Skip to comments.Plans for massive oil pipeline opposed by environmentalists
Posted on 08/18/2011 2:30:22 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
A controversial proposal to build a massive underground pipeline to carry 700,000 barrels of crude oil per day from the oil sands of Alberta, Canada, to refineries in Texas has become the environmental issue of the summer, pitting developers and labor unions desperate for construction jobs against environmentalists and Native American tribes who fear the pipeline will spell environmental disaster.
TransCanada Corp.'s proposed Keystone XL project would consist of more than 1,700 miles of 36-inch-diameter pipe, about 327 miles of which would be in Canada while the rest would snake southward through the central United States. Because the pipeline would cross the international border between Saskatchewan, Canada, and Morgan, Montana, a special permit from the U.S. Department of State is required .. to proceed.
More than 1,000 activists -- including NASA climatologist James Hansen, who has urged the scientific community to "get involved in this fray" -- are expected to descend on the White House starting Sunday for three weeks of civil disobedience and mass arrests. Six California activists are driving from Sacramento to Washington, D.C. as part of a "No Tar Sands Caravan" that leaves Sunday.
The American Petroleum Institute and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, both of which are urging the State Department to approve the project, held a conference call with journalists Thursday in which they claimed the pipeline could generate 20,000 new jobs.
"Today, with the US economy still struggling, nothing is more important than jobs," said Cindy Schild, API's refining issues manager. "And construction of the pipeline would mean massive numbers of them."
Jim Kimball, chief economist for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, said that Teamsters president James Hoffa has written to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urging approval of the project, which would create union jobs related to building and maintaining the pipeline.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
any jobs created these days are in the legal system and "environmental" issues.. from sordid numbers of litigants suing to stifle or obstruct 'progress' and saved the 3 headed beetle. or whatever the flavor of endangered species is that month..
Teamsters vs. environmentalists. Could we hope for a little street education?
Go west with the pipe line , sell to China and China can sell to USA at a profit ,everyone wins , Oh, sorry USA LOL
Would it be cheaper and less problems if they just built a new refinery at the site of the oil?
Oil industry makes economic pitch for Keystone XL pipeline to Gulf
The oil industry is hoping support from organized labor and the promise of 20,000 construction jobs will help convince the Obama administration to sign off on a pipeline that would transport crude oil harvested in Alberta, Canada to Gulf Coast refineries.
Industry leaders teamed up with organized labor today to tout the projected economic benefits of the project, which is fiercely opposed by environmental advocates.
With the U.S. economy still struggling, nothing is more important than jobs, and construction of the pipeline would mean massive numbers of them, said American Petroleum Institute Refining Issues Manager Cindy Schild in a conference call with reporters.
Screw the unions.
If the amer-Indians don’t want the leasing payments that the pipeline would produce. Maybe they can put up a bunch of windmills to kill the wild birds etc. All those beautiful landscapes GONE.
BTW how many massive environmental tragedies has the Alaska Pipeline caused?
I think I’m all for this pipeline. But two things come to mind as I read this...
Why do they intend to put the pipeline UNDER ground? above ground is more sensible.
And secondly...why does it need to be refined in texas? why not refine it in north dakota? There’s already a booming oil industry there. I say throw up a couple refineries in north dakota and do it there.
And then build new pipelines for gasoline, diesel, and other products?
The market is not at the location of the source of the oil.
You'd still have to transport the refined products, and you'd be duplicating existing refinery capacity. A pipeline seems to me to be the cheaper and more straightforward solution to the delivery problem.
Also, from the US point of view, the supply of crude to the US would be well defined--it would be a long-term, reliable arrangement.
texas isn’t the market either.
The distribution system is already in place. Why would ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and others want to build new refineries when they have existing ones already in place?
This can just replace some of our oil imported from overseas and use the facilities and distribution system already installed.
Refineries have a rather large service industry to support them outside the plant fences. Those companies already exist near the refinery complexes.
Then you would need a "products pipeline" to get the output to market, rather than a "crude oil pipeline" to get it to a refinery.
The market for refined products in Northern Alberta is, shall we say, rather thin.
If there was a better economic answer than the Keystone XL pipeline, one can assume the principals would have proposed it.
There are, in fact, several hundred thousand miles of pipeline buried under U.S. soil already.
The pipeline industry is hardly new. We have pipelines all over the country. We have already figured out the economics and security. Buried is far cheaper and better protected.
why does it need to be refined in texas?
If you don't take the product to existing refineries, then you not only need to build new refineries, but also build product pipelines to deliver the gasoline, diesel, aviation fuel and other products. Refining also produces some byproducts that get used in the chemical and plastics industries. Those facilities are next to the existing refineries.
2. Safety..an underground leak is much more easily contained..far less environmental damage...once the leak is detected, the vales are closed, it's isolated, drained, then they just remove the contaminated soil
A new refinery in under development in Elk Point, SD to refine Canadian oil.
The bulk of the output will still go to Texas refineries because a.) that is where most of the country's refining capacity is and b.) that is where most products pipelines originate and distribute to the market.
Crude oil and Products are shipped via discreet pipelines.
the alaska pipeline in above ground
the alaska pipeline is above ground.
we need more capacity anyway, so I say build it in north dakota. like I already said, there’s already an oil industry in north dakota.
The Alaska pipeline has to be above ground because of the permafrost...
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.