Keystone basically has neither a positive nor a negative long term impact.
Unless it explodes or leaks or something.
It sort of just is.
The tar sands are extraordinarily dirty and should never be exploited. The horrible wars over water rights over the next century are not something we're going to enjoy.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
0
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Keystone basically has neither a positive nor a negative long term impact.
Unless it explodes or leaks or something.
It sort of just is.
The tar sands are extraordinarily dirty and should never be exploited. The horrible wars over water rights over the next century are not something we're going to enjoy.
Keystone basically has neither a positive nor a negative long term impact.
Unless it explodes or leaks or something.
It sort of just is.
The tar sands are extraordinarily dirty and should never be exploited. The horrible wars over water rights over the next century are not something we're going to enjoy.
This isn't going to happen, though.
You might as well say coal is incredibly dirty I guess we better throttle the country's power use by 40%
0
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Just build more rails. I just had a steak dinner and am enjoying a pretty decent drink right now. The Acela is literally the best way to travel, short of a blimp with Orc slaves. Let me travel everywhere like this, Obama.
Keystone basically has neither a positive nor a negative long term impact.
Unless it explodes or leaks or something.
It sort of just is.
The tar sands are extraordinarily dirty and should never be exploited. The horrible wars over water rights over the next century are not something we're going to enjoy.
This isn't going to happen, though.
You might as well say coal is incredibly dirty I guess we better throttle the country's power use by 40%
if those who created environmental disasters, especially the kind that are slow to build up rather than being caused by a single extraordinary event, were actually compelled to bear the costs of them then some of the worst potential energy sources, such as tar sands, would never be exploited as other energy sources would be cheaper.
The problem with rails is us poor west-coasters aren't ever going to get any. Nowhere near the population density to make it worthwhile.
How's about some internet infrastructure that isn't immediately given away to a telecom? I'm pretty sure I'd get better service from the US Post and Internet Office than fucking Comcast.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
since corporations are people lets elect Google president
Executive order: everyone can track and sell all personal information.
Executive order: using bing or yahoo makes you an enemy combatant.
Executive order: all cell phones must be the size of a tractor trailer.
Keystone basically has neither a positive nor a negative long term impact.
Unless it explodes or leaks or something.
It sort of just is.
The tar sands are extraordinarily dirty and should never be exploited. The horrible wars over water rights over the next century are not something we're going to enjoy.
This isn't going to happen, though.
You might as well say coal is incredibly dirty I guess we better throttle the country's power use by 40%
if those who created environmental disasters, especially the kind that are slow to build up rather than being caused by a single extraordinary event, were actually compelled to bear the costs of them then some of the worst potential energy sources, such as tar sands, would never be exploited as other energy sources would be cheaper.
I agree with this, but I still think you'd see some development of the tar sands.
It'd probably be a lot more environmentally friendly, but you'd still see development on some level.
The problem with rails is us poor west-coasters aren't ever going to get any. Nowhere near the population density to make it worthwhile.
How's about some internet infrastructure that isn't immediately given away to a telecom? I'm pretty sure I'd get better service from the US Post and Internet Office than fucking Comcast.
I want a SoCal to SF/SoCal to Vegas train so bad.
Okay, the Vegas train is probably a bad idea and would be really gross, but if they make it out of plastic you could just hose it down when it gets to its destination.
The problem with rails is us poor west-coasters aren't ever going to get any. Nowhere near the population density to make it worthwhile.
How's about some internet infrastructure that isn't immediately given away to a telecom? I'm pretty sure I'd get better service from the US Post and Internet Office than fucking Comcast.
o_O
California is literally the only State in the nation attempting to build out true high speed rail, and connecting Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver is well within the appropriate distance for rail travel. The problem is that rail investment (either passenger or freight) have large direct investment benefits for a small number of States with only slight indirect benefits through improved movement of goods and commerce for the nation as a whole. Meaning that all the places which aren't going to have a train station aren't likely to vote to allow funding no matter the ROI or underlying business sense of the investment. Hell, even places that will benefit directly may well be opposed solely due to tribal signalling since railroads cost billions to be made by French central planners or something. Unlike roads, which are completely free and promote freedom with their free ways and naturally spring up from the good earth without planning or union labor.
I'd love to see some actual high speed rail in this country. Even the Acela isn't really high speed. If I remember correctly, the Acela doesn't even get to its max speed on most of its route, right?
Keystone basically has neither a positive nor a negative long term impact.
Unless it explodes or leaks or something.
It sort of just is.
Primarily because it's not our oil and it's going to be shipped off to China.
Really? Are we getting anything out of this outside of an opportunity for a giant tar sands related disaster?
Essentially nothing
There might be a few more refinery jobs opened down at the endpoint terminal if we do the safe thing and process the oil before shipping it out.
It won't do anything for the price of gas though, the US can already buy tar sands oil no problem, as has been stated, the pipeline just lets them ship to China.
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
0
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I'd love to see some actual high speed rail in this country. Even the Acela isn't really high speed. If I remember correctly, the Acela doesn't even get to its max speed on most of its route, right?
It's a slow train by modern standards, but the fastest in America, it just can't get to doped because it doesn't have dedicated track. But it's so civilized, especially first class. The hot towel service actually just came around.
0
Just_Bri_ThanksSeething with ragefrom a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPAregular
They says that the Punk in Cyberpunk is dead. But every day brings me one step closer to my favorite dystopian future.
...and when you are done with that; take a folding
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
I'd love to see some actual high speed rail in this country. Even the Acela isn't really high speed. If I remember correctly, the Acela doesn't even get to its max speed on most of its route, right?
It's a slow train by modern standards, but the fastest in America, it just can't get to doped because it doesn't have dedicated track. But it's so civilized, especially first class. The hot towel service actually just came around.
My understanding of Acela is that Amtrak owns the right of way (or it is shared with municipal transit authorities, but that's nearly the same thing since we aren't talking about timetabling around freight trains with property rights) however that right of way uses track routes that are nearly a century old in some places and as such aren't really all that straight and so aren't amenable to high speed standards. It averages over ~90 mph, which is easily better than driving and slightly better than flying when taking security and transportation from the airport to downtown into account, but still practically half the speed we would be capable of achieving with off the shelf parts if we ever felt like investing in nice things.
I'd have to do some searching but I remember seeing something about how not being able to ship the tar sand to like China, results in a slight dip in prices for parts of the midwest because those are the only places certain goods made from the tar sands can easily get to.
The problem with rails is us poor west-coasters aren't ever going to get any. Nowhere near the population density to make it worthwhile.
How's about some internet infrastructure that isn't immediately given away to a telecom? I'm pretty sure I'd get better service from the US Post and Internet Office than fucking Comcast.
o_O
California is literally the only State in the nation attempting to build out true high speed rail, and connecting Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver is well within the appropriate distance for rail travel. The problem is that rail investment (either passenger or freight) have large direct investment benefits for a small number of States with only slight indirect benefits through improved movement of goods and commerce for the nation as a whole. Meaning that all the places which aren't going to have a train station aren't likely to vote to allow funding no matter the ROI or underlying business sense of the investment. Hell, even places that will benefit directly may well be opposed solely due to tribal signalling since railroads cost billions to be made by French central planners or something. Unlike roads, which are completely free and promote freedom with their free ways and naturally spring up from the good earth without planning or union labor.
It makes perfect sense for California, and arguably the whole coast, as the west is so spread out that you'd really only need to be connecting the huge population centers. And it would be popular as all hell; air travel is awful. Of course the problem is that to really do it would mean building track through some incredibly expensive areas, and the people in those areas have already begun preparations to stop it at almost any cost. A man can dream though.
(Were it me I'd just start royally abusing eminent domain, the SC has already given the govt. incredibly wide latitude in its use, might as well take them up on it.)
Sacramento is about ~80 miles further from Portland than is economical for high speed rail to compete with air travel, and everything else is obviously further still, even if you had it run express past the capital. Places need to be no closer than ~100 miles and no further than ~500 miles. You can fudge on things a bit, especially the shorter distance if you're daisy chaining to somewhere else (like Chicago to Minneapolis via Milwaukee) but anything else is better served by alternate modes.
Of course, if you have a major city halfway between then you can simply have two lines with a transfer or one excessively long line that effectively is timetabled as two trunk lines rather than expecting people to stay on it the whole length. But that's all more or less a question of placing hubs and naming conventions than anything significant. Chicago to New York is just a bit too far apart, especially with Appalachia in between. Chicago to Pittsburgh and also Pittsburgh to New York, however, makes some sense independently. So do both and you have the option of taking the train the whole length even if flying would be faster. That doesn't really work with, say, Eugene.
This is giving me the vapors for a [rail thread]. I'm the in the middle of a busy few weeks so I can't commit the time to OPing one at the moment. But I sure would appreciate reading someone else's. We could discuss U.S. high speed rail, TGV, ICE, Shinkansen, and of course monorails! Or how about a little Warren Buffett and his new train set?
+1
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
edited April 2013
Let's bring this back on topic. If Socks was in charge, we'd have all kinds of alternative modes of transportation:
Look at those fat cats with their yachts and perfect mountain views! Clearly they are out of touch with working-class cats who have to crowd into back alleys and walk to places, meowing for their day's food. Have those cats ever had a day where the food bowl wasn't filled to the brim? I think not
since corporations are people lets elect Google president
Executive order: everyone can track and sell all personal information.
Executive order: using bing or yahoo makes you an enemy combatant.
Executive order: all cell phones must be the size of a tractor trailer.
Executive order 85: all cell phones must be the size of a babies fist.
Executive order 124: all cell phones must be the size of a boeing 737.
Executive order 145: all cell phones must be the size of a late blooming protazoa
Executive order 321: The Cell Phone orbits us. The Cell Phone loves us.
+1
CindersWhose sails were black when it was windyRegistered Userregular
They says that the Punk in Cyberpunk is dead. But every day brings me one step closer to my favorite dystopian future.
Closer? We live in an age where giant corporations can basically act however they want in interfering with our lives. We have gotten to the point where people are getting new and exciting forms of biotic implants. We have access to a giant planet spanning network upon which we can communicate with anyone that is accessed by a tiny tablet that fits in my pocket.
We live in a cyberpunk dystopia. It's just not as bad as it could be.
They says that the Punk in Cyberpunk is dead. But every day brings me one step closer to my favorite dystopian future.
Closer? We live in an age where giant corporations can basically act however they want in interfering with our lives. We have gotten to the point where people are getting new and exciting forms of biotic implants. We have access to a giant planet spanning network upon which we can communicate with anyone that is accessed by a tiny tablet that fits in my pocket.
We live in a cyberpunk dystopia. It's just not as bad as it could be.
Cyberpunk made the mistake of assuming corporations would bother to assume direct power.
The horrible wars over water rights over the next century are not something we're going to enjoy.
I beg to differ! We will be rich rich rich! Rule Britannia
(we've just had 10 months of almost continuous bloody rain)
I don't think blood rain is any more healthy for crops and drinking water then oil contaminated groundwater.
I am very disappointed Obama is going for all this austerity stuff rather then railing against it, but I honestly don't think it would make a difference practically with the GOP opposition.
The environmental adaptation office though is great, the US really needs to get in front of the changes if there is any hope of mitigating the major concerns.
He's a shy overambitious dog-catcher on the wrong side of the law. She's an orphaned psychic mercenary with the power to bend men's minds. They fight crime!
I'd love to see some actual high speed rail in this country. Even the Acela isn't really high speed. If I remember correctly, the Acela doesn't even get to its max speed on most of its route, right?
It's a slow train by modern standards, but the fastest in America, it just can't get to doped because it doesn't have dedicated track. But it's so civilized, especially first class. The hot towel service actually just came around.
My understanding of Acela is that Amtrak owns the right of way (or it is shared with municipal transit authorities, but that's nearly the same thing since we aren't talking about timetabling around freight trains with property rights) however that right of way uses track routes that are nearly a century old in some places and as such aren't really all that straight and so aren't amenable to high speed standards. It averages over ~90 mph, which is easily better than driving and slightly better than flying when taking security and transportation from the airport to downtown into account, but still practically half the speed we would be capable of achieving with off the shelf parts if we ever felt like investing in nice things.
the problem with the Acela is it is way too expensive. to get from dc to New York, it costs $300 round trip per person and takes 3 hours each way. I can drive it in 4, and only use one tank of gas for $50 round trip in my car.
I'd love to see some actual high speed rail in this country. Even the Acela isn't really high speed. If I remember correctly, the Acela doesn't even get to its max speed on most of its route, right?
It's a slow train by modern standards, but the fastest in America, it just can't get to doped because it doesn't have dedicated track. But it's so civilized, especially first class. The hot towel service actually just came around.
My understanding of Acela is that Amtrak owns the right of way (or it is shared with municipal transit authorities, but that's nearly the same thing since we aren't talking about timetabling around freight trains with property rights) however that right of way uses track routes that are nearly a century old in some places and as such aren't really all that straight and so aren't amenable to high speed standards. It averages over ~90 mph, which is easily better than driving and slightly better than flying when taking security and transportation from the airport to downtown into account, but still practically half the speed we would be capable of achieving with off the shelf parts if we ever felt like investing in nice things.
the problem with the Acela is it is way too expensive. to get from dc to New York, it costs $300 round trip per person and takes 3 hours each way. I can drive it in 4, and only use one tank of gas for $50 round trip in my car.
Too expensive for you, but the Acela is regularly sold out so not too expensive for its customers.
I'd love to see some actual high speed rail in this country. Even the Acela isn't really high speed. If I remember correctly, the Acela doesn't even get to its max speed on most of its route, right?
It's a slow train by modern standards, but the fastest in America, it just can't get to doped because it doesn't have dedicated track. But it's so civilized, especially first class. The hot towel service actually just came around.
My understanding of Acela is that Amtrak owns the right of way (or it is shared with municipal transit authorities, but that's nearly the same thing since we aren't talking about timetabling around freight trains with property rights) however that right of way uses track routes that are nearly a century old in some places and as such aren't really all that straight and so aren't amenable to high speed standards. It averages over ~90 mph, which is easily better than driving and slightly better than flying when taking security and transportation from the airport to downtown into account, but still practically half the speed we would be capable of achieving with off the shelf parts if we ever felt like investing in nice things.
the problem with the Acela is it is way too expensive. to get from dc to New York, it costs $300 round trip per person and takes 3 hours each way. I can drive it in 4, and only use one tank of gas for $50 round trip in my car.
Too expensive for you, but the Acela is regularly sold out so not too expensive for its customers.
I'd love to see some actual high speed rail in this country. Even the Acela isn't really high speed. If I remember correctly, the Acela doesn't even get to its max speed on most of its route, right?
It's a slow train by modern standards, but the fastest in America, it just can't get to doped because it doesn't have dedicated track. But it's so civilized, especially first class. The hot towel service actually just came around.
My understanding of Acela is that Amtrak owns the right of way (or it is shared with municipal transit authorities, but that's nearly the same thing since we aren't talking about timetabling around freight trains with property rights) however that right of way uses track routes that are nearly a century old in some places and as such aren't really all that straight and so aren't amenable to high speed standards. It averages over ~90 mph, which is easily better than driving and slightly better than flying when taking security and transportation from the airport to downtown into account, but still practically half the speed we would be capable of achieving with off the shelf parts if we ever felt like investing in nice things.
the problem with the Acela is it is way too expensive. to get from dc to New York, it costs $300 round trip per person and takes 3 hours each way. I can drive it in 4, and only use one tank of gas for $50 round trip in my car.
If I were making that trip, I'd probably spend the extra to get there faster and be able to do things while in transit instead of having to concentrate on driving the whole way.
Interstate driving is boring and exhausting.
a5ehren on
+3
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
One place the Acela nails pricing is the $80-100 up charge for first class. At that amount, it sells put almost every train. Contrast planes that might have to upgrade half the first class seats do they don't sit empty (which still means empty seats on the plane).
Posts
Primarily because it's not our oil and it's going to be shipped off to China.
The tar sands are extraordinarily dirty and should never be exploited. The horrible wars over water rights over the next century are not something we're going to enjoy.
I was speaking economically.
But yes.
This will not stop the pipeline though.
Really? Are we getting anything out of this outside of an opportunity for a giant tar sands related disaster?
Essentially nothing
This isn't going to happen, though.
You might as well say coal is incredibly dirty I guess we better throttle the country's power use by 40%
if those who created environmental disasters, especially the kind that are slow to build up rather than being caused by a single extraordinary event, were actually compelled to bear the costs of them then some of the worst potential energy sources, such as tar sands, would never be exploited as other energy sources would be cheaper.
How's about some internet infrastructure that isn't immediately given away to a telecom? I'm pretty sure I'd get better service from the US Post and Internet Office than fucking Comcast.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
A fiber optic mandate across the nation! The horror!
Executive order: everyone can track and sell all personal information.
Executive order: using bing or yahoo makes you an enemy combatant.
Executive order: all cell phones must be the size of a tractor trailer.
the last thing google needs is more power.
Nah, let's just let our corporate overlords vote for us instead! They know how to do it in our best interests!
I agree with this, but I still think you'd see some development of the tar sands.
It'd probably be a lot more environmentally friendly, but you'd still see development on some level.
We get to buy the price at the oil speculators think we should pay.
So there's that.
I want a SoCal to SF/SoCal to Vegas train so bad.
Okay, the Vegas train is probably a bad idea and would be really gross, but if they make it out of plastic you could just hose it down when it gets to its destination.
o_O
California is literally the only State in the nation attempting to build out true high speed rail, and connecting Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver is well within the appropriate distance for rail travel. The problem is that rail investment (either passenger or freight) have large direct investment benefits for a small number of States with only slight indirect benefits through improved movement of goods and commerce for the nation as a whole. Meaning that all the places which aren't going to have a train station aren't likely to vote to allow funding no matter the ROI or underlying business sense of the investment. Hell, even places that will benefit directly may well be opposed solely due to tribal signalling since railroads cost billions to be made by French central planners or something. Unlike roads, which are completely free and promote freedom with their free ways and naturally spring up from the good earth without planning or union labor.
There might be a few more refinery jobs opened down at the endpoint terminal if we do the safe thing and process the oil before shipping it out.
It won't do anything for the price of gas though, the US can already buy tar sands oil no problem, as has been stated, the pipeline just lets them ship to China.
It's a slow train by modern standards, but the fastest in America, it just can't get to doped because it doesn't have dedicated track. But it's so civilized, especially first class. The hot towel service actually just came around.
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
My understanding of Acela is that Amtrak owns the right of way (or it is shared with municipal transit authorities, but that's nearly the same thing since we aren't talking about timetabling around freight trains with property rights) however that right of way uses track routes that are nearly a century old in some places and as such aren't really all that straight and so aren't amenable to high speed standards. It averages over ~90 mph, which is easily better than driving and slightly better than flying when taking security and transportation from the airport to downtown into account, but still practically half the speed we would be capable of achieving with off the shelf parts if we ever felt like investing in nice things.
It makes perfect sense for California, and arguably the whole coast, as the west is so spread out that you'd really only need to be connecting the huge population centers. And it would be popular as all hell; air travel is awful. Of course the problem is that to really do it would mean building track through some incredibly expensive areas, and the people in those areas have already begun preparations to stop it at almost any cost. A man can dream though.
(Were it me I'd just start royally abusing eminent domain, the SC has already given the govt. incredibly wide latitude in its use, might as well take them up on it.)
Of course, if you have a major city halfway between then you can simply have two lines with a transfer or one excessively long line that effectively is timetabled as two trunk lines rather than expecting people to stay on it the whole length. But that's all more or less a question of placing hubs and naming conventions than anything significant. Chicago to New York is just a bit too far apart, especially with Appalachia in between. Chicago to Pittsburgh and also Pittsburgh to New York, however, makes some sense independently. So do both and you have the option of taking the train the whole length even if flying would be faster. That doesn't really work with, say, Eugene.
Executive order 85: all cell phones must be the size of a babies fist.
Executive order 124: all cell phones must be the size of a boeing 737.
Executive order 145: all cell phones must be the size of a late blooming protazoa
Executive order 321: The Cell Phone orbits us. The Cell Phone loves us.
Closer? We live in an age where giant corporations can basically act however they want in interfering with our lives. We have gotten to the point where people are getting new and exciting forms of biotic implants. We have access to a giant planet spanning network upon which we can communicate with anyone that is accessed by a tiny tablet that fits in my pocket.
We live in a cyberpunk dystopia. It's just not as bad as it could be.
Cyberpunk made the mistake of assuming corporations would bother to assume direct power.
I beg to differ! We will be rich rich rich! Rule Britannia
(we've just had 10 months of almost continuous bloody rain)
I don't think blood rain is any more healthy for crops and drinking water then oil contaminated groundwater.
I am very disappointed Obama is going for all this austerity stuff rather then railing against it, but I honestly don't think it would make a difference practically with the GOP opposition.
The environmental adaptation office though is great, the US really needs to get in front of the changes if there is any hope of mitigating the major concerns.
I'm looking forward to getting augmentations.
I did ask for this.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
the problem with the Acela is it is way too expensive. to get from dc to New York, it costs $300 round trip per person and takes 3 hours each way. I can drive it in 4, and only use one tank of gas for $50 round trip in my car.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Too expensive for you, but the Acela is regularly sold out so not too expensive for its customers.
Might as well attach some Pullman cars to it.
If I were making that trip, I'd probably spend the extra to get there faster and be able to do things while in transit instead of having to concentrate on driving the whole way.
Interstate driving is boring and exhausting.