Keystone XL, Dakota Access Pipelines back!

[JimL]

That is because the EPA has been violating the Constitution: https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.b82002d0b456

A political 5-4 decision by the majority right Supreme Court over costs to the polluter does not change the fact of the pollution they are causing. If the EPA oversteps its bounds in a particular case and the Supreme Court strikes down their ruling, then thats fine as far as it goes, but you don't shut the EPA down for that, you just overturn their ruling.

And BTW Jim, being a sister state you might have heard that we in Connecticut had a record number of minor earthquakes recently. And there is no fracking anywhere near us.

Apples and oranges! The record number of minor quakes that took place in Conneticutt was the natural result of ancient fault lines activating and are not constent or increasing yearly. That is not the case in Oklahoma, where they are directly caused by the fossil fuel industry activity and are getting worse and more common by the year. 643 quakes last year, up fro 63 in 2011. Pruitt ignored that fact in his position in Oklahoma, and there is every reason to believe that he will continue to ignore the science concerning climate change and environmental damage caused by the fossil fuel industry as head of the EPA.

[seer]

A political 5-4 decision by the majority right Supreme Court over costs to the polluter does not change the fact of the pollution they are causing. If the EPA oversteps its bounds in a particular case and the Supreme Court strikes down their ruling, then thats fine as far as it goes, but you don't shut the EPA down for that, you just overturn their ruling.

Jim, this Trump thing is only temporary until he gets his people in place. Remember Obama did a flurry of new regulations right before he left office, Trump has the right to stop those using the same Executive power and look at them.

Apples and oranges! The record number of minor quakes that took place in Conneticutt was the natural result of ancient fault lines activating and are not constent or increasing yearly. That is not the case in Oklahoma, where they are directly caused by the fossil fuel industry activity and are getting worse and more common by the year. 643 quakes last year, up fro 63 in 2011. Pruitt ignored that fact in his position in Oklahoma, and there is every reason to believe that he will continue to ignore the science concerning climate change and environmental damage caused by the fossil fuel industry as head of the EPA.

Jim first, correlation is not necessarily causation. Second, if the people of Oklahoma are against fracking they will elect politicians that will put an end to it. It is their choice. And I think Pruitt will do a good job in bringing a out of control EPA to heel.

[Sparko]

Those don't seem like good reasons to me. From most estimates it would only create a few dozen permanent jobs. The world is moving toward alternative energy and Trump plans on giving federal land to the states so they can sell it anyway. Plus, we don't know if the oil is going to us. Pipelines are plenty unsafe, so I don't see why you think it's safer than truck and rail.

You realize that even "alternative" sources like electricity still rely greatly on oil? Transportation is still dependent on oil. We are a LONG way away from having electric transportation as the primary means of transportation. Oil is also needed to manufacture materials, like plastic, which is used everywhere. Even in making solar panels. We will never be free of using oil in the foreseeable future.

[Leonhard]

He worked for the company, he didn't own it.
I may be mistaken in the timing, but didn't the request come around the time his dad passed away, he may have been distracted if that was the case.

That is true, he gracefully bowed out of the discussion because of that.

[Leonhard]

You realize that even "alternative" sources like electricity still rely greatly on oil?

Sparko, be serious. No one is suggesting ending gasoline and oil consumption from one day to the other. What you're giving here is a chicken and the egg problem. Who cares if we need fossil fuels to build the initial infrastructure. Eventually we won't need fossil fuels.

There's nothing that in principle prevents us from a full and total transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources.

Transportation is still dependent on oil. We are a LONG way away from having electric transportation as the primary means of transportation. Oil is also needed to manufacture materials, like plastic, which is used everywhere. Even in making solar panels. We will never be free of using oil in the foreseeable future.

Define long and 'foreseeable'.

A full transition won't take longer than one hundred years, and can certainly be done in less than fifty. If the US wanted it could go completely green in terms of electricity by 2025.

[Sparko]

Sparko, be serious. No one is suggesting ending gasoline and oil consumption from one day to the other. What you're giving here is a chicken and the egg problem. Who cares if we need fossil fuels to build the initial infrastructure. Eventually we won't need fossil fuels.

There's nothing that in principle prevents us from a full and total transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources.



Define long and 'foreseeable'.

A full transition won't take longer than one hundred years, and can certainly be done in less than fifty. If the US wanted it could go completely green in terms of electricity by 2025.

dream on.

[Leonhard]

dream on.

I like you Sparko but I'd rather you actually argue your points, rather than arguing from incredulity.

[Starlight]

Trump apparently owns stock in two of the pipeline companies directly affected by this order. Their stock value has, unsurprisingly, gone up a lot as a result of this order.

Conflict of interest much?

[Leonhard]

Trump apparently owns stock in two of the pipeline companies directly affected by this order. Their stock value has, unsurprisingly, gone up a lot as a result of this order.

Conflict of interest much?

Sush, don't you know that while he certainly owns his companies still, he remains completely neutral and impartial.

[Starlight]

Sush, don't you know that while he certainly owns his companies still, he remains completely neutral and impartial.

Our Beloved Leader cannot have conflicts of interest, by definition, for all he meditates upon all day is Our Best Interests and he is Entirely Unselfish and gives no thought to his own welfare. #NorthKorea #USA

[Sparko]

I like you Sparko but I'd rather you actually argue your points, rather than arguing from incredulity.

I already did and you just handwaved it away with pie in the sky predictions.

Oil is used for a lot more than just fuel. Even as fuel, a LOT of electrical generation uses fuel oil as a source of generation. Other than that, it is used for lubrication, asphalt roads, and feedstocks for chemicals to create materials like plastics. Sure in 100 years we might be able to be completely off of fossil fuels, but not by 2025. For the foreseeable future (next 50 years) we will be dependent on fossil fuels. It will gradually get less and less, but unless there is some major technological breakthrough in something like fusion power or solar power, we will still need fossil fuels.

[Sparko]

Sush, don't you know that while he certainly owns his companies still, he remains completely neutral and impartial.

I probably own stock in them too. I bet so does Obama. if you know anything about the stock market, generally people buy ETFs or Mutual Funds that follow the markets and own bits of stock in hundreds of companies.

[robrecht]

Trump apparently owns stock in two of the pipeline companies directly affected by this order. Their stock value has, unsurprisingly, gone up a lot as a result of this order.

Conflict of interest much?

Does he still? I thought he sold his stock in this this company last year/

[One Bad Pig]

Trump apparently owns stock in two of the pipeline companies directly affected by this order. Their stock value has, unsurprisingly, gone up a lot as a result of this order.

Conflict of interest much?

I'd wager that Trump has stock in hundreds, if not thousands, of companies. As a billionaire, stock in any one or two companies going up is exceedingly unlikely to give him more than pocket change. Feel free to keep hyperventilating over this, though.

[robrecht]

There are always risks, but I don't remember pipelines exploding and killing people and leveling houses like rail or truck disasters.

You didn't answer my question about whether or not it might be wise to do an environmental impact study to at least look at these risks.