Chip Bok by Chip Bok

Chip Bok

Comments (8) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. wbr

    wbr said, over 1 year ago

    bho does not want to take $$$$ from buddy buffet

  2. chayasnana

    chayasnana said, over 1 year ago

    I hope so. The pipeline is an ecological disaster.

  3. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    You know Canada could put the pipeline across their own country but they would rather risk the ecology of our country.

  4. wbr

    wbr said, over 1 year ago

    if canada put pipeline across its land it would be sell crude oil vs pipeline to refineries in the USA. then it would be selling oil products at bigger margins. A review of safety and accident statistics provided by the U.S. Department of Transportation for the extensive network of existing U.S. pipelines—including many linked to Canada—clearly show that, in addition to enjoying a substantial cost advantage, pipelines result in fewer fatalities, injuries, and environmental damage than road and rail. Americans are more likely to get struck by lightning than to be killed in a pipeline accident.:.manhattan-institute

  5. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    Keystone XL would divert Canadian oil from refineries in the Midwest to the Gulf Coast where it can be refined and exported. Many of these refineries are in Foriegn Trade Zones where oil may be exported to international buyers without paying U.S. taxes. And that is exactly what Valero, one of the largest potential buyers of Keystone XL’s oil, has told its investors it will do. The idea that Keystone XL will improve U.S. oil supply is a documented scam being played on the American people by Big Oil and its friends in Washington DC.
    .
    http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswift/keystone_xl_is_a_tar_sands_pip.html

  6. MortyForTyrant

    MortyForTyrant said, over 1 year ago

    @wbr

    You are trying to deflect from the real problem. Keystone XXL is not designed for crude oil but oil-tar-sands. Nobody has any idea how to clean up a spill of that stuff. It should not be developed anyway, it is only cost effective because of the instability in the middle east.

    -

    About safety: there was a broken pipeline that spewed a lot of oil into a river for days without being noticed. It took three years to clean up. And also remember all the natural gas pipelines that blow up occasionally, taking out whole street blocks!

  7. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @coraryan

    I thought ‘conservatives’ were name calling nit wits who make up their ‘facts’ and you prove it. The XL pipeline does not cross Canada to the coast, it was blocked by protesters. They want to cross the US to the coast because people like you think its a good idea to have the spills in this country for oil that will be exported, but I can see current events are not your strong point.

  8. ARodney

    ARodney said, over 1 year ago

    Check the record of the tar-oil spill in the Kalamazoo. We really don’t want that crap in the Platte. Not for oil that we are not even going to use ourselves. To mitigate climate change, we have to leave some oil in the ground. This is an excellent place to start.

  9. Refresh Comments.