What damage will adding .9% more pipeline do to 185,000 miles of existing pipeline?

[healthmyths]

Keystone will add 1,800 miles to already existing 185,000 miles of pipeline as the below map shows... why the big issue?

REMEMBER THE VALDEZ!!!

• The amount of oil spilled could fill 125 Olympic-sized swimming pools.
• As many as 2,800 sea otters, 300 harbor seals, 900 bald eagles and 250,000 seabirds died in the days following the disaster.
• 1,300 miles of coastline were hit by the oil spill.
• 1,000 harlequin ducks were killed by the oil spill, in addition to many chronic injuries that occurred as a result of the long term effects of the spill.
• The cleanup required about 10,000 workers, 1,000 boats and roughly 100 airplanes and helicopters.
• Four deaths were directly associated with cleanup efforts.
• The spill caused over $300 million of economic harm to more than 32 thousand people whose livelihoods depended on commercial fishing.
• Tourism spending decreased by eight percent in south central Alaska and by 35 percent in southwest Alaska in the year after the spill.
• There was a loss of 9,400 visitors and $5.5 million in state spending.
• Many fish populations were harmed during the spill. For example, sand lance populations went down in 1989 and 1990, herring returns were significantly fewer in 1992 and 1994 and adult fish had high rates of viral infections.
• Pink salmon embryos continued to be harmed and killed by oil that remained on stones and gravel of stream banks through at least 1993. As a result, the southwestern part of Prince William Sound lost 1.9 million or 28 percent of its potential stock of wild pink salmon. By 1992, this part of the sound still had 6 percent less of the wild pink salmon stock than was estimated to have existed if the spill had not occurred.
• Two years following the Exxon Valdez spill, the economic losses to recreational fishing were estimated to be $31 million.
• Twelve years after the spill, oil could still be found on half of the 91 randomly selected beaches surveyed.
• Three species of cormorant, the common loon, the harbor seal, the harlequin duck, the pacific herring and the pigeon guillemot still have not fully recovered.

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Facts

 

[Freewill]

Do you think that the pipeline should be built using eminent domain?

 

[healthmyths]

Do you think that the pipeline should be built using eminent domain?

Do you think you want another Exxon Valdez times 10?
My whole point has nothing to do with "eminent domain" but simply which is the greater risk? 1 million barrels traveling 1 mile on the open ocean or
700 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land?
Is that concept hard to grasp? Hard to answer? Just a simple point!
Which is the bigger number? 1 million or 700?
Which will cause more damage? 1million barrels or 700 barrels?
How hard is that to answer?

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Do you think that the pipeline should be built using eminent domain?

Most of the pipelines built already do. Oil and gas energy companies send out reps called Right of Way agents who schmooze the landowners into signing off for the pipeline company to come through. If the landowner resists then too bad, eminent domain rules anyway.

As far as risk goes, I think the Alaska pipeline, built 30+ years ago, has proven to be fairly safe and reliable.

I think the objection comes from the fact that the Keystone pipeline is the pipeline for the product going abroad as opposed to being refined and sold domestically.

 

[Freewill]

Do you think that the pipeline should be built using eminent domain?

Do you think you want another Exxon Valdez times 10?
My whole point has nothing to do with "eminent domain" but simply which is the greater risk? 1 million barrels traveling 1 mile on the open ocean or
700 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land?
Is that concept hard to grasp? Hard to answer? Just a simple point!
Which is the bigger number? 1 million or 700?
Which will cause more damage? 1million barrels or 700 barrels?
How hard is that to answer?

Risks happen everyday. The processed oil is not going to get to market overseas by anything other then ships so the risk would seemingly not be reduced by the pipeline.

But I want to imagine them wanting to run the pipeline over your property and you not wanting it, would you want the government to just take your land for something that will not benefit you?

 

[deltex1]

The oil is in the ground. The oil is pumped to the surface. It is then retuned to the ground for transport to facilities that turn it into useful products. What is so hard to understand?

 

[Freewill]

Do you think that the pipeline should be built using eminent domain?

Most of the pipelines built already do. Oil and gas energy companies send out reps called Right of Way agents who schmooze the landowners into signing off for the pipeline company to come through. If the landowner resists then too bad, eminent domain rules anyway.

As far as risk goes, I think the Alaska pipeline, built 30+ years ago, has proven to be fairly safe and reliable.

I think the objection comes from the fact that the Keystone pipeline is the pipeline for the product going abroad as opposed to being refined and sold domestically.

As I said, miles of gas pipeline has been built around me and I have not heard of any eminent domain issues and compared to where they want the pipeline we have a whole lot of people.

That said, other then ED I have not heard of the reasoning other then concerns over spills in an aquifer. Why would anyone try and stop progress? What is their motive and is it legit?

 

[Freewill]

The oil is in the ground. The oil is pumped to the surface. It is then retuned to the ground for transport to facilities that turn it into useful products. What is so hard to understand?

Do you think that those opposed are just being obstinate? That they have no real concerns? The same debate happened over the Alaskan Pipeline way back when. The pipeline will be built but I don't believe we should just ignore the concerns raised.

 

[deltex1]

The oil is in the ground. The oil is pumped to the surface. It is then retuned to the ground for transport to facilities that turn it into useful products. What is so hard to understand?

Do you think that those opposed are just being obstinate? That they have no real concerns? The same debate happened over the Alaskan Pipeline way back when. The pipeline will be built but I don't believe we should just ignore the concerns raised.

Six years of pondering various concerns seems adequate to me. We defeated Germany and Japan quicker than that.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

The oil is in the ground. The oil is pumped to the surface. It is then retuned to the ground for transport to facilities that turn it into useful products. What is so hard to understand?

Do you think that those opposed are just being obstinate? That they have no real concerns? The same debate happened over the Alaskan Pipeline way back when. The pipeline will be built but I don't believe we should just ignore the concerns raised.

There is general fear by the landowners of undetected leaks, breaks, and subsequent pollution of their farm lands by crude oil.

Challenging the Keystone Pipeline from the Courtroom to the Plains
Meet the Texas Farmer Challenging the Keystone Pipeline from the Courtroom to the Plains

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Do you think that the pipeline should be built using eminent domain?

Do you think you want another Exxon Valdez times 10?
My whole point has nothing to do with "eminent domain" but simply which is the greater risk? 1 million barrels traveling 1 mile on the open ocean or
700 barrels traveling 1 mile on dry land?
Is that concept hard to grasp? Hard to answer? Just a simple point!
Which is the bigger number? 1 million or 700?
Which will cause more damage? 1million barrels or 700 barrels?
How hard is that to answer?

Risks happen everyday. The processed oil is not going to get to market overseas by anything other then ships so the risk would seemingly not be reduced by the pipeline.

But I want to imagine them wanting to run the pipeline over your property and you not wanting it, would you want the government to just take your land for something that will not benefit you?

would you want the government to just take your land for something that will not benefit you?

Landowners are paid.