About that Dakota Access Pipeline

[zenkai]

You have to remember that he is an awake, independent voter that sides with Republican stances 99% of the time.

To an ultra liberal I do seem republican, I am sure.

- - - Updated - - -

My condo has 5 electric charging stations in the UG parking lot, and every personal stall has an electrical stubout for future ones.

We have electric charging stations at all the malls in town, and every new development that goes in has to provide a minimum of 2 stations. It's not always as inconvenient as you're saying it is, depending on where you live.

Regardless, I drive an '81 280ZX running a twin turbo straight 6 so I'm not exactly married into the whole not-buying-gas thing.

Exactly my point, it's not there yet, people arguing we don't need a pipeline just buy solar panels and electric clearly have no grasp on reality. Especially since they think not putting in a pipeline would stop that oil from being sold here, it won't it will just be delivered the same way it is now.

[TexasRules]

You have to remember that he is an awake, independent voter that sides with Republican stances 99% of the time.

What does that have to do with anything? I am an independent conservative voter. I side with Republicans sometimes and with democrats almost never. What does that make me? Answer: A minority on the huffington post 2.0 message board here.

[Caolela]

Do you believe you can power America on solar/natural power alone? Have you looked at -all- into the amount of power natural methods actually produce?

Germany has been doing a pretty good job with theirs. Not always 100% of their power needs but a big chunk of it:

Germany Just Got Almost All of Its Power From Renewable Energy

They've also been steadily closing their nuke plants because of the ongoing disaster at Fukushima. All of them will be shut down in a few more years.

[oxymoronic]

Any of them that go over, under, or through the water people drink? Pipes break and leak, this isn't a question of "if".

Look at it this way. If it's so safe, why not put it back where it was originally planned, under the majority caucasian town, before they moved it citing the risk.

Also, why should the US take on the risk so that Canadian oil companies can sell to Asia? We really don't benefit from the pipeline in any way.

amazing how people believe this dribble cause it was written on the internet. if you were going to plan a pipe across great distances would you run it under a city or out in the middle of nowhere? stupidest shit i've ever heard of and you repeat it like it is the truth. what advantage does trying to run a pipe under peoples homes and businesses have opposed to the middle of fucking nowhere? use your fucking brain and you will see its bullshit. also amazing you think we dont benefit from this. yeah we going to take all the risk and let them make all the money, yeah that is USA...

- - - Updated - - -

My condo has 5 electric charging stations in the UG parking lot, and every personal stall has an electrical stubout for future ones.

We have electric charging stations at all the malls in town, and every new development that goes in has to provide a minimum of 2 stations. It's not always as inconvenient as you're saying it is, depending on where you live.

Regardless, I drive an '81 280ZX running a twin turbo straight 6 so I'm not exactly married into the whole not-buying-gas thing.

i like the 90s version but i would rock the 81 too, nice car. my uncle rolled his like a dummy

[Coconuter]

If you're anti-nuclear and pro-solar, I urge you to do more research on existing models (build, safety, resources used, disposal, efficiency, space, etc.).

Solar is still far off from truly being anywhere close to a green energy source. The amount of panels and non-renewable resources used while they are near the theoretical maximum efficiency is proof of this. My personal reality check was at my workplace, I started up a project to look into going solar. I was starting with a $2.4 million project using nearly 2.8 acres of land. They claimed it had just over a 5-year payback and a life span of 25 years.

Over 80% of that payback was from government tax benefits and green energy checks. So it paid itself off using money from tax payers. The real savings? About $70k/year.

Does solar have benefits? Sure. But outside of 12V DC lighting, not much, barely even for residential.

As for nuclear, if you're still against it, you haven't picked up a single book about newer plant designs, fuel enrichments, disposals, wastes, safety, or anything. You just jumped on a bandwagon and you're riding it hard because you have no true desire to learn.

[petej0]

Germany has been doing a pretty good job with theirs. Not always 100% of their power needs but a big chunk of it:

Germany Just Got Almost All of Its Power From Renewable Energy

They've also been steadily closing their nuke plants because of the ongoing disaster at Fukushima. All of them will be shut down in a few more years.

We are trading one eco-problem for another. All those solar cells require rare earth metals which need to be mined from the earth and processed, resulting in environmentally unsafe waste that must be dealt with. I am all for solar cells and would support legislation that requires new commercial building supply a certain percentage (30% for example) from renewable energy. I am just not sure what we do about the increased mining (and those impacts) for the rare earth materials needed to produce them on a larger scale.

[Gamdwelf]

We are trading one eco-problem for another. All those solar cells require rare earth metals which need to be mined from the earth and processed, resulting in environmentally unsafe waste that must be dealt with. I am all for solar cells and would support legislation that requires new commercial building supply a certain percentage (30% for example) from renewable energy. I am just not sure what we do about the increased mining (and those impacts) for the rare earth materials needed to produce them on a larger scale.

Just mine asteroids ezpz.

[zEmini]

In my opinion, both parties are at fault here. Shame on...

-the tribe for not repealing the eminent domain edict months before the project started. Get off your drunk lazy ass.
-the oil barons and the entire industry in general. Most intelligent people understand the Oil is biggest contributor to climate change and pollution.
-the the media for not talking about this enough (but whatever they would say is probably fake news anyways).
-eminent domain in general. I understand that Roads and Freeways need to be built, but it should NEVER be enforced by corporate interest. that would be like McDonald's forcing you to move out of your house because they want to build a restaurant there.

[Tradewind]

But again, why should we help Canadian oil companies sell to Asia? What's in it for us?

A) If you run down the ownership shares of companies like Murphy, Devon, ConocoPhilips, Mocal, Husky, Exxon, Royal Dutch Shell, Statoil (Norway private) and even the "powerhouse" Canadian oil companies like Suncor, CNRL and Cenovus are all majority foreign owned (85%-95%+ and mid 50s respectively for the latter 3). Granted that's not all US ownership shares, there's of course a ton of Chinese interests.

B) If the oil is being exported to foreign markets from southern US refineries, then it's not going back into Canada's coffers, the oil is already sold by then. The oil is bought up (for cheap since the WCS price is heavily discounted compared to WTI or other light sweets). It gets pumped down to refineries in OK and TX like Ponca City, Ardmore, Port Arthur, Galveston etc. Or west coast refineries in the Puget Sound area (hence other recent argument about expanding TransMountain capacity up here). Those profits and taxes/royalties/whatever else on those exports don't flow back to Canada, they stay with whomever purchased the raw bitumen. Ergo, US based refineries buying cheaply discounted Canadian oil and making serious bank in the US.

C) A large amount of refined petroleum products, derived from the bitumen we export, is actually sold back to Canada, in the form of gasoline and diesel fuels. Canada, specifically Western Canada's refining capacity is woefully low compared to our extraction capabilities. As it's never made much sense economically to build multi-billion dollar refineries with no reliable means of exporting it to global markets and certainly our own market is much too small for it to be viable. The largest refineries in the East import their oil from Saudi Arabia and Venezuela instead of buying WCS from the West too, super fun.

D) It's not just Canadian oil. Bakken formation oil from the Dakotas and Montana are also large proven deposits. However, Bakken oil is an extra light blend and volatile, nearing to explosive as it's chemically volatile and emanates a ton of vapour products. Transporting it via rail or truck is very very dangerous. The Lac-Megantic train explosion in 2013 was carrying Bakken light and caused serious death and damage when it derailed. Ideally, increasing pipeline capacity will promote development of the wells and again contribute more towards energy independence...and imo, more importantly, safety.

[petej0]

In my opinion, both parties are at fault here. Shame on...

-the tribe for not repealing the eminent domain edict months before the project started. Get off your drunk lazy ass.
-the oil barons and the entire industry in general. Most intelligent people understand the Oil is biggest contributor to climate change and pollution.
-the the media for not talking about this enough (but whatever they would say is probably fake news anyways).
-eminent domain in general. I understand that Roads and Freeways need to be built, but it should NEVER be enforced by corporate interest. that would be like McDonald's forcing you to move out of your house because they want to build a restaurant there.

There are other uses for petroleum then for energy.

Eminent Domain can only be used if there is a public benefit or for lands used by the public, In this case, it isnt a single corporate interest that is benefiting, but a greater good/need for increased oil transportation capacity.

[Polyxo]

The problem with pipelines isn't the pipelines themselves. It's that the companies that will be building it will shirk any and every safety protocol to save even the smallest amount of money. They're not interested in finding out where a non-permeable layer is to cross streams, let alone putting the pipeline in that layer.

There are countless environmental issues that can be summed up to this problem. Hydraulic fracturing is banned in New York State, and not because hydraulic fracturing is inherently bad. It's banned because companies refuse to disclose fracturing fluid, which often contains carcinogenic anti-rusting and abrasive agents that can escape, and biocides which will destroy the purification plants these companies take their wastewater to.

[Annoying]

To an ultra liberal I do seem republican, I am sure.

- - - Updated - - -



Exactly my point, it's not there yet, people arguing we don't need a pipeline just buy solar panels and electric clearly have no grasp on reality. Especially since they think not putting in a pipeline would stop that oil from being sold here, it won't it will just be delivered the same way it is now.

I think this is accurate, but at the same time still don't see a reason for adding more pipelines. We're clearly slowly working our way toward renewable energy, and unless there's some kind of shortage somewhere that I'm not aware of, delivering it the same way we do now seems fine by me.

i like the 90s version but i would rock the 81 too, nice car. my uncle rolled his like a dummy

I'll stick with my 201x versions. =P
<3 my Z.

[Deleted]

Wasn't the original route next to Bismarck, and the all the white people complained so they just moved it a bit because no one gives a fuck if some natives complain.

[Caolela]

We are trading one eco-problem for another. All those solar cells require rare earth metals which need to be mined from the earth and processed, resulting in environmentally unsafe waste that must be dealt with. I am all for solar cells and would support legislation that requires new commercial building supply a certain percentage (30% for example) from renewable energy. I am just not sure what we do about the increased mining (and those impacts) for the rare earth materials needed to produce them on a larger scale.

Yes but the mining waste is exponentially less of a problem than continuing to the extent we do with fossil fuels. And Germany isn't using just solar but also wind, biomass, and so on.

- - - Updated - - -

As for nuclear, if you're still against it, you haven't picked up a single book about newer plant designs, fuel enrichments, disposals, wastes, safety, or anything. You just jumped on a bandwagon and you're riding it hard because you have no true desire to learn.

Insurance companies won't underwrite nuke plants because it's such a huge risk. It only takes one Chernobyl or Fukushima to create a $200.-300. billion or larger claims payout and private insurers cannot afford that risk. That's why nuclear is covered by government subsidies/underwriting and is not cost effective - except for the plant owner once it comes online.

Anything you're hearing about the "glories" and so-called safety of nuclear power is mainly from corporations with the greatest potential to profit, while having the start-up costs and potential risk loaded on the back of the taxpayer.

[Coconuter]

Insurance companies won't underwrite nuke plants because it's such a huge risk. It only takes one Chernobyl or Fukushima to create a $200.-300. billion or larger claims payout and private insurers cannot afford that risk. That's why nuclear is covered by government subsidies/underwriting and is not cost effective - except for the plant owner once it comes online.

Anything you're hearing about the "glories" and so-called safety of nuclear power is mainly from corporations with the greatest potential to profit, while having the start-up costs and potential risk loaded on the back of the taxpayer.

Really? The safety was just a bunch of lies with newer plants? Go look up the AP1000 engine by Worthington. It's not the most up to date by any means, but, you can view more data on it than new models. Learn it, learn its fail safes, compare to other disasters, then understand they are safe and you're talking out of your ass because you don't want to change your view on nuclear despite available information and knowledge that's been handed to the public.

Then as far as the insurance goes? That's been negated long ago by advancements and placement. They are very much cost effective now. Much more than solar which can't even pay itself off. Reasoning? Safety records, fail safes, high enrichment plant size, ability to ensure 100% no meltdowns possible from new rod design etc. etc. etc......

Please stop spewing out ancient thoughts by the ill informed. Chernobyl and Fukushima are old plants, old designs, and if those are your examples you haven't a clue about the industry today. Thoughts like these are why true advancements are stalled for our world.

[zenkai]

Really? The safety was just a bunch of lies with newer plants? Go look up the AP1000 engine by Worthington. It's not the most up to date by any means, but, you can view more data on it than new models. Learn it, learn its fail safes, compare to other disasters, then understand they are safe and you're talking out of your ass because you don't want to change your view on nuclear despite available information and knowledge that's been handed to the public.

Then as far as the insurance goes? That's been negated long ago by advancements and placement. They are very much cost effective now. Much more than solar which can't even pay itself off. Reasoning? Safety records, fail safes, high enrichment plant size, ability to ensure 100% no meltdowns possible from new rod design etc. etc. etc......

Please stop spewing out ancient thoughts by the ill informed. Chernobyl and Fukushima are old plants, old designs, and if those are your examples you haven't a clue about the industry today. Thoughts like these are why true advancements are stalled for our world.

Exactly, They are using 1 example out of many.

The biggest threat to any nuclear plant isn't it failing, it's security, which is why they all have a small private army guarding them.

[Garnier Fructis]

Hey kids, we took a short trip out of town, but we need to grab a motel room and stay the night because we went 2 hours out of town and it's going to take 8 hours to charge our car to get back home.

Yeah it's really practical.

A 30 minute charge will give you about 170 miles, according to Tesla. It takes 75 minutes for a full charge, but it's not linear, so at 40 minutes you've already got ~80% charge.

So let me revise this for you: Hey kids, we took a short trip out of town, now it's lunch time so let's go grab lunch and our car will be finished charging by the time we're done.

Apologies for the long response. It wasn't because you had an amazing bulletproof point, though. No, it took me all of 2 minutes to look up this shit.

- - - Updated - - -

What does that have to do with anything? I am an independent conservative voter. I side with Republicans sometimes and with democrats almost never. What does that make me? Answer: A minority on the huffington post 2.0 message board here.

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then... it's not a duck?

[Kujako]

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then... it's not a duck?

Clearly a beaver in a duck costume.

[Garnier Fructis]

The only problem with nuclear power plants is lack of standardization. It costs too much because we keep putting up nonsense barriers to it.

[Kujako]

The only problem with nuclear power plants is lack of standardization. It costs too much because we keep putting up nonsense barriers to it.

Dont forget the lowest bidder construction that ends up costing more in the long run.