@westside-steve said:

1) wtf are you talking about with union road workers? i seriously dont' have the slightest idea what that means so i couldn't be crying about it. Check to see first if someone has any idea of your super cool reference. If they don't, you're kind of just throwing shit in for fun than.

2) It would make no dent in our energy independance. That's a lie spoonfed to you by the pipeline people,

@logicisforsquares said:

Teh boom in ND that is starting to die isn't it? I get it, a few peeps got filthy rich in ND. Overall though that so called boom hasn't done shit for us. And i know that boom is dying out cause i have family in PA in the Steel mills....it kept them going for awhile it's true, but now it's pretty much over.

@westside-steve said:

Just to be the devil's advocate, better or worse than Chernobyl?

Better than Chernobyl by far. Chernobyl is still not particularly safe to inhabit 30 years later

@logicisforsquares said:

1) Don't build a nuclear power plant on a fault line

2) Don't use equipment/technology that is decades out of date

France seems to do just fine with it.

Nuclear power is out best option going forward. We need to educate the public on this energy source and gain public - ... who the fuck am I kidding. 28% of Americans take the Bible literally. We're still arguing over the existence of man made climate change. People are fucking stupid. It will be a long time before the American public is ready for widespread nuclear power.

@westside-steve said:

You're probably right. GreenPeace is full of hippy morons

@logicisforsquares said:

SMH, neither you nor I are capable of truly grasping how any of these accidents will resonate through all the ecosystems, economic systems, etc. so let's no be foolhardy enough to act like we know the future. However we can grasp that both nuclear energy and fossil fuels, oil and natural gas, have had negative impacts on both the environment and the economy.

@baconhound said:

Oh, so the ocean where the spill happened is completely unuseable for the next thousand years?

@westside-steve said:

Good question. To be honest I really don't know how this will all shake scientifically or economically and it's probably speculation at this point by ecologists and economists. I will say this though Exxon and Horizon were worse from my perspective because they happened closer to the US.

@baconhound said:

Exxon Valdez, Deep Water Horizon.

Just to be the devil's advocate, better or worse than Chernobyl?

WSS

@logicisforsquares said:

Exxon Valdez, Deep Water Horizon.

@mld-woody said:

Right. The public is stupid and easily controlled with fear mongering propaganda (.... cough.... )

Nuclear Power sounds scary. That's all a lot of people need. Fuck the fact it is probably our best option and needs to researched and invested in.

High time to quit being pussies about nuclear energy.

WSS

@mld-woody said:

Nuclear power is just fine but the public image took a huge hit after Fukishima. People were already iffy after what happened at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.

So we could sit and have a conversation about an energy source that scares the shit out of people or we could discuss a pipeline that could be realistically built soon if politicians didn't make it an ordeal.

@baconhound said:

And, the results of legalization keep pouring in

Nuclear Power sounds scary. That's all a lot of people need. Fuck the fact it is probably our best option and needs to researched and invested in.

@baconhound said:

Cool. Get started on getting everyone on board with building nuclear power plants after Fukishima and we will have this conversation again. Until then, I will keep the conversation grounded in reality.

@fairhooker11 said:

http://www.npr.org/2015/02/25/389008046/a-hard-look-at-the-risks-of-transporting-oil-on-rail-tanker-cars

and the railroad is already overused getting the petrol from Canada & ND down to the refineries

to the point of possible hazardous accidents.

Arent you libs against that? no?

CSX has rail workers who are facing layoffs due to the slow down in coal. The Pipeline would give these people work.

@clevfan4life said:

That pipeline wouldn't make the slightest dent in our unemployment numbers. Why are infrastructure jobs ridiculed as shovel ready rubbish that disappear after the project is done but people act like this pipeline will spawn magic fairies that will spread out across the continent bestowing employment on all of us like some harry potter bullshit?

You realize the jobs that are created to support a pipeline operation? It isn't just the people working on the pipeline. Service industry people make $16 an hour to support the boom right now in North Dakota. I work in oil and gas. It isn't just the project. It is all of the supporting industries.

and the railroad is already overused getting the petrol from Canada & ND down to the refineries

to the point of possible hazardous accidents.

Arent you libs against that? no?

@clevfan4life said:

That pipeline wouldn't make the slightest dent in our unemployment numbers. Why are infrastructure jobs ridiculed as shovel ready rubbish that disappear after the project is done but people act like this pipeline will spawn magic fairies that will spread out across the continent bestowing employment on all of us like some harry potter bullshit?

And of course it would make a dent. It would also make a dent our energy independence.

WSS