We'll need to see a link to this bullshit.
We'll need to see a link to this bullshit.
So the cost of transportation does not affect the price of gas? You're really too stupid for words asshat.
KXL dead!
- Thread starter LV426
- Start date
We'll need to see a link to this bullshit.
We'll need to see a link to this bullshit.
So the cost of transportation does not affect the price of gas? You're really too stupid for words asshat.
Yes. More oil has been lost to pipeline leaks the last 5 years than to truck or rail accidents.
Oil is still flowing into the water at the trans-Alaska pipeline terminal in Valdez
https://www.ktoo.org/2020/04/20/oil...the-trans-alaska-pipeline-terminal-in-valdez/
Disaster, decline and hope for an aging mega project
https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060058721
Oil Leak Is Latest Mishap for Alaska's Troubled Pipelines
https://www.propublica.org/article/oil-leak-is-latest-mishap-for-troubled-alaska-pipeline-system
Leak is latest of Alaska's pipeline woes
Some 500 spills a year occur in the Prudhoe Bay oil fields and along the 800-mile, three-decade-old pipeline system.
https://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0809/p02s01-usgn.html
These links show problems with that pipeline from 2006 through 2020.
Pipelines are not safer, and the Alaska pipeline is responsible for more oil leaks than any other source.
Canada isn't an importer of oil. They priduce far more than their tiny population could ever consume. They are a major EXPORTER. Get some facts. [/size]
Right, which is why they want access to global markets by way of the Gulf...so they can sell their oil for a higher price than they sell it to us.
You're the one who wants Canada to sell their oil to China.
I already linked it to you earlier...remember the permit application?
The one you didn't believe existed, but then had to eat a gigantic plate of shit because it did.
Existing markets for Canadian heavy crude, principally PADD II [U.S. Midwest], are currently oversupplied, resulting in price discounting for Canadian heavy crude oil. Access to the USGC [U.S. Gulf Coast] via the Keystone XL Pipeline is expected to strengthen Canadian crude oil pricing in [the Midwest] by removing this oversupply. This is expected to increase the price of heavy crude to the equivalent cost of imported crude. The resultant increase in the price of heavy crude is estimated to provide an increase in annual revenue to the Canadian producing industry in 2013 of US $2 billion to US $3.9 billion.”
http://priceofoil.org/content/uploads/2012/02/TransCanada_assessment.pdf
There it is...you must love the taste of shit because you sure eat a lot of it on JPP.
Put down the bottle because I already linked to that permit application earlier.
So now you're trying to engage in something circular because you're stalling.
We already get a discount on tar sands sludge from Canada, according to TransCanada.
You want to get rid of that discount, and I'm not sure why.
Those links are from uncredentialed whacked out environmentalist bullshit web sites jackass.
The claim that transpoirting by truck, rail or ship is safer is the realm of uneducated, lying leftist morons like yourself. Now fuck off and kill yourself. The global IQ will benefit from it.
Alaska Pipeline Doomsayings Revisited
The New York Times ran an editorial that began, passage of the Alaska pipeline bill is the triumph of scare propaganda and economic pressure over reasoned public policy on Nov. 14, 1973.
Reality: Despite those claims, the pipeline has had tremendous policy implications. It created tens of thousands of jobs, from the construction of the pipeline in Alaska to the manufacturing of the pipe in Pennsylvania, to the building of the tankers to transport the oil in Louisiana.
And as gas prices rise going into another summer driving season, the pipelines effect on the oil market bears mentioning. Alaska produces about 800,000 barrels a day or about 1 percent of the world market of 73.5 million barrels a day, said Peter Van Doren of the Cato Institute.
A loss of that production would increase prices by at least 10 to 16 percent. In the 1980s, when production was 1.8 million barrels a day and the world market was smaller (54 mbd), the loss of Alaskan oil would have increased world oil prices by 30 to 50 percent.
Bye-bye Caribou?: Many people suddenly developed a passionate concern for the mating habits of Alaska caribou and campaign noisily against intrusion of Arctic pipelines into this essential activity, reported The Christian Science Monitor on Oct. 10, 1972. The New York Times on Oct. 14, 1973, said the question is whether the caribou will go the way of the buffalo.
Reality: Thirty years later we can see the effects of the pipeline on the caribou. Walter Hickel, a former U.S. Secretary of the Interior and governor of Alaska, said that the caribou herd has not only survived, but flourished. In 1977, as the Prudhoe region started delivering oil to America's southern 48 states, the Central Arctic caribou herd numbered 6,000; it has since grown to 27,128. Alaskas Department of Fish and Game Web site reports that in general, caribou have not been adversely affected by human activities in Alaska. Pipelines and other manmade objects have been built to accommodate caribou movements, and the animals have adapted to people and machines.
Earthquake Risk: Larry Moss of the Sierra Club stated in the Los Angeles Times on June 14, 1973, that the oil industry has continued, single-mindedly, its attempt to turn a sows ear into a silk purse. Support for this claim was that the pipeline had basic design flaws which cannot really be overcome by engineering ingenuity. This was supposedly because the pipe would cross one of the most active earthquake zones in the world, would scar and despoil vast tracts of magnificent, undisturbed country and would threaten extensive oil spills in the numerous rivers which the pipeline would cross.
Reality: The time passed since the construction of the pipeline allows for testing of this claim. On Nov. 3, 2002, a 7.9-magnitude earthquake struck Alaska. It was the worst earthquake recorded on Alaskas Denali fault, and considered a once-in-600-years event. The New York Times on Nov. 5, 2002, called it one of the largest earthquakes in American history, which, had it struck a major city, would have destroyed hundreds of buildings and killed many people. Tremors caused movements around Yellowstone National Park and even rocked boats in Louisiana. In comparison, the great San Francisco earthquake of 1906 was weaker at 7.8.
Yet the pipeline withstood the powerful quake just as designed damaged but not ruptured, according to the Nov. 10, 2002, Los Angeles Times. If anything, last week's powerful earthquake shows that the pipeline could have withstood more, the pipelines seismic design coordinator said. The New York Times article said that After an aerial survey today, pipeline officials said they found no leaks in the structure.
Gale Norton summarized the effects: The Alaska pipeline was just 60 miles from the quake's epicenter. It shook back and forth, some supporting struts broke. But the pipeline held. It did not crack. Not a drop of oil was spilled. No one was injured. The safety systems put in place worked to perfection. The predicted design flaws that supposedly couldnt be overcome by engineering ingenuity werent mentioned after the earthquake occurred.
Misplaced Effort: Less than five months after the announcement of the oil discovery and proposed pipeline, members of the Sierra Club complained that they were invited to only two superficial meetings where they were told nothing significant, according to The New York Times on July 5, 1969. The Sierra Club and their fellow environmentalists from the Wilderness Society, Friends of the Earth, and Environmental Defense Fund Inc. delayed pipeline progress with lawsuits. The Feb. 13, 1973, New York Times said the delay in construction is the best the oil companies can expect, while the possibility grows ever livelier that after years of misplaced effort the Alaska pipeline will join such forgotten and costly fantasies as the South Sea Bubble.
Reality: That misplaced effort has pumped 15 billion barrels of oil into the U.S. economy. Adrian Herrera of Arctic Power, an Alaska-based group that advocates oil drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, said the effects of the pipeline have been huge. The benefit is both economic and social. Infrastructure that was built in conjunction with the pipeline has a trickle-down effect that has helped all businesses. Nationwide the effect has been quite profound, he continued. Not just a direct benefit theres indirect benefits too. Jobs supporting the pipeline have been spread across the nation, as have the advantages from having more oil available.
Pipeline Breaking: On May 6, 1970, The New York Times said that the head of the Naval Arctic Research Laboratory warned that the proposed trans-Alaska oil pipeline might break and wreak great damage to the environment.
Reality: Despite leaks in the past, the pipeline has improved and is leaking less. The United States has the most stringent environmental controls on oil. Any spill of more than a teaspoon is reported. The whole pipeline is scanned every day from the ground or helicopters for leaks. Despite being three decades old, the pipeline is more modern than many others around the world.
All Hell to Break Loose: The New York Times on Nov 10, 1974, quoted an internationally known professor on Arctic soils from Rutgers University. He predicted all hell will break loose on Alaskas north slope within five years after hot oil starts flowing through the trans-Alaska pipeline. He then compared the spread of damage to the permafrost to a cancer that takes five years.
Reality: Of the 800-mile pipeline, 420 miles are above ground to avoid the permafrost. When above ground, it has a 2-inch heat pipe containing pure ammonia. When the air is cooler than the ground, the ammonia vaporizes and draws the heat from the earth. The ammonia then condenses on the pipe, starting the process again.
Major Oil Incidents Not Caused by Pipeline
The pipeline has not been without accidents but the biggest ones did not involve pipeline malfunctions. On Feb. 15, 1978, there was a leak of 16,000 barrels. There are some indications that it is sabotage. You have to suspect foul play, said Morris Turner of the Alaska Pipeline Office, according to The Washington Post on Feb. 16, 1978. No one was ever charged in that incident. On Oct. 4, 2001, Daniel Carson Lewis, who had been drinking, shot the pipeline and caused a leak of more than 6,000 barrels of oil. The Los Angeles Times on Oct. 21, 2001, quoted a state policeman as saying, Alcohol and a guy with a gun nothing deeper than that.
The largest oil-related incident in Alaska since the pipeline was built was the Exxon Valdez incident not a pipeline failure.
https://www.mrc.org/news/alaska-pipeline-doomsayings-revisited
KTOO is a local TV station in Alaska.
The Christian Science Monitor is a source you've used on JPP before.
All those links show is that from 2006-2020, that Alaskan pipeline leaked a shitload of oil.
The US is the ONLY importer of Canadian oil. It doesn't need to go anywhere else. Whats with all the bullshit, strawmen and lying? Can't make a point without them?
Stop with the lies and strawmen. That wasn't the question. Answer it: So the cost of transportation does not affect the price of gas?
Geeko Sportivo
Verified User
So you believe that transport by rail, truck or ship is less risky? The FACTS are proven by the Allaska pipeline. The environmentalists made all kinds of lie filled claims of what would happen. None of them proved to be true. It is far safer and more economical to deliver oil by pipeline. Thise are the basic FACTS, and no amount of flailing or lying can change that.
Canada isn't an importer of oil. They priduce far more than their tiny population could ever consume. They are a major EXPORTER. Get some facts.
The question was hypothetical to begin with!
It was just a question that racists like you refuse to answer!
Not a pipeline leak dumb cunt.
Did you look at the ate on this article you dumb cunt? It has nothing to do with pipeline leaks. Dumb cunt.
Not the Alaska pipeline you dumb cunt.
Not about the pipeline; this was about the SHIP Exxon Valdez you dumb cunt.
All these links indicate what a dumb cunt you are and that you didn't even bother to read them.
No it isn't. The facts are there. It is NOT safer to transport by road or rail, or ship. Try to be less dishonest and stupid.
It never takes long for lying leftist morons to go off the rails and use the racist meme. You losers really are the dumbest fucks on the planet. No wonder the Party of the Jackass needs uneducted dolts like you to stay elected.
Americans and jobs the losers. You must like being a loser eh?
Proving, once again, you are JPP's foremost Drama Queen. CLICK HERE:
Right, and because of that, we enjoy leverage and can dictate pricing discounts since competition for that Canadian oil is limited by geography; basically you have just US refineries competing for it.
And those refineries can and do collude with one another to keep the prices low.
Exactly! So we don't need KXL since it's already coming here.