Boehner Using fake Jobs Numbers to Push for Keystone XL, says 350.org activist

Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion

Boehner Using fake Jobs Numbers to Push for Keystone XL, says 350.org activist

[34 posts] [10 contributors]

Topic Rating:

(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:

Started 3 months ago by TomOver
Latest reply from howatzer

Tags:

« Previous 12

rus

Login to Send PM

Red Sun Rising said:
Thanks Tom, as you may have noticed, Rus and I have a dysfunctional relationship on here, but hey, I'm happy to be a source of laughter, regardless. He, and others like him are free to marginalize us. It only works to our advantage. Those who have been working on the Keystone had already thought it was a done deal, twice. Sorry about their....luck. ;-)

Admittedly though, it puts the fun in dysfunction... ;)

Getting popular, though.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/poll-finds-americans-pumped-for-oil-pipeline-20120131

Posted 3 months ago #
TomOver
herenowbeyond.org
Login to Send PM

rus said:
Please.

As if the environmentalist fringe has the ability prevent either country from exploiting the tar sands. Might as well claim strawberry shortcake will lead a stampede of unicorns through Canada.

Well, the argument that the US should exploit the tar sands because if we don't, Chain will, should be applied also to the idea that China and other countries may eclipse the US, in terms of economic and political power, by way of their development of alternative sources of energy.

Part of the critique of corporate power as it pertains to the fossil fuel industries is that it undermines incentives for doing what's best for our country long-term.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that we're on the wrong path if we concentrate money in private hands while we neglect our infrastructure and other investments---scientific and social---that are necessary for our long-term national interest.

Posted 3 months ago #
TomOver
herenowbeyond.org
Login to Send PM

rus said:
Admittedly though, it puts the fun in dysfunction... ;)

Getting popular, though.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/poll-finds-americans-pumped-for-oil-pipeline-20120131

Is this another link to a study or article that Rus didn't read ?

Posted 3 months ago #
howatzer

Login to Send PM

Red Sun Rising said:
The Keystone XL pipeline isn't going to happen "either way", no country will be allowed to continue the tarsands/oil sands development project. The environmental community will make sure of it, which is strongly allied with the Occupy Movement. Times have changed, people are engaged, and evidence of this is everywhere.

I suggest taking a trip to Edmonton and explaining this to the people driving the large trucks full of tar sands.

This is the main problem with with the anti-fossil fuel movement. They believe that if the US doesn't use it, it won't get used. It will get used, and likely by a country with far less stringent environmental protection standards that we have.

Posted 3 months ago #
TomOver
herenowbeyond.org
Login to Send PM

howatzer said:
I suggest taking a trip to Edmonton and explaining this to the people driving the large trucks full of tar sands.

This is the main problem with with the anti-fossil fuel movement. They believe that if the US doesn't use it, it won't get used. It will get used, and likely by a country with far less stringent environmental protection standards that we have.

I'm not sure about the point about other countries using tar sands if the US doesn't. But how about creating jobs in ways less environmentally destructive ? Some of us talk as if the 'environment' were some abstraction on the other side of the galaxy, as opposed to what it actually is : the source of all life.

We wouldn't be having this debate, or doing anything for that matter, without the 'environment.'

Posted 3 months ago #
rus

Login to Send PM

TomOver said:
I'm not sure about the point about other countries using tar sands if the US doesn't.

Because if you actually cared about the environment you'd realize that if other countries use tar sands oil, the same energy is expended in extraction and the same greenhouse gasses are released. Only difference is jobs and profits go some place else.

I mean, if you cared about any of that.

Posted 3 months ago #
alexs
Limestone bluffs of the Scioto
Login to Send PM

Sure the same gases will be released regardless of where the oil is used. And sure there's profit to be made. But there's more to it than that, there's also risks that come with that profit. People here don't want to put a major and irreplaceable aquifer at risk, along with some rivers, etc. If Canada wants to get mad and roll the dice on a pipeline through the Rockies, and oil tanker traffic off their coast, that's their call. But that's meeting domestic resistance:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jan/09/oil-sands-battle-canada

The other thing about the profit/risk factor is, any profits would go to a few, while any risk would be borne by all. How fair is that?

Posted 3 months ago #
howatzer

Login to Send PM

TomOver said:
I'm not sure about the point about other countries using tar sands if the US doesn't. But how about creating jobs in ways less environmentally destructive ?

Well, considering the tar sands are in Canada, which, last I checked was a different country, then I think the point is self-evident.

And, as I've said before, before I put my stock into solar/wind I need to first find out which 1/4-1/2 of Ohio's land surface area we'd devote to covering with panels and/or turbines.

Posted 3 months ago #
rus

Login to Send PM

howatzer said:

And, as I've said before, before I put my stock into solar/wind I need to first find out which 1/4-1/2 of Ohio's land surface area we'd devote to covering with panels and/or turbines.

On that:
http://www.city-journal.org/2012/22_1_environmentalism.html

Posted 3 months ago #
Porky
C-Bus' East Side
Login to Send PM

alexs said:
People here don't want to put a major and irreplaceable aquifer at risk, along with some rivers, etc.

I agree, as much as I want the jobs, our fresh water supply is already under assault and it's priceless.

Posted 3 months ago #
rus

Login to Send PM

Porky said:
I agree, as much as I want the jobs, our fresh water supply is already under assault and it's priceless.

More an argument for a different route, though. Also, is the proposed pipeline any more risky than shipping the oil via rail?

Posted 3 months ago #
Porky
C-Bus' East Side
Login to Send PM

If there was a proposed route that would have less risk I might be in favor of it, I know nothing is 100% but this is too risky to get wrong.
As far as it being any more risky than being shipped via rail, probably not, it's one of those darned double edged swords.

Posted 3 months ago #
TomOver
herenowbeyond.org
Login to Send PM

rus said:
On that:
http://www.city-journal.org/2012/22_1_environmentalism.html

I at least agree with Bryce in terms of what he says in the 8th and 9th paragraph about the problems with corn ethanol in terms of net energy. Again, the concept of throughput applies. He also might be raising or reminding us of possible complications to using organic farming to feed ourselves.

But one possible flaw to his argument is he uses a narrow standard for comparing organic farming unfavorably to fossil-fuel-intensive agriculture: the amount of land required to produce a particular amount of food.

Factoring in the affects of industrial agriculture on biodiversity and water and it's reliance on natural gas and especially oil might complicate his analysis.

Posted 3 months ago #
howatzer

Login to Send PM

rus said:
On that:
http://www.city-journal.org/2012/22_1_environmentalism.html

TomOver said:
Factoring in the affects of industrial agriculture on biodiversity and water and it's reliance on natural gas and especially oil might complicate his analysis.

OK, but keep the perspective that these worries are first-world luxuries. There are many billions of people on this planet that would love to have the privilege to worry about biodiversity (as opposed to malnutrition and starvation).

Modern food production is a triumph, period. There are problems that need to be addressed, but these are minuscule compared to the alternative.

Posted 3 months ago #