AsburySkinsFan Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 Yup...no chance of any water being affected by this spill. Here’s drone footage of the affected area. Good thing that road was there to stop it from reaching that water. I’m sure it’s all fine though, the oil company said so. And those gullible enough to believe them say we should trust them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 Always a chance, do you wish to wait and see what govt officials say on the impact? preliminary reports are no surface water or drinking water supply is impacted....of course that is preliminary. does your drone show the massive cleanup/repair and monitoring response that has been on site and will remain till cleanup and remediation is done? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 13 minutes ago, twa said: Always a chance, do you wish to wait and see what govt officials say on the impact? preliminary reports are no surface water or drinking water supply is impacted....of course that is preliminary. does your drone show the massive cleanup/repair and monitoring response that has been on site and will remain till cleanup and remediation is done? Yeah they always do a great job cleaning up from the mess they created in the places no one wanted them. And you seriously want me to put trust in a government report on this? A government that refuses to acknowledge science? A government agency run by a guy who is bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry? Honestly, @twayou crack me up sometimes. BTW, has that Gulf of Mexico clean-up coming along? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 I don't expect anything but hysteria and conspiracy theories .....and you to keep buying gas. That pipeline can carry 23 Million gallons a day and has for nearly a decade, science says you are overeating a bit ....probably delusions brought on from the fumes while filling up your vehicle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 17 minutes ago, twa said: I don't expect anything but hysteria and conspiracy theories .....and you to keep buying gas. That pipeline can carry 23 Million gallons a day and has for nearly a decade, science says you are overeating a bit ....probably delusions brought on from the fumes while filling up your vehicle. Classic, as long as it isn’t your water then you don’t give a damn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 my give a damn for unrealistic arguments is is certainly broke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 On 11/16/2017 at 9:51 PM, Predicto said: His drinking water is poisoned. https://www.click2houston.com/news/investigates/safety-of-houston-drinking-water-causing-growing-concern He wants everyone else to suffer like he does just to revisit this Quote https://patch.com/texas/houston/what-s-your-water-new-report-suggest-it-s-chromium-6 The communities served include Jersey Village, the Heights, Missouri City, Sharpstown, Bunker Hill, Sunnyside, Aldine, Spring, Humble, Kingwood and many more. The average ppb in those tested were rated high at 0.75 ppb, with high readings of 5.4 ppb. By comparison, 30 samples were rested in the City of Pasadena with only four detecting measurable amounts of Chromium 6 with an average of .006. Wonder why my industrial wasteland town has almost none(and probably less than SF) and well below Cali water standards? Despite being home to massive petrochemical production, storage, transport and riddled with pipelines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 43 minutes ago, twa said: my give a damn for unrealistic arguments is is certainly broke. At every single turn you side with the fossil fuel industry, seems what you deem “unrealistic” and what is actually unrealistic is separated by your own bias. When crude oil started spilling from the floor of the Gulf of Mexico you were certain that it was only a small leak. You’re constantly citing the safety of these pipelines. And then when it all goes sideways your argument is that the environmental damage is collateral damage to maintain the status quo and your red herring that everyone hasn’t already gone to solar cars. You’d be the one laughing at the Wright Brothers as they rode their bikes to the airfield, “Hey Orville and Wilbur, why don’t you just fly!” Then, when you’re pinned down you cite statistics. The ONLY people who find that convincing are the ones who aren’t shoveling sludge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 I side with the reality ya'll are not willing to change your lifestyle, ya want a omelette w/o breaking eggs and then blame the cook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 43 minutes ago, twa said: I side with the reality ya'll are not willing to change your lifestyle, ya want a omelette w/o breaking eggs and then blame the cook. You’re cute when you’re lying through your teeth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 7 hours ago, AsburySkinsFan said: You’re cute when you’re lying through your teeth. What am I lying about? Surely not that pipelines are the safest method of transporting oil and gas Mr science denier. Surely not that you continue to use it and drive demand. Surely not that this was a relatively small leak for the amount flowing thru the pipe. Surely not that the environmental impact from this leak will be small. Damn sure not that you depend on pipelines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 Yay more oil spills. But our local fossil fuel advocate will be here momentarily to tell us how good this all is for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 1 hour ago, AsburySkinsFan said: Yay more oil spills. But our local fossil fuel advocate will be here momentarily to tell us how good this all is for us. Better than the alternative obviously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 1 hour ago, AsburySkinsFan said: Yay more oil spills. But our local fossil fuel advocate will be here momentarily to tell us how good this all is for us. Ok what is your beef? Do you prefer Rail or Trucks to pipelines for transporting oil? TWA already showed that Pipelines spill less per amount shipped than either of those methods. So what is it you want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 8 minutes ago, twa said: Better than the alternative obviously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 Do you have wind/solar and electric vehicles? Be the change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 I cant do wind. I keep breaking it. Eh? Eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 I wonder if that oiled bird would prefer being chopped by turbines or fried by solar? Don't they call the ones at Ivanpah flamers or such? oops, nope , they are streamers Quote https://www.sciencealert.com/this-solar-plant-accidentally-incinerates-up-to-6-000-birds-a-year The sight of a bird being fried to death is so common at the Ivanpah Solar Plant in California’s Mojave Desert, that workers have nicknamed the smouldering birds "streamers", because they leave tiny wisps of white smoke behind as they burn up in the sky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 All the sudden twa cares about birds. Once again yet another pathetic attempt by a fossil fuel cultist to have us believe that because we have not already switched 100% to non-fossil fuels then we are hypocrites, and that such goals are pointless because we haven’t already attained them. As such he advocates for greater fossil fuel distribution and greater environmental damageas well as the necessary anti-captitalist method of land procurement that serves to line the pockets of the fossil fuel elites while leaving the rest of us holding the bag. Oh, but when they spill they get fined...not enough to hurt, and certainly not enough to force greater safety efforts, but enough commas and zeros to impress the mob as the inforgraphic is splashed across Faux News and their talking points. Your time has past, I pray the next generation will look back and wonder why we insisted on allowing corporate interests to circumvent world environmental demands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 you the one brought up birds goals are good, but there is more than one route to them. My time is certainly past, hopefully the next generation won't be as stupid as the one that exposed our throat to OPEC while giving them trillions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 15 hours ago, nonniey said: Ok what is your beef? Do you prefer Rail or Trucks to pipelines for transporting oil? TWA already showed that Pipelines spill less per amount shipped than either of those methods. So what is it you want? Oil is a reality. Anyone seriously expecting it to just "go away" is delusional. Processing Canadian oil has distinct advantages for both sides and IS happening, and will continue. But when you're piping it thousands of miles across the heartland of the country, would it really be too much to ask they make some efforts to do it responsibly? Maybe just a tad more infrastructure investment as a Plan B for when there are spills/leaks? No matter what anyone might think, I tend to be a fairly pragmatic kinda guy, and I can live with Keystone, etc. The network of pipelines extant massively dwarf this one project, so go ahead, build it, but c'mon guys, put a little more into it than the bare minimum/utterly cheapest way to accomplish the results. The technology has existed in the industry for a long time to monitor flows closely and react to pressure fluctuations to control unintended outflows, the problem is that these cost $$$, and rather than site them regularly and closely together so that they could immediately respond, they have become scarcer and spread out much further strictly determined by cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 21, 2017 Share Posted November 21, 2017 that pipeline has that monitoring technology and that was responsible for stopping the flow. it is far from the bare minimum. I'm kinda interested in why the pipe failed in the first place Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.