Skip to main content

View Diary: KXL will carry as much carbon as all the cars on the West Coast, plus Michigan, NY, and Florida. (55 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Other options are not done deals (7+ / 0-)

    Don't believe the hype -- alternative pipelines coming from Alberta to bring tar sands to the Canadian East or West coasts are facing major opposition in Canada...they are perhaps as likely or even more unlikely than Keystone XL being built.  So the idea that there will be some other pipeline bring the tar sands oil to the coast if KXL isn't built is not necessarily true.

    On rail taking tar sands, check out this blog from Anthony Swift (NRDC):

    Additionally, industry experts (as well as Big Oil itself) have said time and again how important KXL is to tar sands expansion.  Check out these links for some of those quotes:


    From NWF:

    •  Anthony Swift more or less seems like (0+ / 0-)

      an idiot - can't he at least compile a coherent argument?

      For example he makes an anti-rail argument by linking this pdf that closes with this summary slide:

      Gibson’s existing rail business for moving crude / other products is sizable and positioned to grow significantly. Potential growth areas:
      - Additional truck to rail transloaders
      - Hardisty area unit train facility
      - U.S. Gulf Coast unit train receipts

      Rail should be a sustainable option for moving crude oil for the short, medium and long term:
      - Advantages of rail will make it an ongoing transportation option
      - Ability to move heavy oil should reduce amount of forecasted
      condensate import required for oil sands
      - Some locations where pipelines may never be built (e.g. Alberta to

      •  Factual Disagreement is Appropriately Articulated (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        without also simultaneously offering a gratuitous insult when engaging others on the steward-to-steward communications protocol.

        •  Did you actually click on the link (0+ / 0-)

          and read his material?

          It truly is idiotic - that is a fact, not a gratuituous insult.

          Brings to mind the time Greenpeace proposed banning chlorine  - one of the most abundant natural elements - from planet earth.

          Or maybe he's not being idiotic, just flat out lying.  Maybe I should have called him that instead?

          Bottom line - don't you find it just a tad embarrassing, if not downright irksome, when environmentalists put out totally sketchy information that discredit the entire movement?

          •  Yes I do (0+ / 0-)
            "Bottom line - don't you find it just a tad embarrassing, if not downright irksome, when environmentalists put out totally sketchy information that discredit the entire movement?"
            Yes, it is a movement founded by a scientist, John Muir, for this kind of approach to campaigning and declarations to be happening.

            But, the only way to influence these groups is a steward to steward consult, which should leave out the insults....

            If you're trying to teach stewardship conduct, you have to do it by practicing stewardship conduct (and declarations).

    •  Another counterargument is (0+ / 0-)

      that returning the rail cars loaded with diluent seems to be a major issue, and a potential game changer in this realm.

      For example here's a patent  just granted for rail cars to do just that

      If you read through that, you'll probably be boggled that being able to apply 9th grade math to "real world" problem is patentable, but whatever.

      The key thing is that once diluent is being returned to Northern Alberta by rail instead of by pipeline, that will free up those pipelines to run in the reverse direction - thus adding even more capacity than just realized by the expansion of rail.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site