Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
16 days ago.
by absolem
BeRight
#1

CLEAN... ENERGY

Offshore wind farms from New Jersey to Virginia took a big step closer to reality with the completion of a review that showed the renewable energy source would not cause major environmental damage, officials said today. Wind projects off the coasts of Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, and New Jersey are being studied. The Mid-Atlantic lease proposal follows the Cape Wind project in Massachusetts that was given the go-ahead in 2010 after 9 years of federal review."No developer should have to wait nine or 10 years," for approval, Salazar said. The response from the developers was "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA"

 
 

Member Comments

absolem

OWO...a few questions for you. 1) where is the final destination for the tanker ships? 2) how much fuel and greenhouse gases will be expended and expelled by the tankers to carry the same volume that the pipeline will carry? 3) what will you say when there is another exxon valdese?

Posted 198 days ago.

Ohwiseone

And still there is no need for it ! Extend the existing line to lake superior and ship via tankers !

Posted 198 days ago.

absolem

equivalent of more than 180 barrels of oil annually (NRDC 2001). Although there do not appear to be any estimates of the total volume or impacts of such end-use impacts on even a local scale, much less any global estimates, extrapolating from this one estimate suggests that stormwater runoff carries the equivalent of almost 20 million barrels of oil (more than 3 million m3) annually nationwide (about 0.8 percent of total annual motor fuel consumption), though this should be considered little more than an order of magnitude estimate. Total global runoff from contaminated surfaces could not be estimated from available data." either way, this will probably be more for you to cherry-pick. so have at it.

Posted 198 days ago.

absolem

NasCarNut... "Well since you put it that way what would it hurt to add another source of contamination to our soil and water??...put the pipeline in then, the sooner the better!!..." you said it i didn't. how you can't see that i agree with you is beyond me. i am all for protecting our water. i have made that abundantly clear. however, to ignore natural sources of contamination is truly a case of sticking one's head in the "tar" sand so to speak. i hope you will agree that any contaminiation is undesirable but occurs everyday life, sometimes from unexpected sources. the responsible thing to do is minimize any negative effects whether it is oil, wind, solar geothermal, hydro, electric or gas. i found thgis from a study which you are more than welcome to find yourself. "Incompletely combusted fuels and minor spills and leaks from motor vehicles also generate contaminants. One study found that runoff from one square kilometer of roads and parking lots carried the

Posted 198 days ago.

NasCarNut

understand that there is contamination of oil into our water by way of leaching or natural flow

Well since you put it that way what would it hurt to add another source of contamination to our soil and water??...put the pipeline in then, the sooner the better!!...

Posted 198 days ago.

absolem

NasCarNut...i will agree 100% with you. we all need clean water. our society can not survive without it. this project is like anything else in life and that thing is called "minimizing risk". least we forget where the oil comes from and understand that there is contamination of oil into our water by way of leaching or natural flow. it is found in both fresh and salt-water. in addition consider the amount of oil that consumers contaminate the soil with just from oil changes in our vehicles. i shutter to think of the other fluids that we "leak" into the soil and ultimately ourselves. OWO suggested ferrying the oil across one of the great lakes. it seems odd that he would suggest that considering the very up-close and personal proximity that it would place the oil in relation to the water. i have not looked into any proposed alternate routes that the pipeline could take in order to minimalize its potental harm to the environment.

Posted 198 days ago.

NasCarNut

The KXL passes over the Ogalalla aquifer that waters the crops that feeds our country and part of the world...It passes over more than 2000 contributory rivers , streams and creeks...

is it really worth the risk??...I can live without a lot of things but clean water isn't one of them!!...

Posted 198 days ago.

absolem

, i think you will agree that all lands with the exception of indian reservations and federal lands are contingent upon the payment of taxes or upon the needs of the government whether local, state or federal. in many respects opposition is correct that the oil will not be used exclusively for north americans and it will not necessarily drive down the costs to consumers. there is a level at which it becomes impratical to even bother to pump it or refine it. if we can get over the idea of American Protectionism for many commodities that we produce, we will then have a shot at insuring that we have sufficient resources in which to supply our needs and hopefully within most peoples budgets. remember the cost is the cost and the price is the price. it is all relative.

Posted 198 days ago.

absolem

NasCarNut..protecting the Ogallala Aquifer is an important concern. we would be remiss not to mention not only the current contamination problems but also the continuation of conatminants irrespective of whether the pipeline is built, scuttled or even dismantled. the aquafier is currently being assalted by above. the roughly 174,000 square mile area of crop and rangeland seems to be the culprit of th current contamination. just imagine for a moment the amount of natural and artificial fertilizers along with the untold amount of pesticides that are applied to the "bread basket" of america. the nitrates as well as the enormous amounts of animal waste combine to form a powerful toxic cocktail. minimalizing contamination while still providing for the needs of our citizens is a delicate balance that will not be easily achieved. there are just too many interests at play and the task of pleasing everyone will prove to be daunting. concerning the generational "holding of land&q

Posted 198 days ago.

NasCarNut

Claim: $7 billion will be spent of the Pipe line.

Fact: Actually spending in the US: $3 billion. The rest goes to Canada.

Claim: 20,000 jobs will created in manufacturing.

Fact: All the steel manufactured for the pipeline will be manufactured in Asia. Steel fabrication are the only manufacturing jobs that could created by the project.

Posted 198 days ago.

NasCarNut

Fact: Even the number of temporary jobs has been exaggerated. According to analysis by Cornell University only about 500 to 1,400 local TEMPORARY jobs. Another 2,500-4,650 temporary jobs would be created IN CANADA:

Montana = 257 South Dakota = 333 Nebraska = 248 Kansas = 18 Oklahoma = 113 Texas = 470

Posted 198 days ago.

NasCarNut

Claim: 119,000 jobs would be created 

Fact: The current CEO of Transcanda Russ Girling, admitted that the number of jobs create by the pipeline will be 50 - Nov 16, 2014, ABC's "This Week" program

"Yes, the actual operating jobs will be about 50."

Posted 198 days ago.

NasCarNut

The poll question is misleading... ask the question - Do you support a Canadian Oil company transporting oil across America to be refined and sold to every other country in the world EXCEPT America??... See how many people favor that...

Posted 198 days ago.

NasCarNut

It's passing right through America's bread basket, through lands that have been held by families for generations. Their children will be left with nothing but a wasteland if this oil gets into the rivers lakes and aquifers. 

Posted 198 days ago.

NasCarNut

The pipeline is really pumping is bitumen, the most lowest grade, most toxic form of crude. It has the consistency of peanut butter. Chemicals and solvents must be added to it plus it must be heated just to get it to pump. It takes 2000 lbs of pressure to push it through that pipe. When it gets to it's destination, those chemicals and solvents must then be removed creating even more toxic waste.

Posted 198 days ago.

BeRight

Oblabla will veto the bill. Question is will there be enough votes to override?

Posted 198 days ago.

Stillhere

Washington (CNN)—A majority of Americans favor the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline -- a result that could give Republicans a boost as they move toward a showdown with President Barack Obama over the project -- a CNN/ORC poll has found.

The 1,179-mile Canada-to-Texas pipeline is backed by 57% of the 1,011 Americans surveyed on Dec. 18-21. Just 28% oppose it, while 15% say they are unsure.

WHY is Obama obstructing progress that the vast marjority of Americans want??

NOTE; CNN poll NOT FOX

Posted 198 days ago.

Stillhere

So who should one believe>??? lololol its very easy

Posted 199 days ago.

Stillhere

Lets take a look at motivation shall we? I am not rich nor will I be. I want NOTHING from the GOVT yet others seem to want quite a lot they NEVER EARNED

Posted 199 days ago.

Stillhere

sour grapes still make bitter whine

Posted 199 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or