Designs,
I started a thread about this a while back. NOW you wanna talk about it?
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/members/politics/215301/1/Ethical-Oil
White House Protesters against the Keystone Pipeline
by designs 94 Replies latest social current
-
-
designs
palmtree67-
I asked you to show pictures of the Oil Sands sites, would you care to. I think our politicians should travel to those sites as well. If the pipeline project goes ahead we will have it for the rest of our lives, that is worth serious consideration in light of Encana's and BPs recent problems with pipeline ruptures.
The Daryl Hannah comment, well that's on my wish list.
-
designs
TAI-
Sorry I missed your comment at the bottom of page 1. Thanks for the onsite analysis. Old pipes, that has to be addressed no matter what else happens with the Keystone Project.
Do you see any problems with the mining processes of the Oil Sands, any adverse effect on ground water aquifers. All of these issues will come up at the Federal and State levels.
-
botchtowersociety
We buy oil. We cannot live as we do without it.
We can either buy from our friends in Canada that care about their environment and treat their people with decency--or we can buy from crapholes that care for neither their environment or the rights of their people.
We cannot live without oil. There are no replacements yet. Canadian oil is ethical oil. I would rather buy from them than from others.
Those of you who are against the Canadian pipeline are more than welcome to eschew any and all dependence on oil. That means not using means of transportation or using products that depend on automobiles, trains, planes, or ships. Moreover, it means you must eschew anything that uses petroleum as a feedstock, such as, for example, plastics. It also means rejecting any material that requires some form of petroleum in its manufacture. This includes food.
When you do this, you will have a semblance of moral authority. Otherwise, you need to "go vegan" and live what you preach--because if you do not you are laughable hypocrites.
And yes, you must stop posting on JWN. Your computer, and the connection running from it all all the way to this site, is greased with oil.
-
palmtree67
Oh, Pshaw. There's pictures of the oilsands sites everywhere on the 'Net. Post them yourself.
Oilsands porn, I call it. Designed to rile up uninformed people such as yourself.
You think natural muskeg is so beautiful? LOL
I live here and the sites are a very small part of the environment (which I pointed out to you before, but you ignored)
-
palmtree67
I also had previously addressed your question about ground water.
Thinkykins is a good friend of mine.
-
designs
This thread is an opportunity for all sides to express their points of view. I am a strong environmentalist but I also work and teach in the construction industry does that give you some idea of the sumblence of the breadth here I'm looking for. The Keystone project could very easily employ 20,000-25,000 in short order. It will also cross and overlay aquifers that have been around for 100,000s of years and once polluted well that's pretty much it.
-
Think About It
What people don't realize is that the Oil Sands industry is actually the biggest environmental friendly industry in the world. All that sand is contaminated with naturally occuring oil that leaches out into the water. We are extracting the oil from the dirty sand and depositing the clean sand back in it's place.
Think About It
-
designs
It seems the impact on the environment shows air quality stays pretty good but greenhouse gases go up 45%. Boreal forests are thought to reclaim the mined land. The Oil Sands Advisory panel says the water testing is piece meal and needs better monitoring. CO2 is said to be about 90% of that produced by coal mining and processing.
Any other pros and cons.
-
palmtree67
Designs,
Syncrude is one of the largest producers here. They have invested $1.6 billion in reducing SO2 emissions by 60%. Studies show our region's air quality is as good, or better than Edmonton, Calgary or Toronto.
There are 58 air quality monitoring stations throughout the region, and it is monitored 24 hrs a day, 365 days a year.
The industry accounts for only 5% of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions and only 0.1% of global emissions.
ALL tailing ponds are set for reclamation within 20 years.
Because I live here and my man works in the industry, I can assure you that operations are CONSTANTLY monitored so they do not have a long-term, permanent impact on the eco-system.
The Royal Society of Canada does not believe the industry has impacted the water quality in the area, but recommends further studies. Which the oil companies fully support. There are more than 100 water monitoring stations in the area. As I pointed out to you before, they withdraw only 1/5 of 1% of the Athabasca River's flow. That jumps to 0.5% in winter. Process-affected water is NEVER discharged into the local water systems.
In the last 5 years, Syncrude alone has invested more than $300 million to improve operations and reduce their enviromental impact. I imagine the other oil companies have done similarly.
On a community level, Syncrude has donated over $10 million for community projects int he last 2 years, paid $28 million into the government's climate change fund, planted over 5.5 million trees, $2 million to conservation and bird protection programs.
Do accidents happen? Yes, of course, they do.
But I think our record is far better than Saudi Arabia's or China's. Plus we take responsibility when there is a problem and fix it. Not cover it up, like the Chinese have done.
It's too bad Americans have not had any of these same concerns when it comes to their other foreign oil suppliers.