General Discussion

hatrack

(65,313 posts)

55. So, 830,000 barrels/day /42 (roughly - gallons per barrel) * 22.38 (pounds carbon/gallon) . . .

Wed Nov 12, 2014, 10:41 PM

Nov 2014

= 780 million pounds (and a bit) of carbon daily - for the life of the pipeline, which comes down to 354,621 metric tons of carbon per day, every day, for as long as the toxic heart of the Athabascan continues to move its sludge.

It's probably a bit low, since some of the tar sands crude is likely to end up as diesel or bunker, which would bump end output up a bit more, to say nothing of particulate pollution, but as guesstimates go, it'll do. As additional pipelines come on line, encouraged by Keystone and leading to both Pacific and Atlantic coasts of Canada, you can double or triple this total C output.

Oops! Sorry - I'm "focusing too much" on climate, I know. Silly me! But hey, I'm sure there's a nifty trade deal in the works with China that will cut total emissions in 2025, or 2035, or 2060, or sometime after everyone on this board is dead.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

95 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

BREAKING: Lame Duck Senate Will Vote To Approve Keystone Pipeline [View all] Cali_Democrat Nov 2014 OP

What a completely, utterly worthless fucking political party villager Nov 2014 #1

So true. 840high Nov 2014 #27

I hear that the House and Senate are racing to see which one can vote it through first. razorman Nov 2014 #36

Well said. Octafish Nov 2014 #60

Oh. My. God. riderinthestorm Nov 2014 #2

Gosh, Mary Landrieu will almost CERTAINLY win her election now! hatrack Nov 2014 #3

Yes! I'd bet my last penny on it! City Lights Nov 2014 #14

Outstanding! MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #4

Literally - Xipe Totec Nov 2014 #9

Another nail in the coffin newfie11 Nov 2014 #5

But climate change isn't the problem with Keystone Recursion Nov 2014 #7

+1 nt arely staircase Nov 2014 #20

It is part of the problem inasmuch as tar sands extraction is a major polluter Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2014 #23

Canada is going to drill every barrel it can whether it goes out by train or pipe Recursion Nov 2014 #26

Then Canada can build it's own pipelines across Canada, and its own refineries Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2014 #31

Far from it! I'm sure adding 830,000 bbl/day to output capacity won't change emissions at all! hatrack Nov 2014 #28

Those 830,000 bbl/day will enter the marketplace ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #40

So, 830,000 barrels/day /42 (roughly - gallons per barrel) * 22.38 (pounds carbon/gallon) . . . hatrack Nov 2014 #55

No ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #62

No, actually, much wouldn't reach market without the pipeline NickB79 Nov 2014 #77

Is that your opinion, ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #82

Ah yeah SammyWinstonJack Nov 2014 #6

But they can't take time to approve the Attorney General nomination? Blue_In_AK Nov 2014 #8

Senate Democrats have lost their way. earthside Nov 2014 #13

That was my first thought. They claim they won't have time until "next year" BlueJazz Nov 2014 #19

Unfortunately G_j Nov 2014 #10

And POTUS will sign it with glee. notrightatall Nov 2014 #11

Maybe, maybe not. Cha Nov 2014 #15

want to bet? nt arely staircase Nov 2014 #22

Unfortunately, yes, I will take that bet. notrightatall Nov 2014 #29

ok arely staircase Nov 2014 #32

OK. notrightatall Nov 2014 #33

hope you are wrong arely staircase Nov 2014 #37

You're gonna lose this bet, hate to say... alcibiades_mystery Nov 2014 #44

I bet he kicks the can down the road arely staircase Nov 2014 #46

It will pass, and he will sign it alcibiades_mystery Nov 2014 #47

It is doubtful that a pocket veto would be available to the WH. tritsofme Nov 2014 #74

Obama has been kicking and obstructing this since he took office in 2009. freshwest Nov 2014 #86

+1 nt arely staircase Nov 2014 #89

I want a piece of that action as well davidpdx Nov 2014 #87

I'm so disgusted with these assholes... Ilsa Nov 2014 #12

This isn't about spineless democrats, it's about democrats lob1 Nov 2014 #57

So get a hold of your Senators and Call and email Harry Reid Cha Nov 2014 #16

yeah that'll do it BlindTiresias Nov 2014 #18

yeah, better to complain on the internet arely staircase Nov 2014 #24

Same outcome BlindTiresias Nov 2014 #52

whatever floats your boat arely staircase Nov 2014 #54

So you're going to blame voters again? Marr Nov 2014 #45

So we don't get an AG confirmation but we get this bullshit. No wonder minorities didn't turn out. craigmatic Nov 2014 #17

What the Hell - the pipeline passes through all "Red" states Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2014 #21

That was a quick surrender. Can't wait to see what else they want to give up neverforget Nov 2014 #25

Now, now! Let' use our "bipartisan" voices, shall we? hatrack Nov 2014 #30

Hey! PAProgressive28 Nov 2014 #48

Not being forced into law Proud Liberal Dem Nov 2014 #58

I vote for Democrats and this is what I get? procon Nov 2014 #34

I think most Democrats dont see what the big deal is with this pipeline. DCBob Nov 2014 #35

Are we, the American people, going to benefit from the harvest? snappyturtle Nov 2014 #53

Maybe they'll vote no, and then filibuster later! It could happen. Zorra Nov 2014 #38

Fucking spineless assholes... truebrit71 Nov 2014 #39

Landrieu is toast, even approving the Keystone Pipeline wouldn't get her reelected davidpdx Nov 2014 #88

I kpete Nov 2014 #41

FWIW LiberalElite Nov 2014 #42

Nobody objects that it would be dishonest for departing members to vote on this, like AG alcibiades_mystery Nov 2014 #43

Completely irrelevent. They have no power to approve it or disapprove it. Darb Nov 2014 #49

Do they really think this will save her seat? PAProgressive28 Nov 2014 #50

Can you imagine if it's close, and they Don't take a vote on this? Calista241 Nov 2014 #93

Not to worry. Obama will surely veto it. Won't he? Tierra_y_Libertad Nov 2014 #51

They probably have the votes to override a veto madville Nov 2014 #64

Maddow Ripping the Senate Democrats tonight. earthside Nov 2014 #56

Express Yourself. Half-Century Man Nov 2014 #59

Thank goodness for President Obama bigwillq Nov 2014 #61

Only about 13 Democrats will need to jump ship madville Nov 2014 #69

If they jump ship, they should just continue jumping to the other party (nt) bigwillq Nov 2014 #72

And let the Republicans have 70 seats ? Yieks! yeoman6987 Nov 2014 #83

Veto, for fuck's sake. VETO! Prophet 451 Nov 2014 #63

That's the problem here, a veto likely will be overridden madville Nov 2014 #65

I really can't see an override happening Prophet 451 Nov 2014 #66

They will only potentially need 13 Democrats madville Nov 2014 #67

The same Congress that passes the law has to override the veto alcibiades_mystery Nov 2014 #68

This will surely get passed in the new Congress madville Nov 2014 #71

That's certainly true alcibiades_mystery Nov 2014 #73

I don't think the Administration's madville Nov 2014 #76

Well, we heard from a million people that Clinton only signed DADT because his veto would be alcibiades_mystery Nov 2014 #78

They couldn't even wait until officially becoming the minority to capitulate? LondonReign2 Nov 2014 #70

Well, the keystone states want this taught_me_patience Nov 2014 #75

Stock up on potable water. nt silvershadow Nov 2014 #79

And they wonder why people didn't bother to vote. nt dflprincess Nov 2014 #80

if there is so much sweetapogee Nov 2014 #81

Obama jalan48 Nov 2014 #84

I don't think most people appreciate... Gumboot Nov 2014 #85

Kick for the Quislings LondonReign2 Nov 2014 #90

Our Kabuki Democracy at its best! marmar Nov 2014 #91

They've really let it all hang out in the last 14 years. We should have an award show in their honor adirondacker Nov 2014 #95

So they are going to give up the Keystone Pipeline without getting anything in return? krawhitham Nov 2014 #92

That's the difference between the Republicans and Democrats, I suppose deutsey Nov 2014 #94