Quote:
Originally Posted by CampbellsTransgressions
"It's only 5000 barrels" becomes a weak argument when the oil seeps into a river.
|
I think the argument still stands. The consequences can be mitigated without bankrupting the pipeline owning company. For example the spill last year in the North Sask was 225 m^3 (1400 barrels) and from what I can tell the long term affects have been limited.
And again you need to provide the alternative for the oil supply and compare its affects. Pipelines are a clear case of better than any other alternative.
With Trump defending coal the clear answer is switch to natural gas. It's lower cost and cleaner. Where is that option for pipelines. You can be a billionaire overnight if you figure it out.