Meet The New US Petroleum Pipelines

Tyler Durden's picture

Still confused why crony capitalist #1, the "rustic" Octogenarian of Omaha, and Obama tax advisor #1, Warren Buffett has been aggressively attempting to corner the railroad market, while the administration relentlessly refuses to allow assorted new, and very much competing petroleum pipelines from America's neighbor to the north to cross through the US (in gratitude for the former's generous "tax advice" and pedigree by association)? Hint: it's not concern about the environment. The answer is the chart below.

Source: Diapason

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Motorhead's picture

Buffet is a fucking ass hole, albeit a rich fucking ass hole.  But, given the state of US politics, if it weren't him, it'd be somebody else getting these crony deals.

GetZeeGold's picture



I'd rather buy expensive gas transported by train than cheap gas transported in a pipeline.


Because I'm a patriot.....and if it can save just one prairie dogs life I'm for it.

Mae Kadoodie's picture

Meanwhile here in the PA/NJ we are fighting Kinder Morgan's Tennessee Gas Northeast Upgrade Pipeline Project.  They are clear cutting virgin forest, displacing rare species, disturbing sacred indian burial grounds, using eminent domain to lay gas lines on private property wether land owners like it or not.  FERC is a fine example of regulatory capture.  Here's an 87 year old man's plight.  He fought this billion dollar project and lost.  Now he's crying for his trees.  This nation has become a scary place.

Jason T's picture

There were lots of folks against the building of the Erie Canal too.  

An English Tourist, back in 1835 or so, complained that Americans can hardly conceive the horror of a foreigner coming upon "such magnificent trees standing around him with their throats cut, teh very Banquos of a murdered forest."


What has been, will be again ... there is nothing new under our sun.


Cut them.  They'll grow back in a few hundred years in the next dark age that'll start around 2032.


flacon's picture

I bet "Warren" just "Mungered" in his pants after looking at that chart. 

hedgeless_horseman's picture



Hint: it's not concern about the environment.

It's not a concern about the environment?  But, but, those pipelines are so dangerous, they can leak and stuff.  Trains are so safe.

GetZeeGold's picture



Landed smack dab into a bee colony tended by prairie dogs.


The horror......the horror.

SafelyGraze's picture

from 11/3/2009:

"Analysts say Buffett is planting both feet in an industry that is poised to grow as the economy gets back on solid ground."


Manthong's picture

Just wait until the black folks finally figure out that Obama's real middle name is "Uncle Tom".

CrazyCooter's picture

C'mon guys, this is the new "Earth Plus Plastic" paradigm.

Give it 50 years, the human population will have collapsed due to energy constraints. 100 years from now, our descendants will probably be running mule teams again to stay fed ...



A Nanny Moose's picture

Classic Carlin!

The planet isn't going anywhere.....we are!

nmewn's picture

My favorite line was him calling out the deluded, white bourgeoisie liberal greenies wanting to make "the world safe for their Volvos"

Nailed it...classic Carlin.

nmewn's picture

If these damned oil & chemical trains keep derailing & plunging into our fresh water supplies they're going to give crony socialism a bad name!

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Or rail in fresh water too, according to Buffet's plan.

luckylogger's picture

There have been hundreds of thousands of words written about this fuking mess and this picture is equal to all of them !!!!!!!!!!!!!

dunce's picture

I never looked up the comparative safety records of ton/mile of pipelines versus rail but it is not a matter of if there is derailing spills but when and how many. With the rate of shipments growing, even if the rate remains the same, the total will match at least the increase. The rails go through many towns between the bakken and the gulf coast refineries. These trains also tie up traffic as they move across the nation and the are many train / car accidents. Of course you will never hear the old argument "if it saves one life it is worth it" by the by, crude oil pipe lines do not explode in giant balls of fire. nether do tank cars of crude but there may be some tank cars loaded with volatiles in the same train. About ninety people were killed in Kingman, AZ when some tank cars exploded not that many years ago.

Muddy1's picture

After looking at the video and reading the opening sentence I would reassure you that a 70 year old tree does NOT constitute a "virgin forest".  Now, remove all wood products from your house, and the wood used to build your house structure, so that you can "feel good" about where you live.  Don't heat with wood when the petroleum runs out and you get cold.

MSimon's picture

If those virgins stand still they are going to get nailed.

luckylogger's picture

I logged for over 20 years and whenever anybody asked if we cut virgin forests...........

I always said they are all virgins until they are cut.

viator's picture

I doubt if is there is twenty acres of virgin forest in both states. Virgin forest is very rare. There are only a few scattered plots in the Eastern US.

Not only are they cutting non-existent virgin forest they are "clear" cutting it, that's terrible.

DoChenRollingBearing's picture

I have read, but cannot confirm, that there is NO virgin forest in Maine.  Maine is bigger than you might think (almost as big as the rest of New England combined), yet the whole state has been logged over at least once.

If Maine has no virgin forest, then there would be VERY LITTLE east of the Rockies.  Some of my ancestors helped log over Minnesota and Washington state.

verum quod lies's picture

The greatest pressure on the environment comes from population pressure, as well as certain groups of humans that largely do not appreciate things like the environment. Since the borders were effectively thrown open we've added somewhere around 100 million people (i.e., including their offspring). Those tens of millions of new "Americans" and their offspring and their offspring's offspring etc. will keep putting pressure to cut trees and consume resources until we look like the places from which these people came (e.g., Mexico, India, China, Nigeria, etc.). Just imagine our schools, environment etc. without that added population pressure as well as the mix of our elected representatives without so many natural socialist/communist voters who view the country as an economic jackpot to be used and exploited until it is time to move on to another host. "Demography is destiny" and today in the U.S. (i.e., given the types of people imported) it means a good deal of trees cut down that could still be standing.


blackbeardz's picture it's the people!  -not the corporations, ok got it.

The greatest pressure on the environment comes from CORPORATION pressure, as well as certain groups of CORPORATIONS that largely do not appreciate things like the environment. Since the borders were effectively thrown open (FREE TRADE) we've added somewhere around 100 million CORPORATIONS (i.e., including their offspring). Those tens of millions of new "Corporations" and their offspring and their offspring's offspring etc. will keep putting pressure to cut trees and consume resources until we look like the places from which these corporations came (e.g., Mexico, India, China, Nigeria, USA etc.). Just imagine our schools, environment etc. without that added CORPORATION pressure as well as the mix of our elected BOUGHT representatives without so many natural CRONY/CAPATILIST CORPORATIONS who view the country as an economic jackpot to be used and exploited until it is time to move on to another host. "Demography is destiny" and today in the U.S. (i.e., given the types of CORPORATIONS) it means a good deal of trees cut down that could still be standing.

Totentänzerlied's picture

Do you know what a bottom line is? Even KBR/Haliburton has to sell something, eventually, or it would cease to exist.

verum quod lies's picture

Yes, indeed people cause pressure on the environment (e.g., India vs. Canada). Also, we hardly have 'free trade'; and I hate to inform you that corporations in and of themselves are not the issue, that is, unless or until they become monopoly or cartel like in their actions. For example, Warren Buffet is a well connected person who uses those connections and the connections of the companies he controls to assure himself that he will not lose out on a bet/investment that he makes through an artificial entity called a corporation. I know this might be challenging for you but people demand stuff like food and housing and more people means, gasp, more demand for stuff whether or not provided by private individuals, private corporations or a red Chinese front company. It is just that some forms of entities responding to perceived demand don't always clean up after themselves and some people don't do such a good job either. Also, incidentally, much of the worst pollution caused in the history of the planet was done by government and especially socialist/communist ones (e.g., the Soviet Union or Red China today).

blackbeardz's picture

and who organizes all this pressure the "people cause on the environment"? if you chose the people over corporations as the cause your "bottom line" is facisim. The bottom line sounds alot like "the end justifies the means". "much of the worst pollution" is a wide open statement so stuff that one too. How much of the " little of the worst pollution" do you attribute to western gov't? Go back to your eugenics board hangout please.

nmewn's picture

Warren Buffet, National Socialist/Crony Capitalist.

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

I'd say "Crony Capitalist", who knows how to use the Socialists as his sock puppets, per Hedgeless_Horseman's pic above.  He's a capitalist in socialist's clothing, to fool Obama and Dem sheep.

rbg81's picture

Sorry, but the prairie dog can go fuck itself.  I want my cheap gas.  And if you're trying to make my gas expensive, screw you too.

GetZeeGold's picture



Well it's a good thing you're not in charge then. Like walking 5 miles to and back from the grocery store is going to hurt you any.


If it makes you feel any better...studies have shown it may help the spotted owls as well....we think.

rbg81's picture

Most of these environmentalists are completely full of shit.  Not all, but the vast majority.  Because they base their arguments on emotion and politics, not science.  They bitched and moaned about the Alaska pipeline and there was zero environmental impact.  Drilling in Anwar is the same thing--you're only talking a very small slice of land.  The Keystone pipeline is long, but tiny from a land use perspective.  

You want to talk environmental impact:  how many animals get killed every year due to cars?  I don't see anyone volunteering to stop driving.

Middle_Finger_Market's picture

Cheap gas, hoes and money...oh America. What have you become or rather what were you all along that we are now starting to see.

rbg81's picture

Hey Middle-Finger,

The people who ACTUALLY BUILT this country didn't give a shit about the prairie dog either.  They cared about making their fortunes and making the country great at the same time.  Our problems started when we started caring more about snail-darters than about what civilization really needs.  That being said, I think we need to national parks, wildlife preserves, and protect real endangered species.  We also need reasonably clean water and air (vs. setting impossible & insanely expensive standards that have zero bearing on people's actual health).   But its a sad commentary when we can't get things done that need doing due to made up environmental BS--which is probably 95% of what you hear about.  

Strut's picture

The people who ACTUALLY BUILT this country didn't give a shit about the African slaves, Native Americans, Buffallo, Eastern Elk, or any 1 of the other 100's of extinct species of North American plant and wildlife either.

There fixed it for you.

What civilization *REALLY* needs is fucks like you to go extinct.

MSimon's picture

Are you of reproductive age?

Strut's picture

Are you looking to be my baby momma?

Middle_Finger_Market's picture

Hey rbg81,

I appreciate your opinion, you're right the founding fathers of the great land of the US of A and it is (was) great were right in the middle of the industrial age and they capaitalised on that. Yes enviromental issues were put on the side lines for progress, that's how we as a species were evolving and thanks to the hard work of those gents we are here now, were we are today. So no complaints. Unfortunately your particular mindest along with the likes of Buffet et al crony capitalists we have moved beyond the industrial age. We have moved beyond the destruction of enviroment is progress and to a new paradigm of growth prospects, where oil and cheap money created via a debt system are no longer relevant to society as a whole. Where state and religeon need not be our point of call or worship or becon of future direction but rather self perpetuation in terms of global business ethics. Buffet has none. Paper is money and money is paper, we print paper with ''save trees'' as our ethics... I mean really!? Technology obviously plays a part in the future...crony politics and capitalism does not. Enviroment and progress must go hand in hand...where else is there to go? I mean at the end of the day we are a pin head in the grand scheme...we are the earth which is our only home and the earth is us. Contemplate my words while I cotemplate yours.



rbg81's picture

Me go extinct?  Well, never say never.  But at least I remembered to reproduce a few times.  Unlike many of the Environmentally correct (or Politically correct) shitheads who are so guilt ridden about their own pathetic existence that they won't have any kids.  

Oh, yeah:  they can go fuck themselves too. 

Slartibartfast's picture

Everyone focuses on production efficiency, but never talks about consumption efficiency.

Why fix it or upgrade it when it's cheaper to chuck it and buy a brand new one?

cossack55's picture

You obviously do not drive in a deer area.  300 lbs. buck thru your windshield at 60 mph = driver in box.

Terminus C's picture

bah, that's child's play.  Try a thousand pound moose.

Scro's picture

The problem with white tail is that they ain't very bright and will run right in front of you on the HWY. And they try and "jump" your headlights and often end up in the windshield. Antelope are a lot smarter, I don't see them as road kill.

Slartibartfast's picture

...and if you see one, there's a darn good chance there's one or two following along behind.

Stop feeding the f-ing deer, idiots! They hang around at night and you're not letting nature weed out the weak and diseased ones! Wolves have consumer rights, too! (Besides, they're really cool too if you do actually spot one or hear them calling at night).

rbg81's picture

People hit deer all the time where I live.  The usual outcome is deer dead and car totaled.  Maybe its repairable if you have a large SUV or minivan.  Human fatalities are rare and mostly cause by stupid driving in the snow.  In fact, I'll wager that more people are killed swerving to avoid deer than killed from hitting them.

shovelhead's picture

Y'all city folk gits all worked up over them critters but we un's recycle.

Ever et smoked dillos an possums? That's damn good eatin.

Y'all gits that gas an we gets the trees.

MSimon's picture

Wood for trees? That is odd.

DangerClams's picture

You ate smoked dildos?


I assume they were pole-smoked dildos.