On Sun, 24 May 2015 12:58:06 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> On 5/24/2015 12:37 PM, sf wrote:
>
> >
> > There's no talk of a water pipeline yet. Oil gets lots of pipelines,
> > water gets none.
> >
>
> Where would the pipeline come from? Is there enough water in a
> reasonable distance? If so, it would be a smart idea.

Who needs a reasonable distance? If oil can be piped from Mid-Canada
to the Gulf coast then water can go that distance too.

--

sf

On 5/24/2015 12:42 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 12:58:06 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>> On 5/24/2015 12:37 PM, sf wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There's no talk of a water pipeline yet. Oil gets lots of pipelines,
>>> water gets none.
>>>
>>
>> Where would the pipeline come from? Is there enough water in a
>> reasonable distance? If so, it would be a smart idea.
>
> Who needs a reasonable distance?

Investors?

> If oil can be piped from Mid-Canada
> to the Gulf coast then water can go that distance too.

Bbbbbbut...Keystone XL was denied!

On Sun, 24 May 2015 13:11:47 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque
> wrote:

> On 5/24/2015 12:42 PM, sf wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 May 2015 12:58:06 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
> >
> >> On 5/24/2015 12:37 PM, sf wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> There's no talk of a water pipeline yet. Oil gets lots of pipelines,
> >>> water gets none.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Where would the pipeline come from? Is there enough water in a
> >> reasonable distance? If so, it would be a smart idea.
> >
> > Who needs a reasonable distance?
>
> Investors?
>
> > If oil can be piped from Mid-Canada
> > to the Gulf coast then water can go that distance too.
>
> Bbbbbbut...Keystone XL was denied!
>
>
A water leak won't contaminate the aquifer beneath it!

--

sf

On 5/24/2015 3:15 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 24 May 2015 13:11:47 -0600, Cabrito del Bosque
> > wrote:
>
>> On 5/24/2015 12:42 PM, sf wrote:
>>> On Sun, 24 May 2015 12:58:06 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/24/2015 12:37 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There's no talk of a water pipeline yet. Oil gets lots of pipelines,
>>>>> water gets none.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where would the pipeline come from? Is there enough water in a
>>>> reasonable distance? If so, it would be a smart idea.
>>>
>>> Who needs a reasonable distance?
>>
>> Investors?
>>
>>> If oil can be piped from Mid-Canada
>>> to the Gulf coast then water can go that distance too.
>>
>> Bbbbbbut...Keystone XL was denied!
>>
>>
> A water leak won't contaminate the aquifer beneath it!
>

Heh, no but it will cause untold miles of excavation, or an unsightly
above ground installation.

Your point is taken, water can be piped quite easily, save for the
expense of the utilities to run the pumping stations.

On 5/24/2015 2:42 PM, sf wrote:

>>
>> Where would the pipeline come from? Is there enough water in a
>> reasonable distance? If so, it would be a smart idea.
>
> Who needs a reasonable distance? If oil can be piped from Mid-Canada
> to the Gulf coast then water can go that distance too.
>

Willing to pay $65 a barrel for water?

On Sun, 24 May 2015 22:30:34 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> On 5/24/2015 2:42 PM, sf wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Where would the pipeline come from? Is there enough water in a
> >> reasonable distance? If so, it would be a smart idea.
> >
> > Who needs a reasonable distance? If oil can be piped from Mid-Canada
> > to the Gulf coast then water can go that distance too.
> >
>
> Willing to pay $65 a barrel for water?

When it's a choice between zero water and paying $65 a barrel, what do
you think?

--

sf