Image 01 Image 03

Mother Jones Unwittingly Makes a Case for the Keystone Pipeline

Mother Jones Unwittingly Makes a Case for the Keystone Pipeline

Ask a stupid question…

The reliably leftist publication Mother Jones has noticed that using trains to transport oil hasn’t worked out too well over the last few years.

Too bad there’s no safer way to transport fuel.

Head over to Twitchy to read more reactions but be forewarned, most of the responders didn’t hold their tongues.

The Obama administration constantly claims to care about job creation but if that was true the Keystone Pipeline should have been a no-brainer.

Unfortunately, they’re beholden to leftists like the geniuses who write for Mother Jones.

Featured image via YouTube.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:
,

Comments

The pipeline is both safer and better for the environment. No noxious fumes from fires.

pipeline will not affect rail shipments much if at all.
rail can go east-west and unit trains can be built in week, pipelines req flow contracts. any business lost to pipeline would probably be made up supporting the pipeline.
and remember, most of keystone is already built and running. we need both pipelines AND rail, neither one is the perfect solution alone but together they can augment each other.

the reason they are blowing up is bakken oil is much more flammable than anyone thought.

and a few blew up due to derailments of OTHER trains on adjacent tracks then hitting the oil train.

    cutting torch in reply to dmacleo. | June 2, 2014 at 11:29 pm

    dmacleo: “any business lost to pipeline would probably be made up supporting the pipeline.”

    I think that would be a good thing. Steel is not flammable.

    torch

One of the obstacles of switching from rail to the pipeline mode of transport is Warren Buffett and his Burlington North railroad.

While pipelines have generally performed well, displacing the rail option will be hard fought.