• =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3a_I_know_it=e2=80=99s_a_long_time_ago_here=e2=80=a6?=

    From Ken Olson@21:1/5 to xyzzy on Thu Dec 8 22:56:16 2022
    On 12/8/2022 10:21 PM, xyzzy wrote:
    …but remember when rfsc wingnuts promised us that pipelines were safer and that’s a reason we should permit the Keystone XL?

    https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/keystone-pipeline-shut-after-oil-spill-into-kansas-creek-2022-12-08/



    Statistically, they are.
    --
    ÄLSKAR - Fänga Dagen

    Слава Україні та НАТО

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Con Reeder, unhyphenated American@21:1/5 to Ken Olson on Sat Dec 10 02:52:54 2022
    On 2022-12-09, Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org> wrote:
    On 12/8/2022 10:21 PM, xyzzy wrote:
    …but remember when rfsc wingnuts promised us that pipelines were safer and >> that’s a reason we should permit the Keystone XL?

    https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/keystone-pipeline-shut-after-oil-spill-into-kansas-creek-2022-12-08/



    Statistically, they are.

    Indeed. Accidents will happen. 14,000 barrels is a bit, but not really
    that much in the scheme of things. Might kill a few fish, but will it
    kill as many birds as the nations wind farms? No.

    --
    Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
    -- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From xyzzy@21:1/5 to unhyphenated American on Sat Dec 10 03:16:53 2022
    Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <constance@duxmail.com> wrote:
    On 2022-12-09, Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org> wrote:
    On 12/8/2022 10:21 PM, xyzzy wrote:
    …but remember when rfsc wingnuts promised us that pipelines were safer and
    that’s a reason we should permit the Keystone XL?

    https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/keystone-pipeline-shut-after-oil-spill-into-kansas-creek-2022-12-08/



    Statistically, they are.

    Indeed. Accidents will happen. 14,000 barrels is a bit, but not really
    that much in the scheme of things.

    14,000 barrels is equivalent to 69 tanker truckloads.

    Might kill a few fish, but will it
    kill as many birds as the nations wind farms? No.

    No you’re right, one oil spill will not kill as many birds as every single wind turbine in the US. But OTOH I’m confident this single oil spill will kill more fish than every wind turbine on the face of the earth.

    I’ll take “dumn, irrelevant comparisons for $1000, Alex”.



    --
    “I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian, liberal personality.” — Altie

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From floaterjr@21:1/5 to xyzzy on Sat Dec 10 00:40:41 2022
    On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 10:16:58 PM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:
    Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <cons...@duxmail.com> wrote:
    On 2022-12-09, Ken Olson <kol...@freedomnet.org> wrote:
    On 12/8/2022 10:21 PM, xyzzy wrote:
    …but remember when rfsc wingnuts promised us that pipelines were safer and
    that’s a reason we should permit the Keystone XL?

    https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/keystone-pipeline-shut-after-oil-spill-into-kansas-creek-2022-12-08/



    Statistically, they are.

    Indeed. Accidents will happen. 14,000 barrels is a bit, but not really that much in the scheme of things.
    14,000 barrels is equivalent to 69 tanker truckloads.
    Might kill a few fish, but will it
    kill as many birds as the nations wind farms? No.
    No you’re right, one oil spill will not kill as many birds as every single wind turbine in the US. But OTOH I’m confident this single oil spill will kill more fish than every wind turbine on the face of the earth.

    I’ll take “dumn, irrelevant comparisons for $1000, Alex”.
    --
    “I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian, liberal personality.” — Altie
    https://www.chicagobusiness.com/crains-forum-safer-chicago/chicago-violence-problem-debate-safety-inequality#:~:text=Overall%2C%20Chicago's%20per%2Dcapita%20murder,Louis.
    Well, there's safe and then there is safe. I was nearly murdered in chicagoland in the late 80's. Now that is unsafe. At least it's less violent than NY or LA so the chamber of commence can toot their horn about that.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From xyzzy@21:1/5 to floaterjr on Sat Dec 10 12:23:39 2022
    floaterjr <gpgmga@gmail.com> wrote:
    On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 10:16:58 PM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:
    Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <cons...@duxmail.com> wrote:
    On 2022-12-09, Ken Olson <kol...@freedomnet.org> wrote:
    On 12/8/2022 10:21 PM, xyzzy wrote:
    …but remember when rfsc wingnuts promised us that pipelines were safer and
    that’s a reason we should permit the Keystone XL?

    https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/keystone-pipeline-shut-after-oil-spill-into-kansas-creek-2022-12-08/




    Statistically, they are.

    Indeed. Accidents will happen. 14,000 barrels is a bit, but not really
    that much in the scheme of things.
    14,000 barrels is equivalent to 69 tanker truckloads.
    Might kill a few fish, but will it
    kill as many birds as the nations wind farms? No.
    No you’re right, one oil spill will not kill as many birds as every single >> wind turbine in the US. But OTOH I’m confident this single oil spill will >> kill more fish than every wind turbine on the face of the earth.

    I’ll take “dumn, irrelevant comparisons for $1000, Alex”.
    --
    “I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian,
    liberal personality.” — Altie
    https://www.chicagobusiness.com/crains-forum-safer-chicago/chicago-violence-problem-debate-safety-inequality#:~:text=Overall%2C%20Chicago's%20per%2Dcapita%20murder,Louis.
    Well, there's safe and then there is safe. I was nearly murdered in chicagoland in the late 80's. Now that is unsafe. At least it's less
    violent than NY or LA so the chamber of commence can toot their horn about that.


    Can always count on you for a total non-sequitir

    --
    “I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian, liberal personality.” — Altie

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Con Reeder, unhyphenated American@21:1/5 to xyzzy on Sat Dec 10 16:05:50 2022
    On 2022-12-10, xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com> wrote:
    Con Reeder, unhyphenated American <constance@duxmail.com> wrote:
    On 2022-12-09, Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org> wrote:
    On 12/8/2022 10:21 PM, xyzzy wrote:
    …but remember when rfsc wingnuts promised us that pipelines were safer and
    that’s a reason we should permit the Keystone XL?

    https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/keystone-pipeline-shut-after-oil-spill-into-kansas-creek-2022-12-08/



    Statistically, they are.

    Indeed. Accidents will happen. 14,000 barrels is a bit, but not really
    that much in the scheme of things.

    14,000 barrels is equivalent to 69 tanker truckloads.

    And when that amount of oil flows normally, it means 69 tanker
    trucks didn't run and consume resources to do it. Or some number of
    railroad cars.


    Might kill a few fish, but will it
    kill as many birds as the nations wind farms? No.

    No you’re right, one oil spill will not kill as many birds as every single wind turbine in the US. But OTOH I’m confident this single oil spill will kill more fish than every wind turbine on the face of the earth.

    I’ll take “dumn, irrelevant comparisons for $1000, Alex”.


    Killing fish in one stream? Sad, to be sure. Catastrophic? No.

    The point is that everything has collateral damage of some type.
    Normal operation of wind turbines kills birds. Pipelines leak. Trains
    derail. Trucks have emissions when they transport things.

    Pipelines are the most efficient long-term method of transporting
    fuel. When the people of New England write checks to pay their
    large heating bills this winter, perhaps they'll work to oppose
    the politicians that killed the pipelines that would have given
    them relief.

    The opposition to the pipelines was never about spills. It was about, supposedly, the opposition to using fossil fuels at all. And people
    who find math to be optional have settled upon the completely
    impractical wind/solar non-solution. If we'd invested all that money
    in nuclear, we'd be in a much better place now.

    If you are still for large-scale wind or solar as a general power
    source, you are either stupid or ideologically blind. Environmentalism
    is now much more a religion than it is a science.

    --
    I used to think the whole world stank. Then I found out I had poop
    on my mustache. -- Anonymous

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)