Skip to main content

View Diary: Update: Canada "Ghost Train"on Fire Hours Before Runaway (138 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  One point you seem to have missed is that (6+ / 0-)

    tar sands oil is not the same thing as crude from the Bakken Field.  

    I always prefer precision in making a point.  An unfortunate combination of OCD and decades of working for lawyers.  

    We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

    by Observerinvancouver on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 11:59:06 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I have just realized (from reading comments (4+ / 0-)

      down thread) that I don't know for sure that crude from the Bakken Field is different from tar sands oil.  If I"m wrong, I apologize for pontificating without a license.  

      We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

      by Observerinvancouver on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 12:05:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Virtually all batches of crude oil (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Observerinvancouver, Creosote

        are different.  Even from the same well over time, or from different wells (or parts of the tarsands) at any one point in time.

        So it is fair to say that two types of crude oil are different based on not really much knowledge at all.

        In this case, however, they are very different insofar as the bitumen from the tarsands isn't really "oil" (it's more like peanut butter in its physical properties like viscosity) while the Bakken oil is.

    •  The issues are similar (6+ / 0-)

      Shipping oil by rail is dangerous enough that it too needs to be regulated and can't be allowed to be an escape valve for polluters.  Both tar sands and conventional crude are toxic and hazardous.  Thus the special exemptions need to end.  Lawyers also know when distinctions aren't in fact material ones I would hope (even as they argue the opposite!)

      Touch all that arises with a spirit of compassion. An activist seeks to change opinion.

      by Mindful Nature on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 12:30:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Conflating the tar sands nd te Bakken Field is (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        earicicle

        material.  People are spooked about the tar sands but not so much about the Bakken Field.  Whether either is justified is beside the point.  You appear to be using the tar sands to get people alarmed about the Bakken Field.

        BTW, as a Canadian (born in Alberta to boot) I'm pretty ashamed of the damage my country is causing.  

        We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

        by Observerinvancouver on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 02:29:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Actually (2+ / 0-)

          I am pretty alarmed by both for identical reasons, as most people should be. They are merely part of a larger issue. Both represent large, destructive extractions of fossil fuels that need to be kept in the ground and any shipments need to be regulated and restricted for precisely the reasons shown here.  

          Touch all that arises with a spirit of compassion. An activist seeks to change opinion.

          by Mindful Nature on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 08:37:59 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site