$325M facility one step closer to construction

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
While 325$$ Million is a drop in the bucket when you are talking oil...its a good start...they have to get the operating structures in place and can expand from there...
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
While 325$$ Million is a drop in the bucket when you are talking oil...its a good start...they have to get the operating structures in place and can expand from there...

What I would REALLY like to see are plants that produce diesel from coal. We could be producing 100% of our diesel from coal which would put a HUGH dent in the amount of oil we import. Many we could even eliminate our oil imports. It is cost efficient whenever oil is over $60 per barrel.
 

blackpup

Veteran Expediter
I would like to see the U.S. develop a greater degree of energy independence, and not rely quite so much on supplies from other countries. Then get over the irrational fear of Nuclear power plants.

jimmy
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I would like to see the U.S. develop a greater degree of energy independence, and not rely quite so much on supplies from other countries. Then get over the irrational fear of Nuclear power plants.

jimmy

The irrational fear of Nuke plants is a problem. So is the EPA. So is 'climate change' hype. Between the three NOTHING useful is being done. The "green" energy producers are VERY HARD on the environment. Maybe harder and more damaging than coal or oil burning. They chew up and eliminate hundreds of thousands of acres of habitat. It takes over 150,000 acres of the really ugly wind generators to produce the power that the Nuke plant in Newport Michigan produces. They are also NOT reliable. Covering the ground with solar farms also destroys habitat.

The 'Greenies' CLAIM that they are saving the earth. How can they do that while destroying habitat? What a joke.
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
The irrational fear of Nuke plants is a problem. So is the EPA. So is 'climate change' hype. Between the three NOTHING useful is being done. The "green" energy producers are VERY HARD on the environment. Maybe harder and more damaging than coal or oil burning. They chew up and eliminate hundreds of thousands of acres of habitat. It takes over 150,000 acres of the really ugly wind generators to produce the power that the Nuke plant in Newport Michigan produces. They are also NOT reliable. Covering the ground with solar farms also destroys habitat.

The 'Greenies' CLAIM that they are saving the earth. How can they do that while destroying habitat? What a joke.

Wind turbines also consume 1,000;s of acres of food producing land...
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
you lose the land they sit on which is about 1/4 acre alone....and then the land that the access roads take...it adds up...

You are correct and it does add up. I was thinking more like when the wipe out ten's of thousands of trees on the tops of mountains to put those ugly things on. Then they use herbicides to keep the trees from coming back up. Real "green". :rolleyes:
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
You are correct and it does add up. I was thinking more like when the wipe out ten's of thousands of trees on the tops of mountains to put those ugly things on. Then they use herbicides to keep the trees from coming back up. Real "green". :rolleyes:

They also interrupt some of the flight paths for the migrating birds...
 
Top