Posted on 09/27/2010 9:24:36 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
KAMIAH, Idaho - Two of America's largest oil companies want to drive mammoth truckloads of refinery equipment along a narrow ribbon of spectacular mountain road that borders national forests, wild and scenic rivers, historic sites and campgrounds.
Local residents are not pleased.
"This is something that weighs 600,000 pounds (272,150 kilograms), is two-thirds the length of a football field and 30 feet (9 meters) high," said Linwood Laughy, who has sued the Idaho Department of Transportation to stop the mega-loads. "I don't think it belongs on the highway."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
This sounds like a job for...
well, linwood laughy, whoever the hell that is, doesn’t “think” this belongs on the highway. what in the name of sam hill is wrong with it? why is ol’ linwood sueing? piss on linwood.
The Ice Road Trucker gang?
I don't think anyone is going to leave it there.
Perhaps he is right. Mount that sucker on self-propelled tracked mega movers and go cross-country with it, then.
They say they’re afraid the tall loads will fall into the neighboring river. Do the truckers of this proposed monster rig consider it to be suicide duty?
This has nothing to do with safety, the environment or integrity of the road. This is about the fact that the refinery in Billings, Montana plans to refine Canadian shale oil and the Indians are going nuts about it.
The fact is that the tribes have no authority to stop traffic across state thorough fares.
The whiners need to shut up and let the over-taxed entities pay the excessive fees to move their equipment on our highway system that our parents paid so much for so that the whiners can have gas for their trips to get lattes.
/johnny
When the idiots complaining give up their cars and start walking.. I’ll start listing to them.
It’s not their road. It’s not staying in front of their homes.
The Canadians will have a lock on lumber and fuels if these bozos keep it up. What stinks is being in the middle of the Bakken play and still paying $2.80/gallon for 87 octane. I’d just as soon see the refinery here.
Whoever does the driving will want to cash that paycheck. It isn't worth anything if you don't.
Having moved back to Alberta after living in the States for a number of years, in the area mentioned, this is absurd. This kind of equipment moves around Alberta, safely and not infrequently on a regular basis (including mountain passes).
The issue has to do with energy, which everyone needs, particularly people who live in the mountains and in rural areas. You cannot efficiently ride a bike, use a bus, electric batteries do not go far enough, etc. Evidently we are to return to the era of horses, mules and dog sleds for basic transportation if these people have their way.
Be thankful Canada has not yet messed up its environmental regulations, the way they are messed up in the USA, or you would have less oil, natural gas, and electricity.
BING!
It has plenty to do with the integrity of the road.
And it has plenty to do with inconvenience to locals.
Most people who like to spout off on this subject have never seen a truly wide load like this moved on a road which they must use, to which there is no alternative.
I have, and it is a huge pain in the ass.
In Nevada, they move huge mining equipment (eg, Cat 797’s) along state and US secondary routes during the summer, and much as Washington states for US 12, the load needs two flag cars in front, one in back, plus two highway patrol officers.
When I’d encounter these processions coming across US-50 or NV-278, the lead highway patrol car would range out in front of the load by five to 10 miles and push everyone off the road into a wide spot and tell you to cool your heels for at least a half hour.
Then the first pilot car would show up, followed in five minutes by the second, followed directly by the load (creeping along at 20 to 30 MPH on a road where everyone else was doing 70 to 75MPH), followed directly by the trailing flag car, then the trailing highway patrol. Then there’d be a huge slug of traffic behind the procession, filled with everything from ranchers to RV’s and OTR trucks, creeping along at however fast the load was moving. Somehow, I always got lucky and was in the opposing lane, where I’d have to wait 30+ minutes, then be on my way. The poor SOB’s stuck behind the load might be doing 25 MPH for 90+ miles.
Now, my inconvenience of seeing a haul-pak moved in three or four loads over two days was a minor piffle compared to this:
“But locals are much more worried about efforts by Exxon Mobil Canada and some subsidiaries to get permission to ship 207 mega-loads of refinery equipment through the two states to the controversial Kearl Oil Sands in Alberta, Canada. Those loads will take a year and force temporary closures of U.S. 12 five nights a week.”
Closures five nights a week.... for a year. If that were proposed for the major road through where I lived, I’d be in court with lawyers too. And that’s based on only the issue of restricting my travel with their road closures. Never mind the future inconvenience when they have to rebuild the road due to the roadbed being crushed by these loads, especially if they try to move them during freeze-up or thaws.
I’d say that if the loads are destined for a site in Canada, then they should be moved on Canadian roads. The Canadian taxpayers can suffer the inconvenience, economic losses and increased road repair costs.
Better yet, they should have not outsourced the construction of something so huge offshore. That’s the single most stupid thing I’ve seen. What, we don’t have the heavy manufacturing capability in the US or Canada any more to build this stuff on-site?
Nothing but a bunch of WACK JOBS.
I don’t know. Let’s say that there’s no danger whatsoever to the driver(s) of the load. Let’s just talk about the consequences of load disruption.
The proposal says that if a load upset occurs, they will need a 500 ton crane to pull the load back up onto a transporter.
To get a 500 ton crane set up on the accident site might require a wait of several days for transport of such a large crane to the accident site, situational engineering to allow the crane to set up its outriggers, etc. 500 ton cranes don’t just zip along - they’re over-weight and over-sized loads in and of themselves. They need large working areas on which to set up - and in areas where the road traverses the edge of a rock face on one side, and the river on the other, the crane might have a pretty difficult time setting up for a pick.
All this time, there’s quite possibly no traffic along the affected stretch of US 12, because in many spots there is no alternate route, no possibility of passing the accident site, etc.
With over 200 loads to be moved... something is going to go amiss, at some point, somewhere on this route. Move one or two loads? Yea, OK, get set up, make a big party event out of it, move the load.
200+ loads? Sorry, that’s just stupid. They should have built the stuff on site rather than try to cheapen the bottom line by having it done in South Korea.
Would current U.S. and Canadian regulations prevent the manufacture of these pieces on-site? Would some environ-MENTAL group not sue over the manufacture, claiming that the pieces would eventually contribute to “carbon pollution?”
In any event, w.r.t. wide loads, you have my sympathies. On a roadtrip earlier this year, I planned to drive east across the Hudson River on I-84, just to see the bridge. But lo and behold, when I got there, I get stuck in traffic due to an oversized load being escorted east across the bridge. And we had to negotiate an S-curve prior to the bridge, which had the load crawling at 15 mph, and there was no way the police would let us pass. Fortunately, it picked up to about 30 or so along the bridge, which was straight. Then, the load and escorts pulled off after crossing the bridge, so that we could be on our way.
It would be nice if we could just simply build a super-strong interstate highway, with overpass clearances of, say, 40 feet, from the port to Alberta. Let’s call it I-88 West. The oil companies and Canadians could chip in some billions for the highway, in a PPP. Then the 207 loads could roll on up there nice and easy.
At one point in our history, that could very well be what we would have done. But with all the environ-MENTAL regulations and red tape, it would be a non-starter now.
I don’t see why. They’re just steel welded together into a large structure. The same groups could be suing to block the entire project, regardless of where these assemblies were built.
The four large vessels for the refinery at Billings were made in Japan, and the 207 loads destined for Alberta were made in S. Korea. I’d wager that they got a “deal they couldn’t resist” on the price of the steel if they’d agree to have the fab done overseas as well. They could have shipped the steel here and had the fab done locally, but no, the MBA’s running these outfits wanted to get it done as cheaply as possible, screw the local workers, screw the local taxpayers paying for the roads, screw the local economy and screw anyone who has to get by them.
Unlike in the eastern US, there are lots of places in the western US where if a road is blocked, it can mean your life or someone’s life as you’re trying to get down that road to medical care. Unlike most people here on FR, I have had the experience of having to jump into a car with a loved one, jam the throttle down and proceed to a hospital at 90MPH — for over 100 miles - on the single viable route that was paved. A blockage on that road would have been a serious thing indeed.
An oversized load here and there? Sure, that’s normal. Folks can deal with it, for the most part, and the load drivers can pick and choose their weather conditions.
200+ loads, five nights a week, for a year? That’s going to impact public safety.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.