01-25-2017, 10:07 AM
(01-24-2017, 12:59 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: Pipelines Green-lightedThe oil has to get from point A to point B right? The alternative is to send it by rail, which has far more risks considering the railway is overburdened already (http://www.voanews.com/a/dakota-access-p...63592.html). Higher risk, higher carbon footprint, and higher cost. Oil traffic on the rail lines is also causing big issues with grain shipments (https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/us/gr....html?_r=0). Derailments of trains are far more devastating than pipeline spills. Ask the people of the town of Lac-Mégantic...oh that's right, you can't they were incinerated by a derailment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac-M%C3%A...l_disaster). The choice then is simple. Build the pipeline. I say good call.
Also today, President Trump signed orders for the Keystone Pipeline and Dakota Access Pipeline to move forward. He cites job creation as the reason. Environmentalists contend that the risks to water supply and cultural grounds greatly outweigh the creation of a couple dozen permanent jobs.
Sources posted for HoTD so she doesn't lose her shit.