RE: Keeping oil prices dear.....

RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Tkman117 -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (2/28/2015 5:25:10 AM)
Actually sludge is pretty accurate. Material shipped from the oil sands is typically Diluted Bitumen, which is a very granular oily material which needs to be processed before it can be used as a fuel source. The inherent problem with Dilbit is transportation, since it is so thick and has many hard pieces of sand and rock within it, it can rub and erode materials like the interior of pipelines much easier than other oil materials beings sent down pipelines. Not to mention there are these things called column seperations, where the diluted bitumen isn't always under constant pressure and areas between the sludge have a low enough pressure that the oil can turn into a gas. These columns of gas can be confused with potential leaks, which is why some leaks take hours for industry officials to notice. The keystone XL will ship Dilbit down to Texas, and this is one main problem people have with it.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (2/28/2015 6:27:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: joether That's right, America should take on all the expenses and liabilities, but obtain none of the benefits or profit. ORIGINAL: joether Yes, the refineries and subsequently the workers, do profit from the pipeline. I'm stating "Why should America handle the total liability and not get the total benefits with it?" As I stated, this issue is a political football were everyone uses it to score points for their base. The reality is, Republicans lost their credibility to the American people when they down voted a bill that would require all the oil shipped and refined be...ONLY...used right here in America. The refineries and the workers would benefit. Why cant the rest of America as well? Ok, DS, we are going to play a game. Its called 'Reality'. I want you to spot in....EITHER....of my posts you were responding to, were I mentioned taxes? Because that is the whole 'thrust' of your 'argument' here. Reality shows quite clearly that I did not mention taxes. Or that the workers would not pay taxes. And why did I not say this? BECAUSE IT WASN'T BROUGHT UP IN EITHER POST! A first grader could point that out; what's your excuse? Will America not benefit by the taxes being paid? quote: That the project will require 'X' number of workers to construct the pipeline. And these jobs are unfortunately, temporary positions lasting nor more than 3-6 months. After the pipe is finished, less than fifty workers will be needed to maintain the system. That in essence the country handles all the liability and none of the benefits. Its been shown by quite a few other examples of pipelines leaking and even rupturing. An the damage that befalls locations. Historical and finacial records show these damage levels far exceeded the benefits the locations gain from pipelines running through their backyards. Those refineries and workers will continue to pay taxes, though. It's all going to be taxed, Joether. quote: That Democrats tried to place a bill requiring this oil being shipped be used within the USA, rather than foreign markets. Thereby we gain the benefits....AND....the liabilities. That is often known as 'sound business thinking'. Republicans shot down that bill. These are the facts, DS. They are indisputable. I have the evidence and history books to back up all these points. That sludge is going to be refined in the US, just like all the crude oil we import. And, just like all the crude oil we import, the products that are refined from it, will be used in the US or exported. quote: So in order for you to make a case that this pipeline benefits me directly, requires you to come up with the burden of evidence. That has not happen yet. You can call me names, insult my intelligence and education, and even behave like a child. None of these will help your case worth shit. So the ball's in your court, DS.... You have already demonstrated that you're aggressively ignorant, joether. There is nothing I can do to help you. The ball is in your court. Take off your blinders, and finally see.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (2/28/2015 6:46:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Why shouldn't the pipeline be built with the least amount of cost? Mandating that the pipeline be built with only US Steel means that US Steel manufacturers won't have to lower their costs as much. Two questions here: 1: The purpose of this pipeline is to carry 'X' amount of oil per hour of operation. Should a leak (or dare I say rupture) occur, this flow of oil is stopped while repairs are performed. When projects are done with cheap materials, poor engineering, and 'cutting corners', results in faulty problems and people getting pissed off. Sometimes you can get away with this sort of business model. Unfortunately its not a 'one size fits all' viewpoint. 2: Would you rather we use steel from outside the nation? Do you not support the US Economy? ARE YOU LOYAL TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA? Because that is how conservatives have attacked others when the shoe was on the other foot. LMFAO!!! Should we be mandated to use US Steel? I don't think so. Should there be a standard quality required? I absolutely do think so. Should we use the most economical steel that exceeds that standard? I absolutely do think so. Is US Steel the most advanced and highest quality steel available? I don't have any idea about that. Shipping costs for imported steel should help US Steel compete, though, shouldn't it? Why pay more when you don't have to? quote: The pipeline serves the Republican base; the use of US Steel benefits the Democrat's base. You have a problem with one side doing something to appease their base but not the one you support? That's called 'being a hypocrite', DS. The Unions are in support of the Keystone XL project. The environmentalists aren't. Democrats voted to pass the bill, too. quote: quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri And, you didn't present a bill a Democrat tried to push through. You presented an article about the bill that was passed by the Senate. And, it's a bill that enjoys bipartisan support. It's a project the State Department report comes out in favor of. Oh, I'm sorry, do I need the HR# of the bill a Democrat pushed to have the oil be sold only in US markets, and got shot down by Republicans? From a guy who has never done that, I call 'bullshit'! You claimed that there was a bill from a Democrat. You were asked to cite it. In response, you posted a link that didn't cite it. Look in the mirror when you call "bullshit!" quote: The bill didnt 'enjoy' bipartisan support. If you sit down and study things in Washington, D.C., things are never quite what they appear. That one side agrees to one thing, if the other side agrees to something else a few weeks/months down the road. Its messy, trashy, and back-stabbing' but that's what us American's are 'happy' with apparently.... Did Democrats vote for the bill? Yes. Did Republicans vote for the bill? Yes. Isn't that the definition of "bipartisan?" quote: quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri You have already agreed that refineries and refinery workers will benefit from the tar sands being refined in their refineries. Don't those workers spend money locally? Yes, that would be called 'logical'. I didn't feel the need to explain the fucking obvious stuff. The problems with this project are not about the 'end point'. And that you keep evading the real issues, shows the dishonesty in your arguments. What's wrong here? Cant talk about the issues at the core of the issue because you do not have any decent and convenient answers? What endpoint? The endpoint where more workers will still be working and refineries be refining the sludge because of the Keystone XL? Won't those workers still be spending locally? Won't those refineries continue to spend money in upkeep? quote: quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri A new pipeline should be built to carry this sludge so it doesn't mix with other types of oil, shouldn't it? This stuff isn't cheap or easy to refine, so preventing it from tainting other supplies of oil is a good idea. Do you know how many pipelines exist in the United States? Go look that up. You do not transport 'sludge' by pipeline, DS, you do that with rail cars. The reason (from an engineering perspective) is that it 'gums' up the pipeline. Requiring days if not weeks of in-operations to clean the thousands of miles of piping. Do you have any idea how expensive that is? Oil, being a liquid base material, is much easier to transport by pipeline. Granted it has properties that will 'stick' to the piping and cause some minimal problems over the lifetime of the structure; its 'cleaning' costs will be dramatically cheaper. You can transport oil by rail car as well. However, I don't think a rail system exist in quite the connection needed from Canada's facilities to the Gulf. Hence, why the creation of the pipeline. The jury is out as to which mode of transportation is safer. A quick googling shows articles supporting pipelines being safer (a HuffPo link), and a NY Times link supporting rail being safer. Since a rail option might not exist, why not build the pipeline? quote: quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri The argument that much of the pipeline could be built on lands currently in use with the Keystone pipeline (as opposed to the Keystone XL) is a harder argument to defeat, though I think the State Department report addressed that, too. The State Department is allowed its views. I dislike the project because of the 'benefits verse liability' isn't in America's favor. Pipelines have been shown to leak and rupture. This has been shown many times. The cost of clean up in communities is pretty expensive. I'm misusing out the 'political bullshit' and 'football game' here, and simply looking at the cost analysis based on historical information from financial, scientific, economic, and utility sources. Demonize me all you want, DS. I just dont see the 'gain' to America past a tiny minority of individuals. An that 'gain' I do see is quickly and nightly over shadowed by the liabilities this nation will incur. Does it really matter how expensive clean up is when it's the company doing the clean up?

Tkman117 -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (2/28/2015 9:04:16 AM)
FR I find it funny how there is support for the pipeline on the basis of jobs, when the vast majority of the jobs will be temporary and only about 30-40 permanent jobs will result from the construction of the pipeline. Just some food for thought.

Sanity -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (2/28/2015 9:44:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 FR I find it funny how there is support for the pipeline on the basis of jobs, when the vast majority of the jobs will be temporary and only about 30-40 permanent jobs will result from the construction of the pipeline. Just some food for thought. Thats the nature of the construction industry, so obviously youve never worked construction. In construction, you build it, then when its done you move to the next construction project. Finish that, then move to the next project. These are great jobs with good pay lasting for several years. Not everyone wants to live on government handouts, and without SOME people working and paying taxes there wont be any treasury money for "liberals" to buy votes with.

bounty44 -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (2/28/2015 9:49:54 AM)
and I posted something earlier from the state department suggesting 5000-6000 jobs for 2-3 yrs, and also pointed out the money those workers would be spending in the local economies... id further suggest the "focus on jobs" also comes from a conservative put up or shut up in response to Obama's supposed position as being "pro-job" or "pro middle class"

DesideriScuri -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (2/28/2015 2:03:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 FR I find it funny how there is support for the pipeline on the basis of jobs, when the vast majority of the jobs will be temporary and only about 30-40 permanent jobs will result from the construction of the pipeline. Just some food for thought. Actually, my argument is more about taxes, which will be paid not just on 30-40 workers' incomes, but on the products refined, too.

Tkman117 -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (2/28/2015 2:24:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 FR I find it funny how there is support for the pipeline on the basis of jobs, when the vast majority of the jobs will be temporary and only about 30-40 permanent jobs will result from the construction of the pipeline. Just some food for thought. Thats the nature of the construction industry, so obviously youve never worked construction. Nope, I'm a bit too intelligent for that sort of work thanks. quote: In construction, you build it, then when its done you move to the next construction project. Finish that, then move to the next project. These are great jobs with good pay lasting for several years. I am familiar with this kind of construction, but instead of focusing on a single pipeline, why can't that money be invested into other construction projects which have less of an environmental impact? Think of it, if the same kind of money was invested in different projects then how is it any different aside from the fact that it doesnt damage the environment quote: Not everyone wants to live on government handouts, and without SOME people working and paying taxes there wont be any treasury money for "liberals" to buy votes with. If your mentality is as black and white as that then you would clearly have a difficult time getting a job. If you keep your eyes set on a single job and things fall through and you dont look at alternatives, then who is really at fault? You're the people of personal responsibility right? So if job opportunities dont come up, where do you have the gall to blame others for you not getting a job? Talk about hypocritical.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (2/28/2015 7:05:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 Nope, I'm a bit too intelligent for that sort of work thanks. Wow. Just wow. quote: I am familiar with this kind of construction, but instead of focusing on a single pipeline, why can't that money be invested into other construction projects which have less of an environmental impact? Think of it, if the same kind of money was invested in different projects then how is it any different aside from the fact that it doesnt damage the environment What projects are out there that business is wanting to invest in? This isn't about US Government investing. This is about the US Government okaying the pipeline to be built by business, using the business's money. If there are businesses out there that want to invest their own money in more environmentally friendly projects, they can do so. If they have to get government's permission, then, we'll likely see a bill about those, too.

MercTech -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (3/1/2015 7:38:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 FR I find it funny how there is support for the pipeline on the basis of jobs, when the vast majority of the jobs will be temporary and only about 30-40 permanent jobs will result from the construction of the pipeline. Just some food for thought. It is mainly the opponents to the pipeline that are squawking that it doesn't create enough jobs. Someone hasn't been offered enough kickback is the probable reason. The pipeline is not a public project funded from public coffers. It is a private venture that can benefit the people of two countries. All they want is to have their permit to construct approved. And, since it is an interstate project, it needs the equivalent of a federal building permit to start construction. The current administration has dragged its feet for years never making a decision whether to approve, disapprove, or require design change contingent on approval. Canadian companies are pissed at the waffling. Oil companies are pissed at the waffling. And oil workers are pissed at the waffling. And a lot of property owners that would get some lease cash for the pipeline coming through their fields are pissed at the waffling. Who isn't pissed? Rabid extreme environmentalists who see continued waffling as a victory. Maybe some bureaucrats that resent any idea that isn't theirs are pissed that someone would actually try to do something to reduce our trade deficit. It is almost like the administration watched "Atlas Shrugged" and thought "Yeah, that's the ticket!"

RottenJohnny -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (3/1/2015 8:02:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 Nope, I'm a bit too intelligent for that sort of work thanks. Wow. Just wow. No shit, DS. That's exactly what I thought when I read it too. I know a few pipeline welders who'd love to meet this guy.

thishereboi -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (3/1/2015 8:10:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 Nope, I'm a bit too intelligent for that sort of work thanks. And yet not smart enough to keep your mouth shut when you have no clue what you are talking about or when what you are about to say paints you as an arrogant jackass. Personally given the choice I would rather have a discussion with those "ignorant" construction workers than someone who thinks he is above all that.

Sanity -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (3/1/2015 8:19:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 Nope, I'm a bit too intelligent for that sort of work thanks. Wow. Just wow. No shit, DS. That's exactly what I thought when I read it too. I know a few pipeline welders who'd love to meet this guy. He had better hope that the average construction worker is more intelligent than he, as his life and well being depends on their craftsmanship probably every day

Tkman117 -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (3/1/2015 9:49:27 AM)
[:D] and who were the ones who invented the methods to build houses and other things? Scientists, engineers, intelectuals. You can live without a hand, but you can't live without a brain, although cons seem to be the exception [:D]

Sanity -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (3/1/2015 10:54:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 [:D] and who were the ones who invented the methods to build houses and other things? Scientists, engineers, intelectuals. You can live without a hand, but you can't live without a brain, although cons seem to be the exception [:D] Scientists invented houses... [:D]

Aylee -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (3/1/2015 11:21:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 Nope, I'm a bit too intelligent for that sort of work thanks. Wow. Just wow. No shit, DS. That's exactly what I thought when I read it too. I know a few pipeline welders who'd love to meet this guy. Why is anyone surprised? Disdain for the hoi polloi or unwashed masses, is a well documented characteristic of the left. Of course I am naturally suspicious of anyone that has to keep going on about how smart and intelligent they are.

Tkman117 -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (3/1/2015 11:28:50 AM)
In all honesty I'm trolling you folks, so it's pretty laughable to see you people get so upset over this. I'm bored, loaded with work and I thought it would be fun to be a bit of a shit disturber for a bit. Who knew how sensitive you people were [:D]

Aylee -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (3/1/2015 11:41:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 [:D] and who were the ones who invented the methods to build houses and other things? Scientists, engineers, intelectuals. You can live without a hand, but you can't live without a brain, although cons seem to be the exception [:D] Yeah, Og of Ur was quite the intellectual. [8\|]

Moderator3 -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (3/1/2015 11:44:06 AM)
Aww, thank you. I just love it when people stir poop. Gives me something to do and I get to be mean, even on a Sunday! Poop stirring is on my poop list. Here, I thought everyone wanted to post with political correctness, open minds, the will never to inflame a situation or someone and to always please moderators. I forgot my pill for delusion today.

Aylee -> RE: Keeping oil prices dear..... (3/1/2015 11:48:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moderator3 Aww, thank you. I just love it when people stir poop. Gives me something to do and I get to be mean, even on a Sunday! Poop stirring is on my poop list. Here, I thought everyone wanted to post with political correctness, open minds, the will never to inflame a situation or someone and to always please moderators. I forgot my pill for delusion today. It is Sunday. Just have more mimosas. You can even leave out the OJ. [:D]

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125