Posts: 34
Threads: 3
Joined: Oct 2011
This is not directly Puna-related, but since we are all suffering the effects of climate change, this is an important vote coming up. Tuesday, the US Senate will vote on whether to force Obama to build the Keystone Pipeline.
Hirono is vulnerable to persuasion on this issue. As you may know, Louisiana senator Mary Landrieu is up for a runoff election on Dec 6. She has decided that if she can get the pipeline approval passed with a veto-proof majority, she will have the pipeline as a trophy, the President will have to approve it, and she will win re-election. This morning, she announced she had 59 votes. I don’t know if this is true, but she is lobbying hard and I can see her approaching especially her female colleagues and making deals.
To contact Sen. Hirono:
Honolulu office: 522-8970
Washington, DC: 202-224-6361
Or, go to <hirono.senate.gov> to email her.
Posts: 4,331
Threads: 100
Joined: Mar 2014
but since we are all suffering the effects of climate change, this is an important vote coming up.
We are?
Did you realize that not building it will continue to cause more greenhouse gas emissions since transporting the oil by rail and truck is much worse for the environment than a pipeline?
I have just emailed her my thoughts - YES - for the the pipeline.
Posts: 286
Threads: 202
Joined: Jul 2009
The legislation was approved 252-161, with 31 Democrats joining Republicans in backing a construction permit for the controversial project, which would bring oil sands from Canada to refineries in the United. The oil would not be sold here in the U.S., or reduce our prices.
Americans take the risk, while CHINA GETS the OIL. Koch Brothers get the MONEY, and America and the WORLD gets the POLLUTION.
Congress refuses to pass a Job Bill for 6 years,yet APPROVES Keystone XL PIPELINE in a HOUR.
[
!]
Scientists warn will mean "game over" for the planet. If Keystone is built, it is expected to make the Koch brothers $100 billion in profits, making them the wealthiest family in human history.
People have been protesting this Project for years, and Congress, think they are ABOVE THE LAW, TO GAIN $$
https://www.facebook.com/SierraClub/phot...72/?type=1
Posts: 10,458
Threads: 346
Joined: Apr 2009
Just a quick tip. ALL CAPS and fonts in various colours won't persuade the government nor more rational folk. Facebook links don't help. I suggest a different strategy for getting your message across.
Posts: 14,142
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
all for sale
ALL FOR SALE
Posts: 34
Threads: 3
Joined: Oct 2011
Hey, leilanidude -- I'm glad you voted your conscience. The point is, though, not to transport the stuff at all. Just leave it in the ground where it belongs. If nothing else, the stuff is toxic.. We are smart enough by now to figure out non-toxic sources of energy. Then there is the issue that the more we pump out and burn, the more inhospitable the planet will become. Just common sense. JMHO.
Posts: 180
Threads: 3
Joined: Oct 2006
Mearth, I assume by your comment that you no longer drive or ride in vehicles powered by any form of oil or use electricity created from sources of oil or fly in aircraft using oil based fuels. To do otherwise would be to disavow your orthodoxy.
Posts: 8,487
Threads: 1,033
Joined: May 2003
Personally I think we are quite capable of finding ways to run our ground transportation and electrical without fossil fuel... and it is long past time to commit to doing so.
Air travel is another thing and I would like to believe we are capable of caring about future generations of man by not being completely hell bent on burning every drop of oil as fast as we can find it. Or shall we just assume mankind is doomed and forget about life 200, 300, 400 years from now?
Hawaii island is rather well poised to meet our own needs and do away with the oil addiction. Sooner the better.
This Keystone Pipeline is a long term commitment to burning as much oil as possible as fast as possible. Bad choice.
It has been so long since any political body has thought long term versus short term that it might not be recognized if it happened.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
This reminds me of the lava diversion discussion. The same set of scenarios apply here. Common sense would say that we need to switch to hydrogen gas that can be derived directly from water and goes back to being water after use. No exploration costs with the exception of energy source for initial dissociation, geothermal can handle that. All renewable resources. This just makes sense as does saving improvements from lava inundation.
Unfortunately neither of these will be adopted due to the profits involved. The pipeline will be built and hydrogen gas will not replace petroleum based fuels anytime soon. Yes hydrogen is by far cheaper but there's no big profits involved.
So some may still not recognise the similarity.
In the big picture, only through losses are derived financial profits.
That is the current philosophy of our system.
Posts: 34
Threads: 3
Joined: Oct 2011
wax, to be opposed to the continued drilling and pumping of the dirtiest oil on the planet (tar sand) is hardly a position of orthodoxy. There are few options in early 21st century America to live independently of burning fossil fuels -- and most of those options require copious amounts of cash. This is the problem. As Wao nahele kane says (to paraphrase, please pardon), it is how our society is structured. Without alternatives, though, can't we at least limit ourselves to burning the cleaner fuels -- as we move towards those alternatives?
