Skip to main content

View Diary: Update: Canada "Ghost Train"on Fire Hours Before Runaway (138 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Then why isn't the venom directed at the (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Observerinvancouver, Rashaverak, NYFM

    Bakken field, which is every bit the environmental clusterfulck the tarsands is, instead of the tarsands?

    Yeah I realize it's good fun to bash All Things Canadian (heck, I've even taken timid steps in that direction myself from time to time!) but in this case the hypocrisy involved is high even for American standards.

    •  Hmmm. I didn't realize Bakken was that bad. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Roadbed Guy

      Certain things Canadian do deserve bashing.  But not all.  Did you see the Daily Show last week where Jason Jones did a comparison of the U.S. and Canadian banking systems?

      We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

      by Observerinvancouver on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 02:34:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Canadian vs. US banking systems? Yawn!! (0+ / 0-)

        why don't we discuss baby seal hunts, poutine, Terry Jacks, Celine Dion first?

        In any event, a major dig at the tarsands is the poor EROEI (i.e., the amount of energy that it takes to extract the gunk) which results in about 22% higher "wheel to wheel" emissions according to a European study (only 12% according to a US study)

        In any event, in this respect the Europeans regard the shale oil (not to be confused with oil shale, which is even worse, much worse in fact!) to be worse than the tarsands:

        The agreed baseline is based on calculations by the oil industry’s ‘CONCAWE’ body. The oil industry estimate that, on average, producing one megajoule of energy for transport fuel causes 88.3 grammes of CO2.

        According to the Commission’s proposal, different fuels and sources of fuel (or ‘feedstocks’ as they are known) get different ‘default values’ for their carbon intensity.

        The default value for petrol made from conventional crude oil in the proposal is 87.5 g CO2/MJ. Petrol made from natural bitumen (i.e. tar sands) = 107 g CO2/MJ; shale oil = 131.3 g CO2/MJ; coal-to-liquid = 172 g CO2/MJ; gas-to-liquid = 97 g CO2/MJ.

        link

        Plus there are all the issues involved with fracking (potential ground water contamination - which of course is also an issue with the tarsands), the larger footprint of the Bakken field, and the release of methane (a potent greenhouse gas) from the Bakken (which to my knowledge is not an issue with the tarsands).

        Basically it comes down to a value judgement which is worse - methinks it would depend on who hires the higher priced lawyers to argue their side!   My point here is that it is really weird to me how the tarsands are continually dissed (and rightfully so) while the Bakken basically gets a pass.

        •  Americans are much better mythologizers (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SoCalSal, Roadbed Guy

          than we are.  We belong more to the Oliver Cromwell school of portraiture.  Warts and all.  Maybe Americans like to demonize the tar sands to draw attention away from the Bakken Field.  

          We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

          by Observerinvancouver on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 05:41:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Um. Where have you been? (0+ / 0-)

      The massive promotion of fossil fuel oroduction under Pbama has been a major part of the campaign including Bakken and Powder River Basin.  So, the only difference is thatBakken isn't subject to a choke point decision the way the tar sands are.  The idea that it has jack all to do with what is Canadian has to rank among the all time stupidest comments on dailykos on climate change.   Oil is dangerous hazardous toxic shit and we need to get off it yesterday.  

      Touch all that arises with a spirit of compassion. An activist seeks to change opinion.

      by Mindful Nature on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 08:42:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I've been right here (0+ / 0-)

        and have seen approximately a total of 2 anti-Bakken diaries EVER.

        And about that many anti-tarsands diaries EVERY DAY.

        The whole phenomenon  is nicely summarized in the reaction to this disaster - i.e., wrt knee-jerk blaming of the tarsands when they were not even involved.

        •  my goodness (0+ / 0-)

          you should read more of the climate change diaries, since many many of them rail against Obama's all-of-the above energy policies and the push to extract more fossil fuels, which includes Bakken.  Just because a different method (you are telling me there have been no anti-fracking diaries here?  Honestly?) used to extract this stuff, doesn't change any of the underlying criticisms of it. Of course the knee-jerk anti-environment responses tend to miss that.

          Touch all that arises with a spirit of compassion. An activist seeks to change opinion.

          by Mindful Nature on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 09:08:50 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (156)
  • Community (66)
  • Baltimore (48)
  • Bernie Sanders (37)
  • Civil Rights (36)
  • Culture (30)
  • Elections (24)
  • Freddie Gray (23)
  • Law (22)
  • Hillary Clinton (21)
  • Economy (21)
  • Education (21)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Racism (20)
  • Texas (19)
  • Labor (19)
  • Environment (18)
  • Politics (17)
  • 2016 (16)
  • Media (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site