Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

this is only kind of true. WHile rail IS more expensive you can't compare a barrel in a pipeline with a barrel on a train. Pipelines need to carry diluted oil products to make them flow and then sometimes return that back to the source, so there's extra flow. Pipelines use far LESS energy to transport which is kind of ironic; and they are way, way safer.

I don't see this as an environmental move based on the political signalling it buys and other moves made by the US administration. If we agree that we want to reduce demand for certain types of energy than the first thing we should do is promote FF from Canada that are relatively clean, highly regulated and produced by a trusted democracy over the ones that will be used to fill this void from 3rd-world dictators with no environmental controls.



The Natural Resources Defense Council says:

>Tar sands extraction emits up to three times more global warming pollution than does producing the same quantity of conventional crude. It also depletes and pollutes freshwater resources and creates giant ponds of toxic waste. Refining the sticky black substance produces piles of petroleum coke, a hazardous by-product. “This isn’t your grandfather’s typical oil,” [senior policy analyst for NRDC’s Canada project] says. “It’s nasty stuff.”

https://www.nrdc.org/stories/dirty-fight-over-canadian-tar-s...


This is unrelated to the claim that transport by pipeline is less environmentally harmful than transport by train or truck.


I was responding to the parent's last sentence:

>If we agree that we want to reduce demand for certain types of energy than the first thing we should do is promote FF from Canada that are relatively clean, highly regulated and produced by a trusted democracy over the ones that will be used to fill this void from 3rd-world dictators with no environmental controls.

I was pointing out that tar-sands oil probably does not meet the "relatively clean" criteria.


If they can't transport as much by train or truck (due to capacity/expense) then thats a gain for the environment.

If a big fat permanent pipeline makes it more cost effective to extract and sell even more tar-sand oil, then thats a loss for the environment.


Seems related? Making Canadian crude less competitive means less tar sands oil extraction.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: