Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Canada looks to sell oil and gas to Asia due to Obamas delay on Keystone Pipleine
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tRidiot" data-source="post: 1656183" data-attributes="member: 9374"><p>Does anyone think there are legitimate environmental concerns associated with this project? I'm playing devil's advocate here, thinking of the Alaskan pipeline. The oil companies love to show the picture of the polar bear walking on the pipe, but how many of you guys have ever actually been to Alaska and seen if/where there are real issues with damage to the environment. And I'm not talking just about potential leaks or whatever, I'm talking about the damage from heavy equipment and ingress/egress for proper maintenance of such a huge project, not just during construction, but for decades after?</p><p></p><p>Seriously, anyone? I'm curious here, asking to learn, not trying to stir the pot. I believe we have a responsibility to protect the environment from wanton and careless damage in the name of economic prosperity or simple comfort and convenience, but if that impact can be minimized, then I'm much more inclined to accept the small risk.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tRidiot, post: 1656183, member: 9374"] Does anyone think there are legitimate environmental concerns associated with this project? I'm playing devil's advocate here, thinking of the Alaskan pipeline. The oil companies love to show the picture of the polar bear walking on the pipe, but how many of you guys have ever actually been to Alaska and seen if/where there are real issues with damage to the environment. And I'm not talking just about potential leaks or whatever, I'm talking about the damage from heavy equipment and ingress/egress for proper maintenance of such a huge project, not just during construction, but for decades after? Seriously, anyone? I'm curious here, asking to learn, not trying to stir the pot. I believe we have a responsibility to protect the environment from wanton and careless damage in the name of economic prosperity or simple comfort and convenience, but if that impact can be minimized, then I'm much more inclined to accept the small risk. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Canada looks to sell oil and gas to Asia due to Obamas delay on Keystone Pipleine
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom