Keystone Pipeline and Oil by Rail

[MDH]

Well written article:

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_an ... roads.html

[AARR]

With coal down 10% or so from 2011 (and will probably continue to decline for at least the next four years) I am glad to see other traffic segments increasing. Chemicals, pipe and sand inbound and crude oil outbound.

[Norm]

I don't think we're going to see the Keystone built. Plenty of opposition as there always is on projects of this nature and too many 'wishy-washys' in Washington. The railroads already have an advantage in that they can transport the oil where it's needed and wanted. Pipelines only have one destination. The refineries in the south can't handle more crude but those in the northeast can. Rail is one step ahead in the game.

Oh, BTW, this morning I read a news article about a new procedure of extracting heat from coal without burning it. If that works on a large scale it'll be a bonanza for the mines and rails.

[Saturnalia]

If we don't take Keystone, China will. That oil will be used...it is just a matter of who. The "green" lobby should choose to let us in the US use it, because we burn the stuff more cleanly. In China, up the stack it goes, off to cause environmental harm.

I will say no more.

[JDavis21835]

Oh, BTW, this morning I read a news article about a new procedure of extracting heat from coal without burning it. If that works on a large scale it'll be a bonanza for the mines and rails.

What is old is new again. It seems this is not much different from the old manufactured gas processes. Basically, coal is super heated, and off gases. The gas is captured, and burned. I wonder if the new process creates the same nasty by products that the old process created.