Filling a gas-powered vehicle can still be cheaper than charging an electric one

Joined
May 8, 2019
Messages
61
Location
Illinois
There is a risk factor for everything. The alternative to a pipeline would be train or trucks. If the pipeline is underwater then ships are the alternative.

A lot of people live right over a pipeline or close to one. They don’t even know it.
We are at risk just waking up everyday (if you are that fortunate) but to run a tar sand pipeline anywhere near such a crucial water supply isn't a risk it's sheer stupidity with a little greed cherry on top.....
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2017
Messages
24,075
Location
...
We are at risk just waking up everyday (if you are that fortunate) but to run a tar sand pipeline anywhere near such a crucial water supply isn't a risk it's sheer stupidity with a little greed cherry on top.....


All water is crucial. The big city where I live has wells right in town and not far away a jet fuel pipeline that supplies the nearby AFB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FZ1

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,091
Location
Ontario, Canada
We are at risk just waking up everyday (if you are that fortunate) but to run a tar sand pipeline anywhere near such a crucial water supply isn't a risk it's sheer stupidity with a little greed cherry on top.....
Why does it matter that it's a "tar sand" (bitumen) pipeline, why specifically call that out? It sounds more than a bit prejudiced against Canadian-sourced oil than just being against a pipeline near an aquifer (which I can support) if it can be avoided.
 
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
2,345
Location
USA
The big issue is that most ev owners aren't paying road taxes when charging. Add that States are looking to charge road taxes and the fact that the usa doesn't produce enough electricity to support large-scale adoption of ev's.
 
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
13,008
Location
Jupiter, Florida
Something to keep in mind, even the very efficient Tesla cars use well North of 400-440 watt hours per mile at today's higher highway speeds. While fuel powered vehicles also use more fuel at high speeds, the difference sometimes evens out. Accounting for charger and charging losses, 1Kwh purchased per 2 high speed miles is not unusual. At 43 cents per Kwh at Charge America (without a contract) that's over 20c per mile.

By way of comparison, a Nissan Altima is about 13 cents per mile on high speed highway drives, at $5 per gallon.
 
Joined
May 8, 2019
Messages
61
Location
Illinois
Why does it matter that it's a "tar sand" (bitumen) pipeline, why specifically call that out? It sounds more than a bit prejudiced against Canadian-sourced oil than just being against a pipeline near an aquifer (which I can support) if it can be avoided.
We have ~40 relatives on 2 reservations and in Nebraska that a spill could directly affect, we are not far from Kalamazoo and remember all the issues from that spill, that's why it matters to me........I have no issues with a pipeline ran along another route or where the oil/tar sand comes from so you should delete your prejudiced accusation from the post.
 
Last edited:

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,091
Location
Ontario, Canada
We have ~40 relatives on 2 reservations and in Nebraska that a spill could directly affect, we are not far from Kalamazoo and remember all the issues from that spill, that's why it matters to me........I have no issues with a pipeline ran along another route or where the oil/tar sand comes from so you should delete your prejudiced accusation from the post.

That doesn't explain why you specifically called it out as a "tar sand pipeline" instead of just "an oil pipeline" or just "pipeline". Everybody would know what you are talking about and it wouldn't sound so biased against a specific type of oil which only comes from one place, which is Alberta, Canada.

As I said, I have no problem with advocacy for diversion away from aquifers if feasible, and in fact support that action.
 
Joined
May 8, 2019
Messages
61
Location
Illinois
That doesn't explain why you specifically called it out as a "tar sand pipeline" instead of just "an oil pipeline" or just "pipeline". Everybody would know what you are talking about and it wouldn't sound so biased against a specific type of oil which only comes from one place, which is Alberta, Canada.

As I said, I have no problem with advocacy for diversion away from aquifers if feasible, and in fact support that action.
Because it is in fact a tar sand pipeline and NO most people don't know the difference between crude, refined and tar sand pipelines nor the differing level and requirements of cleanup for each............based on tar sand's volatility I give Canada a ton of credit for being smart enough to ship that stuff asap and have it refined elsewhere.
 
Last edited:

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,091
Location
Ontario, Canada
Because it is in fact a tar sand pipeline
Being an oil sands pipeline, so what? Why does that have any bearing on the argument of it not being built near an aquifer? It doesn't, that's my point. Any oil pipeline that can avoid being constructed near precious water resources, should be. It doesn't matter what specific grade or type of product is in the pipe.
and NO most people don't know the difference between crude, refined and tar sand pipelines nor the differing level and requirements of cleanup for each............based on tar sand's volatility I give Canada a ton of credit for being smart enough to ship that stuff asap and have it refined elsewhere.
But that's not germane, unless you are specifically against this particular type of pipeline/product and not others and that's what I was reacting to/calling out.
 
Joined
May 8, 2019
Messages
61
Location
Illinois
Being an oil sands pipeline, so what? Why does that have any bearing on the argument of it not being built near an aquifer? It doesn't, that's my point. Any oil pipeline that can avoid being constructed near precious water resources, should be. It doesn't matter what specific grade or type of product is in the pipe.

But that's not germane, unless you are specifically against this particular type of pipeline/product and not others and that's what I was reacting to/calling out.
agreed, there should be more consideration in pipeline routing in general.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Messages
21
Location
Michigan
ICE are still the only way to go if you have a few hundred mile (or more) road trip. Glorified golf carts are fine for going to Walmart and back.
 

CKN

Joined
Oct 14, 2014
Messages
9,398
Location
Utah
ICE are still the only way to go if you have a few hundred mile (or more) road trip. Glorified golf carts are fine for going to Walmart and back.
Infrastructure will be taken care of in the coming years. It's already happening. Your taxes are paying for it.
 
Top