moldyoldy

Sons of Liberty Loc: look behind you!

That's known as work in progress. Did you read the whole thing and look at all the pics? They have their sh*t together on this.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

I give you credit, J, why you even bother is outstanding..

moldyoldy

Sh*t, you got that right. They have been forced to try to give the appearance of caring abut the environment. In truth, the world will suffer as more and more water is poisoned and trees destroyed. Also, pipes burst and start fires on an almost weekly basis and are not reported widely.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Dangittttttt meant to attach this earlier.

Some of the concerns, alternative etc to implementing the pipeline...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/01/impact-keystone-dakota-access-pipeline-environment-global-warming-oil-health/


The U.S. State Department said TransCanada, the company behind the Keystone XL pipeline, has agreed to change its planned pipeline route to go around the environmentally sensitive sandhills of Nebraska, bury the pipeline deeper in the ground than they had planned, and closely monitor the pipeline’s safety. These steps are intended to help minimize the harm of an oil spill if one happens.


The alternative to a pipeline also presents concerns. The State Department estimated that as of January 2014, 180,000 barrels of Canadian crude oil per day is being transported by freight trains. If no pipeline is built, that number will rise. Using trains to transport oil to refineries in the U.S. poses a safety concern because explosions can occur, killing people and damaging habitats nearby.

The Dakota Access pipeline project was meant to address the growing amount of oil being shipped out of North Dakota by freight trains. It’s cheaper to move oil through pipelines and reduces the likelihood that explosions will happen, according to Energy Transfer Partners, the pipeline project’s builder.

3. WHAT THE PIPELINES MEAN FOR CLIMATE
Many climate activists have opposed the pipelines on the suspicion that they may increase our reliance on, and use, of fossil fuels, and further delay investment in more renewable technologies.

But the State Department said in a 2014 assessment that the Keystone XL pipeline would have no additional impact on greenhouse gas emissions because the oil would be extracted from tar sands in Canada at the same rate anyways, regardless of whether or not the pipeline was built.

The EPA contested that finding, saying that extracting oil from the tar sands generates more greenhouse gases than extracting oil through more conventional methods and therefore contributes to a greater amount of greenhouse gas emissions over time. If more pipelines are built, more oil could theoretically be extracted at a faster rate, meaning greenhouse gases would actually be released more quickly.

The State Department’s assessment argued that the oil extracted from tar sands would find its way to market regardless of whether the Keystone XL pipeline was built or not. However, it’s also true that the fate of the pipelines remains uncertain, with activists in Canada and the U.S. opposing the plans. The volatile market also does not guarantee that demand will make the high cost of extracting oil from the tar sands worthwhile.

The pipeline project is on hold following a federal judge's ruling. But the protesters remain. Here, they camp near Cannon Ball, North Dakota.
PHOTOGRAPH BY ERIKA LARSEN, NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC
The Natural Resources Defense Council and other major environmental groups say that, most likely, Keystone XL pipeline would accelerate the pace and expand the scale of tar sands development. Using trains slows down the process of getting the oil to refineries and ultimately to market, so it is better long-term for the environment, the groups said.

No environmental impact report has been created for the Dakota Access pipeline, though the U.S Army Corps of Engineers said they would conduct an environmental impact survey when they halted the project in December 2016.

Ultimately, Anthony Swift, staff attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, told National Geographic it’s a question of whether the U.S. will support development of “one of the most carbon-intensive sources of energy in the world, or whether we really are going to move in a direction to cut greenhouse gases.”

4. HOW THE PIPELINES WILL IMPACT PEOPLE
Aside from the long-term impact that a warming climate could have on human life as a result of reliance on oil, the pipelines could pose an immediate threat to the drinking water of nearby communities and may damage areas considered sacred by Native American tribes, according to opponents.

The Dakota Access pipeline project has encountered fierce opposition in part because the threat of an oil spill and poisoned water sources could impact the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, whose reservation is immediately downstream of the point where the pipeline will cross the Missouri River. Many tribe members are also concerned about burial grounds being disturbed during construction of the pipeline. Bulldozers have already removed some topsoil on ground that the tribe considers sacred.

Both pipelines would create jobs during their construction. The State Department estimated that the Keystone XL pipeline would create 42,100 jobs over the one to two years of the pipeline’s construction and would create 50 permanent jobs. While that isn’t a lot of long-term job creation, it would keep the crude oil refineries in the Gulf Coast up and running. If the pipeline is not built, it could eventually endanger jobs at those refineries.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Damn you're starting to see the light. You are saying the Obama administration which found no discernible negative environmental consequences with the pipe line are a bunch of liars. Good for you moldy.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Lololol, Good day to you.. nice observation, now expect the twist, it's coming.....

moldyoldy

That is not true.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Yes it is. Easy to find. I actually heard a spokesman for the EPA a few years o.k. stating the environmental impact study found no discernible environmental problems with the pipeline. You know you keep being a good little liar and Obama might hire you to be the next community rabble rouser.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

High LJ. He won't twist. He'll outright lie. It's what they do.

Sons of Liberty Loc: look behind you!

You know how I feel about the pipeline...build it!!!

EL Loc: Massachusetts

Not reported because it doesn't happen. Your imagination is running wild!!!!

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Hard to believe that people like moldy can be so stupid that a mostly liberal Trump hating press would not report negative stories about the pipeline. These libs on OPP need better handlers. No wonder Hillary lost.

moldyoldy

Even in Linda's post, it said the state dept. said no impact, the EPA disagreed.

moldyoldy