Lac - Megantic train explosion rekindles
pipeline debate On Saturday, a train carrying crude oil derailed and exploded destroying an historic part of Lac - Megantic, Quebec and killing at least four 13 people..
Not exact matches
Victoria businessman David Black has thrown yet another log
on the fiery
debate over Enbridge's Northern Gateway
pipeline with his proposal to build a $ 13 - billion oil refinery
on the province's northern coast.
Black has also said he thinks his proposed refinery, by providing permanent jobs and economic benefits to British Columbians hitherto wary of oil exports, «will change the
debate on the
pipeline.»
The hurricane might have helped put climate change back
on the White House agenda, and once the Keystone
debate resumed earlier this year it didn't take long for environmentalist groups to link Canada's planned
pipeline to the devastating storm.
The accident, though, will likely shift the U.S.
debate over Keystone away from whether or not building the
pipeline would have any significant impact
on greenhouse gases (the U.S. State Department says it won't, environmentalists disagree), to whether or not Western Canada's oil is a particularly hazardous fuel.
The State Department's long - awaited environmental report
on the Keystone XL
pipeline leaves President Barack Obama with no real scientific reason to reject the nation's most fiercely
debated energy project.
The derailment and explosions, which took place around 1:15 a.m.
on Saturday, underscored a
debate in the effort to transport North America's oil across long distances: is it safer and less environmentally destructive to move huge quantities of crude oil by train or by
pipeline?
Since this
debate over
pipelines began in earnest last Fall, Jason Kenney and others have been calling
on the federal government to invoke clause 92 (10)(c) of the Constitution, which allows the federal government to exert authority over infrastructure such as
pipelines which, «although wholly situate within the Province, are before or after their Execution declared by the Parliament of Canada to be for the general Advantage of Canada or for the Advantage of Two or more of the Provinces.»
After weeks of flooding the airwaves with demands for an emergency
debate on a motion condemning BC's interference with the Trans Mountain
pipeline Jason Kenney finally got a chance to demonstrate what he meant... Continue reading →
Alberta Premier Rachel Notley wanted a respectful
debate on the
pipeline.
News Release Senator Doug Black is pleased that the Senate agreed to hold an emergency
debate tonight
on attempts by the government of British Colombia to stall the development of the Trans Mountain
pipeline.
The bill isn't in the
pipeline that could get it a floor
debate before the scheduled end of the session
on June 16.
Then
on Wednesday, a post appeared
on the Post's Wonkblog comparing the Amazon / Hachette fight to the
debate over net neutrality: «Wanting to give consumers access to its products through the biggest single
pipeline available, Hachette may relent
on the price at which it sells books to Amazon, squeezing its slim profit margins even further.»
Levi, who has exposed overstatements
on both sides of the polarized
debate, sees the
pipeline as meriting approval mainly because its impact
on climate — whether approved or denied — would be minimal when placed in global context.
Better yet would be to
debate an energy policy for the USA, including opening up exploratory oil and gas drilling including shale deposits, limiting the exponential growth of regulations currently stifling new exploration, ending the EPA regulatory war
on coal, reactivating the Keystone
pipeline, etc.; these issues have direct impact
on American jobs and future energy independence, both of which are more important issues for US voters (and presidential candidates) than any «climate»
debate.
Smith also notes that the repercussions extend beyond the
debate over any given
pipeline — under Harper, the Canadian government has become a global laggard
on basic climate science.
-LSB-...] NY Times story
on Keystone XLBy Andrew
on July 26, 2011 This article
on the
debate over GHG emissions and the Keystone XL
pipeline in the NYTimes does a really good job at highlighting the key issues... and made my day by linking to my blog.
-LSB-...] of mine
on the Keystone XL
pipeline debate.
Needless to say this has been deeply disturbing to an «ordinary Joe» (with 5 grandchildren) who has made an effort to understand the science and the politics that underlie the climate change «
debate», especially since my country has become such an important player in the fossil fuel business with its tarsands and
pipeline industries that affect us all, so I've tried to find out more about Judith Curry's recent contributions to the
debate, not so much the hair - splitting, angels
on the head of a pin, esoteric dissections of graphs and stats that I see here
on your website but the ethical stance that you take
on the larger issue of «killing» the IPCC and all it represents.
UPDATE VI: Canada's Globe and Mail newspaper reports
on how this spill is «seeping» into the
debate over the Keystone XL
pipeline:
He knows how to cut through specious arguments
on both sides of the energy - and - climate
debate while keeping in target the bigger challenges facing the U.S. and the world... [The Power Surge] is one of the best analyses of the amazing changes taking place in the energy sphere today, touching
on everything from fracking to climate change to the Keystone XL
pipeline debate.