Skip to content

Safest Pipeline Ever?

March 28, 2011

The concerns about the Keystone XL Pipeline project continue to mount in regards to the Ogallala Aquifer. If approved, the pipeline will run through the aquifer that provides drinking and irrigation water to 8 states. But TransCanada, the oil company that will be operating the pipeline, does not seem to see a problem. On March 24, 2011, the Argus Leader reported that TransCanada believes there should be no fear about contaminating the aquifer because the Keystone XL pipeline will be the safest pipeline ever built.

Heidi Tillquist, a consultant at the Fort Collins, Colo.-based firm AECOM, said pipelines are the safest way to move crude oil, and further, the 1,700-mile Keystone XL line would be the safest built in the U.S.

Tillquist also did consulting work for Calgary-based TransCanada on Keystone I, which began running tar sands crude through eastern South Dakota in June.

While TransCanada is trying to make everyone believe the Keystone XL pipeline will and could not ever leak, we have to remember that, that was the same argument they made when they were building the Keystone I. We appreciate Tillquist’s attempts at comforting the masses with her confidence in TransCanada. However, we realize this is the same consultant that reassured us about the Keystone I and that pipeline has now sprung half a dozen leaks in less than one year of operation. So if this is the safest possible transport for oil what is the least? A large ditch from Canada to the Gulf?

 

Advertisements
One Comment leave one →
  1. LARRYSPANGLER permalink
    September 28, 2011 7:32 am

    I SAT BEHIND HIEDI WHILE SHE TESTIFIED FOR THE PIPELINE IN LINCOLN NE. ON 9/27/11 SHE WAS SO NERVOUSE THAT THE BACK OF HER BLOUSE WAS SHAKING. I DIDN’T KNOW WHO SHE WAS UNTIL SHE STARTED READING HER CEDENTIALS. AT THAT TIME I FELT LIKE I WAS IN A BAD STEVEN SEGAL MOVIE AND THE CORPORATION HAD PAID HER OFF. I HAVE A RANCH WITHIN 3.5 MILES OF THE PROPOSED PIPELINE. SHE OBVIOUSLY NEVER SET FOOT ON THAT AREA OR CHOSE TO LIE ABOUT IT. THIS AREA IS SO FRAGILE THAT THAT THE ROAD THAT LEADS TO THE PROPOSED SITE IS CALLED THE “SAND ROAD” BY THE LOCALS IT CONSISTS OF WHAT WE CALL SUGAR SAND THAT WHEN DRY, IS LIKE DRIVING IN DEEP SNOW. THIS ROAD CAN ONLY BE DRIVEN ON WITH 4 WHEEL DRIVE VEHICLES AND YOU MUST KEEP MOVING OR YOU WILL BOG DOWN. IT WAS IMPASSIBLE ALL WINTER AND HALF THE SUMMER BECAUSE OF SNOW AND TOO HIGH OF WATER TABLE. ALL THE LAND IN THAT AREA IS THE SAME ONCE YOU DISTURB THE 2 INCHES OF TOP SOIL IT IS ONLY FINE SAND AND IT WILL START TO BLOW CREATING BLOW OUTS. I FELT THE MEETING WITH THE STATE DEPARTMENT WAS NOTHING BUT A DOG AND PONY SHOW , AND THE DECISION HAS ALREADY BEEN MADE. I AM NOT AGAINST THE PIPELINE EVEN THOUGH I THINK TAR SANDS ARE BAD, BUT THAT’S CANADAS ISSUE IF THEY WANT TO DESTROY THIER LAND. TRANS CANADA JUST NEEDS TO REROUTE IT OFF THE AQUIFER. BUT IT IS ALL ABOUT THE $$$$$$$.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: