Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another train hauling oil derails

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
    Nope right in your post. Explain the use of different terms.
    It's actually written in English. Anyone with at least 3rd grade reading comprehension and a rudimentary idea as to how a pipeline functions, could understand this.
    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
      It's actually written in English. Anyone with at least 3rd grade reading comprehension and a rudimentary idea as to how a pipeline functions, could understand this.
      Explain the use of the two terms.

      "The XL pipeline will transport Canadian and US oil to......."

      Makes more sense to me. No hedging.
      “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
      “To talk of many things:
      Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
      Of cabbages—and kings—
      And why the sea is boiling hot—
      And whether pigs have wings.”
      ― Lewis Carroll

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
        Explain the use of the two terms.

        "The XL pipeline will transport Canadian and US oil to......."

        Makes more sense to me. No hedging.
        A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Pirateship1982 View Post
          I like clear and concise. When organizations don't do so, especially in a deliberate communication such as a website, I tend to think they have a specific reason to not do so.
          “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
          “To talk of many things:
          Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
          Of cabbages—and kings—
          And why the sea is boiling hot—
          And whether pigs have wings.”
          ― Lewis Carroll

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
            Explain the use of the two terms.

            "The XL pipeline will transport Canadian and US oil to......."

            Makes more sense to me. No hedging.
            The folks at TransCanada probably thought that "support the significant growth of crude oil production in the United States from producers in the Bakken region of Montana and North Dakota" makes the pipeline more valuable than if it was just transporting the oil.

            There is no hedging involved. The only way a pipeline can support production growth is by moving more oil than is currently being transported.
            Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
              I like clear and concise. When organizations don't do so, especially in a deliberate communication such as a website, I tend to think they have a specific reason to not do so.
              It couldn't be anymore clear and concise than it already is.
              Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                It couldn't be anymore clear and concise than it already is.
                Yes, it can. I posted a much clearer and concise start of the statement. Simply state the pipeline will carry US and Canadian Crude. Their website does not say any such thing.

                WIll it? I don't know, they've not stated that it will.
                “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                “To talk of many things:
                Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                Of cabbages—and kings—
                And why the sea is boiling hot—
                And whether pigs have wings.”
                ― Lewis Carroll

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                  The folks at TransCanada probably thought that "support the significant growth of crude oil production in the United States from producers in the Bakken region of Montana and North Dakota" makes the pipeline more valuable than if it was just transporting the oil.

                  There is no hedging involved. The only way a pipeline can support production growth is by moving more oil than is currently being transported.
                  Freeing up how many 100's of thousands of rail cars from transporting Canadian Crude would not lower the cost to others still using rail? Has supply and demand been suspended?
                  “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                  “To talk of many things:
                  Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                  Of cabbages—and kings—
                  And why the sea is boiling hot—
                  And whether pigs have wings.”
                  ― Lewis Carroll

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                    Freeing up how many 100's of thousands of rail cars from transporting Canadian Crude would not lower the cost to others still using rail? Has supply and demand been suspended?
                    Firstly, they ship on different railroads...





                    The Bakken isn't currently competing with Canadian oil for rail transport.

                    Secondly, he Bakken Marketlink portion of the KXL is designed to transport 65,000 to 100,000 bopd from the Williston Basin (where the Bakken is) to refineries...
                    TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL Pipeline would transport oil sands crude from Canada and shale oil produced in North Dakota and Montana to a market hub in Nebraska for further delivery to Gulf Coast refineries. The pipeline would consist of 875 miles of 36-inch pipe with the capacity to transport 830,000 barrels per day.

                    [...]

                    As stated earlier, the proposed Keystone XL Project would include a lateral pipeline, the Bakken Marketlink, to provide crude oil transportation service from Baker, MT, to Cushing, OK, via the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline and from Cushing to Texas via the proposed Gulf Coast Pipeline.8 Keystone Marketlink9 estimates that the project will cost $140 million and have theability to deliver approximately 100,000 bpd of crude oil to the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline.10 Thus, of the Keystone Pipeline’s 830,000 bpd ultimate capacity, up to 12% has been set aside to transport Bakken crude oil. Keystone Marketlink currently has firm, long-term contracts to transport 65,000 bpd of the 100,000 bpd.11

                    http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41668.pdf


                    Bakken Marketlink Project

                    In the fall of 2010, TransCanada went to the market with a proposal to move Bakken crude oil production by constructing a receipt facility at Baker, Montana. The open season was successful, allowing TransCanada to sign firm term contracts for 65,000 bpd of crude oil transportation from the Bakken to key U.S. refining markets.

                    The Bakken Marketlink project will provide receipt facilities to transport up to 100,000 bpd of crude oil from the Williston Basin producing region in North Dakota and Montana, to Cushing, Oklahoma and the U.S. Gulf Coast using facilities that make up part of the Keystone Gulf Coast Expansion Project (Keystone XL).

                    TransCanada intends to proceed with the necessary regulatory applications for approvals to construct and operate the required facilities and to provide transportation services.

                    Keystone XL and the Bakken Marketlink Project are expected to be in service two years following the receipt of the Presidential Permit.

                    http://www.transcanada.com/bakken.html
                    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      See now that is a clear statement. Should plainly state that on the main page.
                      “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                      “To talk of many things:
                      Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                      Of cabbages—and kings—
                      And why the sea is boiling hot—
                      And whether pigs have wings.”
                      ― Lewis Carroll

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                        See now that is a clear statement. Should plainly state that on the main page.
                        The main page is a short summary.
                        Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                          The main page is a short summary.
                          First thing People see when they visit. See clarity comment.
                          “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                          “To talk of many things:
                          Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                          Of cabbages—and kings—
                          And why the sea is boiling hot—
                          And whether pigs have wings.”
                          ― Lewis Carroll

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                            First thing People see when they visit. See clarity comment.
                            I had no trouble understanding it.

                            There is no other way that a pipeline system from Alberta, through the Williston Basin, to mid-west and Gulf Coast refineries could support increased production from the Williston Basin.
                            Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              And another reason to fund alternate fuel sources, you really don't get a fiery explosion with hydrogen or bio-fuel cells.
                              "The people never have the power, only the illusion of it. And here is the real secret: they don't want it. The responsibility is too great to bear. It's why they are so quick to fall in line as soon as someone else takes charge."
                              "

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                                This pipeline is a critical infrastructure project for the energy security of the United States
                                Hi Dave

                                Just how does the pipeline enhance US energy security?

                                Whilst I can appreciate the ease of derailing a train, its no harder to blow a hole in a pipeline etc.

                                Regards

                                Andy H
                                "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Churchill

                                "I'm no reactionary.Christ on the Mountain! I'm as idealistic as Hell" Eisenhower

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X