It is rather nice to see that many of the silent majority in the upper levels of the environmental movements are not quite as subject to the hyperbole and brain washing as the obnoxious loud "sound bite" ones who invent their science and feel they are above the law? I haven't seen the original article but the snips sound while not completely true at least a reasonable position on the subject. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dailybrew/science-journal-tou...Science journal touts Keystone XL pipeline as lesser of two evils .By Matthew Coutts | Daily Brew – Thu, 31 Jan, 2013.The controversial TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline received some notable support this week when a reputable environmental magazine urged the White House to back the project. Nature, a prestigious science journal, said the U.S. should support the creation of the oil pipeline from Canada to Texas because Alberta’s tar sands are not as “dirty” as some contend. And also, what the heck, that mess will be up in Canada, anyway....The thing is, Nature essentially echoes the thoughts of Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi, who said recently that the pipeline had unfairly become a lightning rod for environmental opposition to the entire ______ development.“I think it's a terrible shame that this one metre in diameter pipeline is being asked to carry all of the sins of the carbon economy and, in fact, I think that some of the protests against this pipeline are deeply misdirected because if, in fact, the pipeline is not built, I imagine that we will end up with ways that are more carbon intensive,” Nenshi said, according to CBC News. Alright, so Nature seems to be familiar with the adage, “You’ve got to break some eggs to make an omelette.” Still: "serious air- and water-quality issues in Canada."Of course the lying and hyperbole still gets in there when you consider that Canada came third on the globe on clean air behind some Island in the middle of an ocean and a small almost completely forested country that is downwind of Sweden, Finland and Norway. http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/thread-820674-1-1.htmlTop 1 Estonia Top 2 MauritiusTop 3 Canada- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Perhaps they saw this?They actually woke up and realized that forcing the companies to use rail would be many times worse that a pipeline. http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/pipeline-opponents-says-cns...Pipeline opponents say CN's crude-by-rail car pitch poses 'risk to company'By Dene Moore, The Canadian Press | The Canadian Press – Thu, 31 Jan, 2013 5:03 PM ESTVANCOUVER - Opponents of the Northern Gateway pipeline are threatening to turn their sights on CN Rail,...Sixteen environmental groups signed a letter sent to Canadian National CEO Claude Mongeau this week to express opposition to any plans to ship product from the Alberta oil sands west by rail."Unfortunately, ... there are far greater fatality, injury and environmental risks when transporting crude oil by rail than by pipeline," the letter said.It cites a study last year by the Manhattan Institute, a right-leaning American think tank that has endorsed construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the Gulf Coast after comparing the safety and accident statistics of rail, road and pipelines.One last thought, the oil sands production is in Alberta, the refineries are in Texas, California or the Midwest, does anyone happen to know which effort puts the most mess into the air? In truth the most pollution comes out of the tailpipe of the truck or car that is the final customer. Tim
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra