CleanTechnica is the #1 cleantech-focused
website
 in the world.


Fossil Fuels oil pipelines

Published on August 20th, 2013 | by Jo Borrás

5

Keystone XL Is Only Part Of The Problem: 3 More Controversial Pipelines

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

August 20th, 2013 by
 

You won’t hear much about the Keystone pipeline in the mainstream press, but you’re here reading CleanTechnica, so you already know that. As our recent post covering the March 29th ExxonMobil Pegasus pipeline oil spill also made clear, there are a lot of pipelines in the US that are just as dangerous — if not more so! — than the Keystone XL. Here’s a brief, but spooky, look at some big oil trouble spots you might not know enough about. Here’s some wisdom.

Bluegrass Pipeline

Bluegrass Pipeline


The proposed 500-mile Bluegrass pipeline would transport flammable natural gas liquids across Kentucky to an existing line that terminates in the Gulf. Landowners and environmentalists gathered at the state capital last week to protest the project, which they fear would threaten water supplies and safety, not to mention the elevated risk of massive fireballs!

Residents say there were caught off guard by the project, and had to ask officials what survey markers, which had been “popping up” on their private land, were for. They were shocked to learn a pipeline might be coming through their property! “Knowing a pipeline is coming through is like waiving a red flag to the creatures of the Earth. God created Earth as our land to use — not abuse,” said Sister Joetta Venneman, a member of a group of nuns and monks who are refusing to give up their land for the project.

Despite the resistance of the locals and a petition signed by over 5200 potentially affected landowners, the governor of Kentucky seems to still side with the oil company. Locals are concerned the company responsible, Williams Co., could leverage its influence over the state government to seize the land under an eminent domain clause if opposition proves too strong.

 

Energy East Pipeline

TransCanada-Asset-Map-640x808


Facing increasing resistance in the US over its Keystone XL proposal, the planet-defiling bastards at TransCanada Corp. are moving forward with plans for another tar sands pipeline that would carry almost as much crude as Keystone — except it would route the oil into New England’s bays and beaches instead of the Texas Gulf. The new pipeline, if built, would be the most expensive in TransCanada’s history, and would run to a new deep-water marine terminal that would be built specifically to export the crude overseas … just like Tar Sands Timmy said it would!

The $12 billion TransCanada project calls for converting more than 1800 miles of an existing natural gas pipeline to carry the oil. Perhaps most worrisome to residents of Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, however, is that the increased shipping capacity from Alberta will impact another pipeline, as well — the 70-year-old Portland pipeline. As the Boston Globe explains, “this would provide Canada — whose Alberta-centered oil industry is suffering from too much supply and too little access to overseas markets — its first direct pipeline to a year-round, deep-water port.”

 

Eastern Gulf Crude Access Pipeline

map_01_egca


You might remember the name “Enbridge” from the recent court case brought against the company by Bell’s Brewery and the people of Kalamazoo, Michigan, who are still recovering from a massive spill in 2012. That company may be facing some heavy fines, but that hasn’t stopped them from coming up with new ways to endanger American citizens in a bid to eke out a few more petrodollars.

Enbridge’s proposed 770 mile pipeline would run from Illinois to Louisiana and carry oil from Canada’s Alberta tar sands. Inside Climate News reports that the project will likely sail through the regulatory process because much of the pipeline is existing construction, currently serving as a natural gas line. “Converting pipelines makes [approval] easier and riskier, too,” explains Carl Weimer, executive director of the watchdog organization Pipeline Safety Trust, because pipeline conversions are subject to less regulation than new pipelines.

Sources: Gas2, TransCanada, Williams Co., ThinkProgress

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.

Print Friendly

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,


About the Author

I've been involved in motorsports and tuning since 1997, and write for a number of blogs in the Important Media network. You can find me on Twitter, Skype (jo.borras) or Google+.



  • femmefm

    http://blog.al.com/live/2013/07/state_and_local_governments_bl.html highly controversial pipelines already being built below and around city’s drinking water supply to transport and store tarsands oil in tanks on the coast of Gulf of Mexico.

  • Steeple

    Planet defiling bastards? That’s some pretty objective journalism.

    • Bob_Wallace

      Sounds about right to me. Perhaps a bit understated.

    • Doug

      I don’t disagree with the statement, but this type of non-objectivity in reporting doesn’t allow us to forward these articles to friends and family without coming across as wackos. Stick to the facts please.

      • http://www.insteading.com/ Jo Borras

        I’m pretty sure trying to reason with the wackos who think things like this are OK is a wasted effort, anyway. :(

Back to Top ↑