[lbo-talk] Obama to reject Keystone

123hop at comcast.net 123hop at comcast.net
Sat Jan 21 21:47:19 PST 2012


Yeah, but the problem with the tar sand from what I understand is that it takes more energy to get the oil out of the sand then the oil delivers once out. Getting the oil out of the sand will result in an ecological catastrophe.

Madness,

Joanna

----- Original Message ----- On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 09:23:29PM +0200, lbo83235 wrote:
> On Jan 19, 2012, at 12:31 AM, Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> > That's an answer to why Obama is playing this game. Not to why enviros care. If they develop that shit, kiss the climate goodbye.
>
> I think Doug is right. From what I know, there are NIMBY / aquifer concerns in play at some local levels, but the real issue is that releasing the carbon contained in the tar sands basically means game over - unless maybe you're "in on the ground floor" with the Koch Bros' investments in geo-engineering.
>
> What I don't get is, why even make the public rejection right now? Is there really serious pressure around this in the U.S. at the moment?

Have to second what Doug says--there's a ridiculous amount of tar sand out there, IIRC enough to make Canada look like Saudi Arabia a couple times over. For it to be profitable IIRC oil only has to be about $50/barrel. Ask a Peak Oiler about it sometime if you want to watch an astounding display of mental acrobatics that end with falling off the trapeze.

I hadn't realized that the Koch brothers were into geo-engineering... I know they fund all those paleo-anthropology PBS programs but I didn't figure them for sci-fi fans.

-- Nathan ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list