🇳🇱
Yet another indication Joe is clueless.. I dont care so much about the pipeline workers, but I do care about the environment. Blocking pipelines means more pollution, and a hell of a lot of it. But Joe is either not smart enough to understand that or cares more about his image than doing good. No surprise.
@freemo the amount of oil mined is heavily influenced by the profit margins available in the market. Are you saying that oil moved without the pipeline is cheaper than oil moved with it?
@Demosthenes No I am saying that the cost-benefit balance is nothing like what you are proposing.
By that logic we should replace all our nuclea power plants (relatively nonpolluting but not perfect, but very cost effective) with coal power plants because coal costs more to operate and the added cost will decrease consumption...
it doesnt work like that
Increasing the cost per gallon by 10 cents for the consumer by forcing the oil to be moved by trucks, but at the same time ensuring each gallon of gas contributes 2x the amount of pollution it did before, is not a win, not by any measure. You cant **increase** pollution by a huge margin and expect you to have a net positive result simply because the price goes up a little. Thats an aburd and self-defeating tactic.
Well said, and exactly...
Plus as i stated earlier in this post: https://qoto.org/@freemo/105612036766523680
There is almost 0 impact on the consumption rate of oil anyway.
So what you'd see is at best a amrginal decrease in oil consumption (1% if your lucky, or if at all) and a HUGE spike in CO2 production.
Its equivalent to forcing all power to be generated with coal rather than nuclear because although coal produces way more pollution it costs more so people will buy less.
Its a self defeating ideology when done naively.
@Demosthenes @freemo Why not just increase fuel tax if this is what you want to do?
@valleyforge @freemo that would be a much better, more efficient solution in every way, but I'm not sure it's politically possible in the USA.
Not a "much better solution"... the only solution of the two considered. The other one isnt a solution anymore than building coal power plants is a solution to reduce power generatione missions.
@freemo @valleyforge making oil less economical than other energy sources is the only way to actually drive widespread change. There are multiple ways to make oil use more expensive.
yes but if you have a marginal impact on the cost and a HUGE impact on the CO2 output you arent having any positive impact, your just punching yourself in the face repeatidly.
@freemo @valleyforge "[increased fuel tax] would be a much better, more efficient solution in every way"
@Demosthenes Incorrect, blocking the pipeline means more pollution as it is transported via other means, the overall supply of oil is uneffected, they just buy more trucks and/or trains to move it. Same amount gets moved but now you have a ton of pollution while you do it.
Its not about oil spilled either, the ways in which they move oil that isnt pipelines equates to **huge** quantities of CO2, it essentially equates to tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of extra trucks on the roads.