Off Topic

[The_Doc_Man]

Gotta always watch out for the gingers.

 

[AccessBlaster]

 

[AccessBlaster]

 

[AccessBlaster]

 

[Steve R.]

And how much more energy (oil/gasoline) is consumed by moving oil/gas by rail and/or truck over using a pipeline?
More energy consumption means greater greenhouse gas emission. The use of trucks means more man-hours (person-hours) of labor are necessary to move the oil from source to destination. Moving a product by truck means greater traffic congestion and greater potential for an accident. I don't know about rail, but it would seem to be more expensive than moving a product through a pipeline. Canceling the construction of oil/gas pipelines does not promote a "green" energy program.

 

[Isaac]

View attachment 89697

Stomach-turning-crazy stuff

 

[AccessBlaster]

 

[The_Doc_Man]

And how much more energy (oil/gasoline) is consumed by moving oil/gas by rail and/or truck over using a pipeline?
More energy consumption means greater greenhouse gas emission. The use of trucks means more man-hours (person-hours) of labor are necessary to move the oil from source to destination. Moving a product by truck means greater traffic congestion and greater potential for an accident. I don't know about rail, but it would seem to be more expensive than moving a product through a pipeline. Canceling the construction of oil/gas pipelines does not promote a "green" energy program.

Before I worked for the U.S. Government as a contractor, I was employed by a company that made monitoring systems for petroleum product pipelines - crude oil, refined oil of various weights, and even some specialty cases where we pumped in saline solution to displace oil from pockets (mostly in Venezuela for the Maraven Corporation). Interstate pipelines transport literally MILLIONS of gallons of oil per day. When properly monitored with state-of-the-art equipment, small leaks can be detected before they become big leaks. The safety record for properly monitored pipelines is actually quite good.

There was one pipeline we did (have to hide names for legal reasons) that was about 1500 miles, from somewhere in the USA midwest that ended up in California. A pipeline that long, when full, contains 633,556 barrels of product. When dealing with heavy crude or thick refined oil, don't expect more than 5 mph down the pipeline, but for a 4-foot transmission line, that 5 mph is 50,684 barrels of oil PER DAY. Yes, it takes a while to get stuff where you wanted it, but ... the biggest oil tanker trucks typically hold at most about 280.6 barrels. The pipeline typically requires three or four operators working in shifts around the clock. How many truckers will it take to transport the oil? Maybe 200? AND the truckers are on the road whereas the pipelines are not. So traffic accidents aren't likely to spill a ton of refined oil or gas all over the street.

This is definitely a case for being beholden to environmental groups that are not aware of the risks implicit in shutting down pipelines.

 

[Steve R.]

@The_Doc_Man: Your post prompted me to do a bit of research to add some credibility to the cost of transporting hydrocarbons. Forbes Magazine had the following article: Transporting Oil: Why Pipelines Still Rule.

Speaking of cost, pipeline is also far and away the cheapest mode of transport. Ranges vary based primarily on distance traveled and grades of crude, but pipeline transportation generally ranges between $2 and $4 per barrel. Rail transport typically costs 2-5 times pipeline transport. Barge varies significantly by distance, but is commonly cheaper than rail and more expensive than pipeline. Finally, trucking is the most expensive and is usually cost prohibitive except for shorter haul shipments.

 

[Isaac]

[satire from the Babylon Bee, particularly good one]

You Think Dr. Seuss Is Bad? Here Are 12 More Children's Books That Should Be Canceled IMMEDIATELY

Your child's bookshelves are crawling with racism and toxic problematicness.

But don't worry -- it's nothing we can't fix with a little good old-fashioned book burning.

There are hundreds of children's books that could use a good canceling. But let's just start with these nine for now:

1. Horton Hears a Who -- This Seuss book hasn't been canceled yet, but it sure needs to be. The book claims a person is a person no matter how small, showing that Seuss hates women's rights and wants to control their bodies.

2. Chicka Chicka Boom Boom -- Prominently features the letter "Q."

3. Every Berenstain Bears book -- These books perpetuate the idea of a nuclear family with traditional values. They also appropriated furry culture.

4. Clifford the Big Red Dog -- He’s literally a dog whistle for far-right neo-Nazi extremists and their affinity to the color red.

5. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory -- Teaches kids there should be consequences for bad behavior without even considering the child's race, ethnicity, or history of being oppressed.

6. The Very Hungry Caterpillar -- This is book encourages kids to consume and consume, destroying the environment for their own personal gain.

7. Goodnight Moon -- Honestly, it's probably not racist, but if we have to read this book to our kids one more time we're gonna die.

8. The Jungle Book -- Insensitive and stereotypical of Indian culture. Mowgli is called "man-cub," and don't even get us started on that loaded term. How has this not been canceled already?

9. If You Give A Mouse A Cookie -- Teaches kids about cause and effect-- which, as we all know from corporate anti-racism training, is an aspect of white culture not shared by other people groups.

10. The Tuttle Twins -- Free markets? Individual responsibility? American history? Are you kidding? Where do we even start? We literally can't even with this one.

11. The Little Engine That Could -- Implies that hard work and effort can help you overcome challenges, which is pretty tone-deaf considering oppressed groups aren't able to benefit from hard work.

12. Genderqueer Marxist Baby -- Actually this one seems fine.

Get out the kerosene if you love your children.

 

[AccessBlaster]

 

[moke123]

I find the whole Dr. Suess controversy pretty funny. Its old news from 2 or 3 years ago when the Suess Museum removed a mural. My daughter was just there a couple weeks ago. He lived in Springfield, Ma. not too far from me.

Now a copy of " And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street" in good condition is selling for $12,000.

 

[FrankRuperto]

@ColinEssex

At least the twin towers of the cathedral stayed up

... - unlike others

It's clear that you're referring to the World Trade Center Twin Towers... Not cool, shame on you

 

[AccessBlaster]

Mission accomplished.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Probably will weed out more than just conservatives, but... her life, her choice.

 

[Steve R.]

Step by step, they're coming for you. The walls are closing in. Another cartoon icon targeted for "cancellation". The Sun reports that: Pepe Le Pew "promotes" ra** culture. Loony Tunes was a great cartoon series. Given the hysteria surrounding "cancel culture", our cartoon characters, over time, will be slowly be "erased". Reminiscent of the Twilight Zone episode: And When the Sky Was Opened.

 

[AccessBlaster]

 

[Steve R.]

"Soylent Green" is real meat. Slurm would be an excellent companion drink for a "Soylent Green" meal. The image is ambiguous concerning whether "Soylent Green" is actually real meat or something else, but the implication is that the author considers it fake meat. Given how "Soylent Green" is made, the author of the image may want to reconsider.

Thorn boards a truck transporting bodies from the euthanasia center to a recycling plant, where the secret is revealed – human corpses are being converted into Soylent Green.

 

[AccessBlaster]

This is a heartbreaker

BuzzFeed has axed 47 HuffPost employees after acquiring the far-left publication last year.

In addition to laying off roughly a third of HuffPost’s writers, BuzzFeed also plans to cut HuffPost Canada, and shrink operations in Australia and the U.K.

 

[Steve R.]