel

            that doesn't mean that they want the tide to come in.

            I, personally, very much want the Keystone pipeline stopped. No, I was not in D.C. last weekend. But I see market forces pulling that oil to market someway, somehow, unless it's stopped by some other means. The profit potential pulls that oil to market almost as inexorably as the moon's gravity pulls on the ocean tides.

            Our chances of convincing the Canadian government to turn off the spigot through regulation are, I hazard to guess, extremely low. Unless we can significantly reduce demand, I believe, that oil will flow.

            I'd welcome counterarguments. But, please, don't assume that I'm your enemy, or "off message", for saying what I believe to be the truth.

            Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

            by Nowhere Man on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 03:42:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  this post is relating facts. It's important to (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AoT, Roger Fox, joedemocrat, emelyn

            know exactly what the opposition is doing.  Do you think it's best to keep this info. under wraps?  Do you think that information released to environmentalists has to be sugar coated?  Re reducing demand see above as I stated reducing personal consumption.  My message is that we can not ignore personal consumption.

            I don't think this crisis can be mitigated without a major change in lifestyle for everyone.  To think that won't be necessary is a fantasy.

            Macca's Meatless Monday

            by VL Baker on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 03:50:21 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  If you look at the comment immediately above (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Roger Fox

              yours you'll see why I have a problem with this diary.  This is good information to have, butt the way you present it clearly says to a lot of people "don't bother building this pipe line because the oil will get to market anyway."

            •  Absolutely do not believe in cover up ... (0+ / 0-)

              Look at the title "THEY'RE FINDING WAYS TO INCREASE DELIVERY OF TAR SANDS CRUDE TO GULF WITHOUT XL PIPELINE" (sorry for all caps, cut & paste from 'comments' look here). What could it have been:

              "Don't fool yourself, the battle doesn't stop with Keystone XL"

              "Keystone XL is a battle: we have a war to fight about moving Tar Sands"

              "Keystone XL is a piece of a dirty puzzle -- don't forget the other pieces"

              Etc ...

              The tone of the title and how it is discussed suggests "don't bother fighting KXL as there are so many other paths to move the oil that KXL is simply an irrelevancy ..."

              I do not think that this is your belief or passion.

              Stopping Keystone XL will put sand in the gears of Tar Sands exploitation expansion plans.

              ---

              And, you could then move to the other half of "Keystone XL is only a battle in war to save humanity", which is that 'if we don't do enough to drive down demand (through conservation, efficiency, alternative supplies, etc ...), we're screwed because eventually the profit seekers will get the drug (Tar Sands oil) to the addicted users -- if we don't address the addiction, the crap will eventually be dug out of the ground.

              ---

              E.g., I don't disagree with you last paragraph. Again, I think that the way this is titled and written says that there is nothing to be gained from fighting Keystone XL.  Is that what you believe and want to communicate?

              Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

              by A Siegel on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:18:05 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  Stopping KXL changes the landscape (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        beach babe in fl, AoT, ozsea1

        Puts all the pressure on the western routes thru BC to the Pacific. It also effectively closes the possibility of super tanker deliveries to Western EU of light sweet syncrude.

        But we have to be aware that the tar sands partners are incredibly savvy.

        ...... Social Security blogathon March 25th thru March 29th. #HandsOffmySS 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 Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:05:25 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site