Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
Tue Jul 9, 2013, 05:58 AM Jul 2013

By Hook Or By Crook... Oops, I Mean By Rail Or By Pipe, That Oil Will Be Moved [View all]

Objections to the Keystone XL Pipeline are that spills would be devastating to the environment and that extraction of tar sands oil would significantly raise greenhouse gases. Well, forget the latter because that's happening and it won't stop or slow down whether or not Keystone is approved. It'll just get moved by rail- as it already is.

Objections to rail transport are the dangers it poses to human life as well as environmental damage. Rail spills are more common but pipeline spills are 3x greater in quantity spilled. Rail now carries half the oil extracted in the U.S. and Canada, a stratospheric increase in the past 5 years. It's easy to build new terminals and it takes far less time to move the oil even if it's costs 1/2 again as much to move it.

So let's just move oil by rail, right? Well, except for these facts: Most of the tanker cars used are manifestly unsafe, prone to punctures and crash dangers and replacing them with safe tanker cars ain't so easy: Only one company manufactures them and there's a two year plus wait for those cars. The rail infrastructure, particularly in the Northeast where a lot of this product is bound, is abysmal. The routes for these trains, particularly in the Northeast and South, go right thru towns, past homes, schools, hospitals, etc. (a minimum of 50 people perished in Lac Megantic) Oh, I almost forgot to add regulatory laxness.

What do they call this again? A catch-22?

I know links are a deadly bore, but there's some awfully good info contained in these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline#Keystone_XL_controversies
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/08/world/americas/deadly-derailment-in-quebec-underlines-oil-debate.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2013/07/08/f-lac-megantic-oil-rail.html
http://www.pembina.org/blog/732
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-06-13/amid-u-dot-s-dot-oil-boom-railroads-are-beating-pipelines-in-crude-transport
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/05/14/pipeline-oil-spills-rail-spills_n_3273725.html
http://www.treehugger.com/energy-disasters/canadian-train-explosion-rekindles-oil-pipeline-versus-train-debate.html
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/national_world&id=9166064

28 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
kick cali Jul 2013 #1
Still selling the keystone, eh, cali? RobertEarl Jul 2013 #12
Quebec disaster highlights the danger in moving oil by rail cali Jul 2013 #2
And the recent Mayflower, Arkansas disaster Art_from_Ark Jul 2013 #4
yep, they both suck cali Jul 2013 #5
I can certainly understand your feeling about this Art_from_Ark Jul 2013 #6
The recent gasoline pipeline disaster in Bellingham, WA too suffragette Jul 2013 #9
I had forgotten all about that Art_from_Ark Jul 2013 #28
The path to our fixed purpose is laid with iron rails, whereon our nation's soul is grooved to run. Eddie Haskell Jul 2013 #3
Okay then. I mean whaat??? cali Jul 2013 #7
kick cali Jul 2013 #8
There's no good way to transport oil, the only way is to reduce demand. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #10
Every Plant And Tree Died’: Huge Alberta Pipeline Spill Raises Safety Questions As Keystone Looms G_j Jul 2013 #11
Yep. there's no good way or even least bad way. cali Jul 2013 #14
Oil and coal suffragette Jul 2013 #13
Political and econmic expediency will be the death malaise Jul 2013 #16
Yes, and profit for the few at the expense of the many suffragette Jul 2013 #19
You are a courageous soul for posting this. The answer is to produce energy locally> KittyWampus Jul 2013 #15
It's just the facts and many, many environmentalists say the same thing cali Jul 2013 #18
We don't agree often, but we do here suffragette Jul 2013 #22
Let China buy it. We don't need it down here. Motown_Johnny Jul 2013 #17
And what about the Salish sea and the areas along the routes? suffragette Jul 2013 #20
We can't control Canada, they are a sovereign nation Motown_Johnny Jul 2013 #23
The Salish Sea crosses the border suffragette Jul 2013 #24
I never said it would. I live near a watery boarder with Canada too. Motown_Johnny Jul 2013 #25
ANALYST: The Great US Energy Boom Is Already Stagnating FarCenter Jul 2013 #21
We could always leave the oil in the ground until we have this figured out NoOneMan Jul 2013 #26
ha ha. like that will ever happen cali Jul 2013 #27
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»By Hook Or By Crook... O...