this pipeline will proved canada the ability to pump their oil, send it through our land, down to the gulf, where it will be sold everywhere else...it doesn't have an impact on US gas prices...
Again, to be clear, why would the U S want to construct this pipeline?
wasteland may have been the wrong terminology
I agree, it's not wasteland...YET
NCN....even your local city planners deal with the "wastelands" in your communities. in retrospect...wasteland may have been the wrong terminology and just gave your mental pit-bull like grip something to latch on to. the pipeline while being an obvious potential hazard for many reasons also serves some good for many communities. i am as concerned about protecting the environment as well as the valued aquafers. we could have the oil continue to travel by way of rail or tanker. it would be interesting to look at the safety record of the rather extensive Alaskan pipeline for insight inot a real world situation. which admittingly i have yet to fully do. but i thought that would be a suitable comparison.
Let's all screw with Ohwiseone's little brain and check out the postings of North East Florida Tea Party on Facebook.
in western Michigan -- the site of what has become the most expensive onshore oil spill in U.S. history. Four years and a billion dollars later, tar sands contamination still plagues the Kalamazoo River and nearby communities.
pipeline spill would threaten the land and water supply of some 110,000 ranches and farms in Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska that produced more than $40 billion worth of food in 2012. In those three states alone, the pipeline would cross 1,073 rivers, lakes, and streams, including the Yellowstone River in Montana and the Platte River in Nebraska, along with tens of thousands of acres of wetlands. It would also run within a mile of more than 3,000 wells that provide drinking and irrigation water in those states.
there's plenty more reason that I find it not to be worth...
Studies show that tar sands pipelines are more vulnerable to leaks than those carrying traditional crude because of the oil's corrosive nature and the chemicals necessary to make it run through the pipes. Despite the industry's grand safety claims, we also know from recent spills and subsequent government investigations that its leak-detection systems are subpar and its spill containment and clean-up methods inadequate.
The proposed $7 billion tar sands oil pipeline would run 2,000 miles across the American heartland, crossing the country's largest freshwater aquifer to reach the Texas Gulf Coast. There, refineries would process a projected830,000 barrels of dirty crude daily, most of them bound for overseas markets, with negligible impact on U.S. energy independence or gas prices.
I just don't see the benefit...
the vast wasteland that i referred to was under-utilized land and/or re-purposed property.
that's what you call wasteland, strange...bet the farmers and those who get water from the land don't think it's wasteland...
A stupid pipeline aint gonna change that
I wouldn't bet on that...
Don't be stupid.
I'm not...but I see yer still dum...smh
He meant vast open expanse of land that it is
he said 'wasteland'...and that's exactly what it will be if a pipeline goes in...
That's not what he meant NCN or he wouldn't say it needs inspected periodically. Why would one inspect a wasteland??? Don't be stupid. See how you liberals are like playing chess with a chicken. Messing up the board and chess pieces and squawking that you are a winner.... He meant vast open expanse of land that it is.. A stupid pipeline aint gonna change that. Quit listening to the liberal commies on CNN and MSNBC and Huff Post
NCN...the vast wasteland that i referred to was under-utilized land and/or re-purposed property. i never intended to infer that the pipeline would cause a wasteland. either way, the potential lack of states to exercise any immenent domain rights to enact a per gallon tax would be a costly oversight. personally i would not have a problem with each affected state taxing the flow of oil.
The vast wasteland that the pipeline covers will need to be inspected and maintained by someone.
reads pretty clear to me...
NCN...that is not what inferred at all. You should take credit for what you say and not what you think you understand from what others have posted.
OWO...the figures come from information supplied by the u.s. treasury. 11.42 billion spent in fy 2008. 20 billion spent in the first 11 months of fy 2012. An increase of 80% in less than 4 years. Not saying it's good or bad. It's just numbers...right?
The vast wasteland
so you agree the land will be a 'wasteland' once the pipeline is layed...I will agree with that...
NCN...that will be traveling to the refineries or shipyards to be loaded onto tankers. I feel fairly certain an increase in labor will occur. The vast wasteland that the pipeline covers will need to be inspected and maintained by someone.
= temporary jobs...like the pipeline
with no benefit to US...
700 Channel Lane , Marietta, OH 45750 | 740-373-2121