Skip to main content

View Diary: Canadian Oil Chief says US State Dept. EIS Wrong: Tar Sands XL Pipeline Will Increase Emissions (52 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The "winking" comment was not directed (0+ / 0-)

    at any particular person, but the mindset of this site.

    For example in the past two years there have been 1934 diaries about the Keystone pipeline (that's from just searching "Keystone" - I'm sure there are more if terms like "KXL" or "game over" were used . ..  but I'll be conservative here).

    By contrast, there have been 66 Bakken diaries  - three of them by you, so kudo's on that!

    The point being is that this quick accounting shows that the Tarsands have received ~30x more attention than Bakken (although my search numbers are far from rigorous, that ratio rings true with my observations).

    Based on stats from this pdf the Bakken oil production increased from about 285K bbls/day to 700K  - which was about the 2005 tarsands output.  So, we're less than a decade behind them, and currently ramping up production at about the same rate.

    But yet we (as a community) focus 30x the venom on a foreign project (which for sure deserves it) compared to something equally nefarious in our own backyard.   I'm just puzzled by this disparity - it couldn't be yet another manifestation of American Exceptionalism, could it?

    •  btw, one explanation for this might be (0+ / 0-)

      that the Bakken exemplifies my longstanding point that pipelines are irrelevant for large scale development of these resources - heck, if pipelines aren't available, the product can be moved by rail no problem.

      People claim that's not possible for the tarsands; thus acknowledging the Bakken production would instantly nullify that claim - so it's better to stay blissfully ignorant I suppose.

      Which simple math does in any event - e.g., about 5 or 6x more coal is moved by rail than the entire tar sands crude production.  Or, another way to look at this is the tar sands production was entirely transported by rail, it would constitute about 7 or 8% of North American rail traffic.  IOW, not really staggeringly impossible numbers!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site