Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Argus

Pipeline protestors need to be jailed

Recommended Posts

Natural gas is way cleaner than coal. This we KNOW.

This whole leakage thing is a red hearing of an argument. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for replacements: outside nuclear...not much to choose from. But future investment in orbital solar collection would certainly be a goal worthy of the human race.

Oh, Elon......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jacee said:

Fiddling with methane leaks while the world burns ... ya, no. There isn't time. There are better choices. 

You contradict yourself, because supporting one faction against another is a colonialist divide and conquer strategy, and you definitely do "presume to tell indigenous people what is best for them."

Indigenous communities will decide for themselves, in their own way. CGL's bribes are hard to turn down in intentionally impoverished communities, but the ancient pull of solidarity and cultural continuity among their people is very strong too. 

An alternate route avoiding ecologically and culturally sensitive areas may still provide the necessary way forward. It remains to be seen. 'Elected' Band Council members all belong to a Clan too, so all have input through the traditional governance model too. I think it is very likely that a united nation will emerge behind the hereditary Chiefs in the current (overdue) Federal government task of clarifying Wet'suet'en rights and title. 

Then we'll see what they collectively decide about the pipeline. 

It’s continued extortionate scam and hustle, driving away investment that would lift many communities.  This is the real story: Fringe Green Fascists hijack Indigenous democratic decision-making and shut down economic opportunities.  A small minority of uninformed and manipulated elderly are empowered by this fringe to lean on their hereditary authority to bring down the interests of the impacted communities and the will of the majority of Indigenous.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

As for replacements: outside nuclear...not much to choose from. But future investment in orbital solar collection would certainly be a goal worthy of the human race.

Oh, Elon......

Invest in Tesla. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

Invest in Tesla. 

It's plummeting right now, down 25% in less than a month, but it's still over $700 which seems irrational.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jacee said:

Fiddling with methane leaks while the world burns ... ya, no. There isn't time. There are better choices. 

You contradict yourself, because supporting one faction against another is a colonialist divide and conquer strategy, and you definitely do "presume to tell indigenous people what is best for them."

Indigenous communities will decide for themselves, in their own way. CGL's bribes are hard to turn down in intentionally impoverished communities, but the ancient pull of solidarity and cultural continuity among their people is very strong too. 

It remains to be seen. 'Elected' Band Council members all belong to a Clan too, so all have input through the traditional governance model too. I think it is very likely that a united nation will emerge behind the hereditary Chiefs in the current (overdue) Federal government task of clarifying Wet'suet'en rights and title. 

Then we'll see what they collectively decide about the pipeline. An alternate route avoiding ecologically and culturally sensitive areas may still provide the necessary way forward.

You would prefer coal?  As for your choices, see "fantasist" from my earlier post.

No, I support those who were elected.  Not necessarily those who agree with me on pipelines.  I would actually still support the elected leaders if the roles were reversed.  I suspect your allegience would be to whatever faction agreed with you.

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

“If that much gets away into the atmosphere”

”If” is the keyword.  

The new regulations brought in by Canada as of January, 2020 should prevent this problem.  Read the article about this on the International Energy Agency website you cited.  Here is a passage:

”In addition, upstream facilities that produce or receive at least 60,000 standard m3(around 45 metric tonnes) of natural gas each year must inspect particular components three times a year for leaks, using a portable monitoring or optical gas-imaging instrument. Operators must repair actionable leaks within 30 days or during the next planned shutdown. Offshore facilities must monitor leaks in real-time with a gas detection system.”

Just because problems may emerge doesn’t mean they can’t be solved.  You don’t shut down an important component of our economy because of fixable problems.

Shut down? Slow down maybe. Gas is ramping up, under false advertising. That won't fly much longer with savvy investors, nor with China that is putting its efforts into transitioning from coal directly to renewables. 

Why would investors put their money into 'IFFY' gas, only a proposed 'interim solution' anyway and already stained by false advertising, when we all know that the next and lasting boom will be renewable energy, a sure thing that can rollout massively and swiftly? 

All we have to do is create a free market in energy by switching some fossil fuel subsidies to renewable energy to provide a balanced and level playing field. 

Why are fossil fuel supporters so attached to a corporate welfare nanny oil-state? It makes no sense, as it's a huge burden and constraint on a free energy market and free enterprise at a time when we most need an inventive and entrepreneurial approach. 

Edited by jacee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jacee said:

Shut down? Slow down maybe. Gas is ramping up, under false advertising. That won't fly much longer with savvy investors, nor with China that is putting its efforts into transitioning from coal directly to renewables. 

Why would investors put their money into 'IFFY' gas, only a proposed 'interim solution' anyway and already stained by false advertising, when we all know that the next and lasting boom will be renewable energy, a sure thing that can rollout massively and swiftly? 

All we have to do is create a free market in energy by switching some fossil fuel subsidies to renewable energy to provide a balanced and level playing field. 

Why are fossil fuel supporters so attached to a corporate welfare nanny oil-state? It makes no sense, as it's a huge burden and constraint on a free energy market and free enterprise at a time when we most need an inventive and entrepreneurial approach. 

 

It's -20 C this morning.

What do you propose to do about that besides having warm thoughts again?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

It's plummeting right now, down 25% in less than a month, but it's still over $700 which seems irrational.

I bet it will be worth thousands per share

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I bet it will be worth thousands per share

Betting on clean energy while pushing dirty energy? Splitting your energy investments is wise short term perhaps, but we all know that clean energy is the real long term winner. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I bet it will be worth thousands per share

I am holding some, but I have been taking profits with this irrational exuberance of late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind folks, not all investment is betting, in fact most of it is not, oil companies are low margin, but they pay big dividends

People don't hold them for the same reason they hold Tesla.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jacee said:

Shut down? Slow down maybe. Gas is ramping up, under false advertising. That won't fly much longer with savvy investors, nor with China that is putting its efforts into transitioning from coal directly to renewables. 

Why would investors put their money into 'IFFY' gas, only a proposed 'interim solution' anyway and already stained by false advertising, when we all know that the next and lasting boom will be renewable energy, a sure thing that can rollout massively and swiftly? 

All we have to do is create a free market in energy by switching some fossil fuel subsidies to renewable energy to provide a balanced and level playing field. 

Why are fossil fuel supporters so attached to a corporate welfare nanny oil-state? It makes no sense, as it's a huge burden and constraint on a free energy market and free enterprise at a time when we most need an inventive and entrepreneurial approach. 

That switch is much harder than you think for many reasons.  It’s not just about inconsistent supply and storage (capacitor/battery), nor is it about building the infrastructure, it’s about the sheer megawatt volume required to power our economy, including electric vehicles.  Tesla-type roofs and batteries, if properly added to the building code and incentivized through retrofit tax breaks/subsidies could really help, but that will take time.  The environmental toll taken in battery production is another issue.  The chemical extraction for those batteries is problematic.  Nuclear is a relatively clean non-renewable power source, but it is expensive to build and maintain.  Canada does have a big uranium supply.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

It's -20 C this morning.

What do you propose to do about that besides having warm thoughts again?

 

It's +10 here, and I'm planning for the electric future. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jacee said:

It's +10 here, and I'm planning for the electric future. 

 

 

That's not saying anything.

What do you propose replaces natural gas if it's so evil? Keeping in mind it's -20 right NOW...not just in theory.

Well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, jacee said:

It's +10 here, and I'm planning for the electric future. 

 

How will you make your electricity?  I have a solar system on my roof.  It cost $33000.00.  I sell into the grid and still receive high electricity bills.  It doesn’t offset my costs nearly enough.  

Also, the payment I receive per kilowatt is double the market cost, guaranteed for 20 years, subsidized by taxpayers, and it still isn’t profitable.  

Edited by Zeitgeist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

How will you make your electricity?  I have a solar system on my roof.  It cost $33000.00.  I sell into the grid and still receive high electricity bills.  It doesn’t offset my costs nearly enough.  

This is the thing, the Green Energy Future hasn't arrived until it is turning a steady profit, in the meantime, there's no reason to sell the oil company when they are paying you a dividend

Green Energy is a long term bet, oil company is a steady earner, so it's not either or.

Edited by Dougie93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

How will you make your electricity?  I have a solar system on my roof.  It cost $33000.00.  I sell into the grid and still receive high electricity bills.  It doesn’t offset my costs nearly enough.  

 

Solar on Earth is generally way too intermittent to be reliable. Supplemental only.

But a massive collector out at the L1 point constantly bathed in sunlight would be a different tale... getting the power to Earth...there's the challenge...and keeping the collector cool. Various different methods have been proposed...all need better space based technology.

Edited by DogOnPorch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Solar on Earth is generally way too intermittent to be reliable. Supplemental only.

But a massive collector out at the L1 point constantly bathed in sunlight would be a different tale...but getting the power to Earth...there's the challenge...and keeping the collector cool. Various different methods have been proposed...all need better space based technology.

I’m extremely interested in technology to transmit electricity through sound waves.  Wireless electricity transmission.  A California company is working on it.  It would literally end the combustion economy and, with our own portable power receptacles, we could become superhuman.  I’m writing a sci-fi book about it.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main problem for the Greentards is not investors, the main problem is that Wind Farms ! turned out to be investor driven pump and dump scams which bilked the taxpayer

Investors are happy to take subsidies from the Kathleen Wynne's of the world, but it's the taxpayer footing the bill.

Oil on the other hand, actually produces revenues for the taxpayer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

That switch is much harder than you think for many reasons.  It’s not just about inconsistent supply and storage (capacitor/battery), nor is it about building the infrastructure, it’s about the sheer megawatt volume required to power our economy, including electric vehicles.  Tesla-type roofs and batteries, if properly added to the building code and incentivized through retrofit tax breaks/subsidies could really help, but that will take time.  The environmental toll taken in battery production is another issue.  The chemical extraction for those batteries is problematic.  Nuclear is a relatively clean non-renewable power source, but it is expensive to build and maintain.  Canada does have a big uranium supply.  

Thanks for your uninformed 'expertise' (that can't even comprehend that new information has just doomed the 'interim gas boom')  but ... I'll trust the free market and entrepreneurial spirits to provide the best solutions, and the best investments. 

The switch of government subsidies to free the energy market is all that is required. 

Hardline 'conservatives' ... so attached to their corporate welfare nanny-oil-state's false profits that exist only when propped up by taxpayers... now that's certainly a self-serving contradiction!  Lol 

What ever happened to conservatives' spirit of free enterprise, fair competition, free markets ... ???!! 

Transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable energy is a simple matter of lifting the constraints on the free market. 

Are you saying that conservatives don't believe in a free market in energy? 

I actually don't really care what conservatives think these days. They are a minority and have made themselves irrelevant. It is just ludicrous to see conservatives so attached to the public teat.  Two-faced much?  'Welfare for fossil fuels, but not for people'?  Lol 

Edited by jacee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

I’m extremely interested in technology to transmit electricity through sound waves.  Wireless electricity transmission.  A California company is working on it.  It would literally end the combustion economy and, with our own portable power receptacles, we could become superhuman.  I’m writing a sci-fi book about it.  

 

The method I describe uses similar technology...laser or microwave band transmission.

Laser focus & microwave transmission needs to be worked on for such a tech to be feasible to begin with...can't have a 100 mile wide collector on Earth...etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

That's not saying anything.

What do you propose replaces natural gas if it's so evil? Keeping in mind it's -20 right NOW...not just in theory.

Well?

Nobody's replacing anything "right now". You're being as ridiculous as a Wexiteer.  Lol 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jacee said:

Notice: Nothing about gas in there, just coal and renewables.

To cut pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, China has promised an “energy revolution” aimed at dramatically reducing its reliance on coal.

And you trust the Chinese Communist Party, do you?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...