Category Archives: TransCanada oil pipeline

How About Those Pipelines?

By now you have heard about the broken oil pipeline in Mayflower, Arkansas that ExxonMobil is currently downplaying. By now you have heard the residents of this neighborhood say that they bought their homes without ever being informed that a pipeline full of tar sand oil from Canada ran near their property. By now you have seen the photos of the nearby creek and the lake with those only-somewhat-effective booms deployed to try to keep the oil out of the lake. And by now you have seen the poor ducks that have to be cleaned up after each of these oil spills, covered with oil once again. It’s a wonder we have any ducks left. Apparently this is the third incident of this type in recent history.

Do you want to live near an oil pipeline? Maybe you do live near one right now and you don’t even know it. If you are someone who backs the Keystone Pipeline (because we need energy and jobs), will you let them build it across your property? The media tried to excuse the break by saying that the pipeline was old and to suggest that the technology in 2013 is much improved. But ExxonMobil, perhaps with an eye to liability issues, denied that the age of the pipe had anything to do with the break. What did cause the break? We assume we will eventually hear the results of the investigation (if there is one).

This environmental mess, which has chased people out of their homes (we hope temporarily) and made a neighborhood unlivable, feeds into all of the arguments that we, the clean energy/clean water people have against building any more pipelines to carry oil (oil that doesn’t even belong to us). Call us any names you please, say that we are against capitalism, against business, against full employment, against energy independence and in this case we do seem to be all of these things. But this is not really where we are coming from. This is the rhetoric of our opponents who for some reason are not worried about our air or our water or the health of the planet. Why aren’t they worried about these things? They say it is because these are made-up things. They say these things are not really happening. But science has measured these things.

We have to ask why these deniers refuse to accept the evidence of the scientists. Maybe it is not just about money, maybe it is about their wish to believe that our lives will not have to change. Maybe they feel that these truths will ruin America’s greatness, although I don’t think this is an inevitable outcome of not building one pipeline. I was almost swayed by opposition argument about how important the Keystone is to our economy, and I felt that if they moved the pipeline away from Nebraska’s water supply that I might relent and back the pipeline; but, after hearing about the facts that several pipelines have broken and that people who buy homes are not even informed about nearby pipelines, I am back to being definite about my opposition to the Keystone Pipeline. I have some allies and I have some reasons.

Robert Redford has spoken up over and over about the reasons why we should say no to the Keystone Pipeline. He even attended a climate change rally held in Washington, DC in February. Here is some of what Robert Redford has to say:

Actor, director and environmental activist

You Can Move Washington, D.C. Forward on Climate Change

Posted: 02/03/2013 7:27 pm

On February 17, tens of thousands are coming together in Washington, D.C. to ask the president to stand up for climate. The Forward on Climate Rally is expected to be the largest climate rally in U.S. history.

How fitting that this will happen on President’s Day weekend after the inspiring inaugural address from President Obama about the moral necessity to tackle climate change for ourselves and for our children.

This is the beginning. The beginning of a real battle, for America’s future.

Real economic security is found in clean energy. That’s our future, not dirty energy that threatens us with ever worsening harm from climate change.

From rejecting the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline to limiting carbon pollution from our nation’s dirty power plants, President Barack Obama’s legacy will rest squarely on his response, resolve, and leadership in solving the climate crisis.

The Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would carry the dirtiest oil on the planet from Canada to America’s Gulf Coast’s refineries and ports, and then most of it likely exported overseas. It would promote one of the most damaging industrial practices ever devised, to coax low-grade crude oil from tar sands. We don’t need another pipeline for Canadian tar sands. It’s not in our national interest but is a profit scheme for big oil that needs to be rejected.

And in addition to the ability to say no to this dirty fuels project, the president has both the authority and the responsibility to limit the amount of industrial carbon pollution emitted from power plants. Taking this action will set the right course for reducing carbon pollution domestically and send the right signals that the U.S. is ready to lead globally. The Natural Resources Defense Council has laid out a common-sense plan that will cut carbon pollution; provide jobs to thousands of Americans; and save families real money in electricity bills.

He also has a video that you can search for on-line.

I worry about the fresh water resources on Earth. The Law of Conservation of Matter and Energy applies here. It says that energy is neither created nor destroyed but simply changes form. Which means that matter can become energy and sometimes energy can become matter, but there is only a certain amount of energy in the universe and we cannot add to it, we can only move it around from one state to another. This same law of physics is true about the fresh water available on Earth. There is only so much of it. Once it gets dirty (especially with oil or toxins) we don’t really know how to turn it back into potable fresh water. And so far we have not found any place to get more fresh water. I wrote a post about water wars. Here’s a reprint. The break and subsequent oil leak in Arkansas has me worrying about future water wars all over again.
How Likely Are Water Wars? – (Reprint of previous post)


I am not the only person on the planet who worries about water shortages. I have been doing some reading online and there are many reports about the worldwide shortage of fresh water resources. Scientific Americanreports about it and CNN, and Web of Creation (which may not sound quite as good as the other two sources). Some places never had great reserves of fresh water, places that are obvious like deserts and interior areas of Africa which only have rain for a part of the year and may have droughts that last for several years. We know the American Southwest also is a desert or near desert climate and lacks fresh water resources. If an area is unpopulated the lack of fresh water is not a problem (nature adapts), but as we have spread into areas where fresh water is scarcer, which people have done all over the world, water supplies in these areas become more problematic. Redirecting rivers will no longer do it for us.


The lack of water can mean a lack of food for obvious reason. Crops do not grow without water. When populations try to grow food in low rain or snow environments they must irrigate. To irrigate one takes groundwater and exposes it on top of the earth. It will evaporate and fall again as precipitation, but perhaps not in the same area where it evaporated. It takes 1 ton of water to grow 1 ton of wheat, which makes wheat a water-costly food, says BBC News. Many other foods do not require as much water but do not have the appeal of wheat. We may find ourselves having to get used to things like soybeans. Of course meat is also a very water-costly food.

Irrigation and raising farm animals are also activities that increase the pollution of fresh water. Manufacturing waste pollutes water, or air and therefore water. Retrieving and using fossil fuels also pollutes water in all kinds of ways. Of course, polluted water cannot be used to quench thirst without negative outcomes, including death. Children are especially susceptible to diseases borne in polluted water, especially in poorer countries without water filtration systems and in low-water environments. There are dead water zones even in salt water off many of the coastlines of developed nations worldwide.

Scientists also say that global warming is having an effect on water reserves as snow packs, glaciers and ice caps dwindle in size. The Yellow River in China never used to run dry, then it ran dry for about 15 days a year, and now it is dry for over 200 days a year. It is not the only river that dries up for part of the year when it never did before.

The 10 worst cities in America in terms of available fresh water are not at all surprising. We could almost name them without a list. However, more and more people are moving to these areas. Some populations have grown as much as 20% in the last decade which creates a larger demand for water. They are, as named in an article by Yahoo Finance:

1. Los Angeles – Major water supply, Colorado River Basin, Pop. 3,831,868

2. Houston – Major water supply, Jasper Acquifer, 2 Lakes, Pop. 2,257,926

3. Phoenix – Major water supply, Colorado River Basin, Pop. 1,593,659

4. San Antonio – Major water supply – Groundwater – Pop. 1,373,668

5. San Francisco Bay Area – Major water supply, Various, Lake Hetch Hetchy – Pop. Over 1.5m

6. Fort Worth – Major water supply, Multiple – Pop. 727,577

7. Las Vegas – Major water supply, Lake Mead/Colorado River – Pop. 567,000

8. Tucson – Major water supply, Local ground water – Pop. 543,000

9. Atlanta – Major water supply – Lake Lanier, Ga – Pop. 540,922

10. Orlando – Major water supply, Floridan Aquifer – Pop. 235,860

There are spots around the world with water problems similar to these problems of United States cities or some areas with even more pressing needs for fresh water. Will those of us with plentiful supplies of fresh water be expected to share? Will companies privatize our water supplies and sell them to us for big bucks? Will water resources belong to public utilities which give people with plentiful water no choice about sharing water; water might essentially be sold down the grid like electricity. Will these water resources be distributed equally or go to the highest bidder? Will some of us take luxurious showers while others die of thirst? Oh, we already do this! Will we continue to develop wetlands out of existence although we know how much they contribute to a healthy water cycle? Will we need a Global Water Management Agency? How happy would privileged people be about this? Oh, the protests! Will we learn to control the weather so it will rain where and when we need it to? We can’t even desalinate the oceans because we have nowhere to put the brine that is produced as a side product.

How many years of fresh water remain on our beleaguered little planet? What things can we do now to tip the fresh water resources in our favor? Humans are the only species on earth which can manage our water resources. Will we actually do any of those things unless laws are passed to force greater respect for fresh water resources, which for economic reasons, seems unlikely? Perhaps we could all go live in low water areas and leave the great water zones pristine. Then we can all have our water piped in. Humans, for all our capacity to evaluate and recognize problems before they become crises, seem unable to react quickly to take steps to lessen the impact of these problems. It could be a fatal flaw.

Posted 31st January 2012 by Nancy Brisson




Oil and Water Don’t Mix

Will we chose oil or will we chose water? You know what they say, “oil and water don’t mix”. This is true in science and it is true in the oil business. Wherever there is oil, pristine water resources are placed in a situation of potential jeopardy. This is one key to the opposition of some groups to the Keystone Pipeline Project. The opposition is strong enough that protestors formed a line around the White House and joined hands. I don’t know if there were enough people to make it around the entire White House but there were enough to attract Obama’s attention. The pipeline decision has been delegated to the State Department, but that could change if Obama responds to the demands of the demonstrators.
NPR says, “In 2010, TransCanada completed a major pipeline – the Keystone – which runs from Alberta to Illinois. The company is now planning a second line, called the Keystone XL, that would run from Alberta to Nebraska with an extension from Oklahoma to the refineries on the Gulf Coast. The map I have included shows both the existing pipeline and the new pipeline which is the center of the current controversy.
Apparently Nebraska stands to feel the greatest environmental impact from the pipeline because the path the pipeline takes has it crossing right through an important source of water. An article that you can find at  says that “Many Nebraskans, including myself [Governor Dave Heineman], support the pipeline, but we are opposed to the route that goes through the Sandhills and over the Ogallala aquifer.” “Why would you risk an oil spill or leak over the aquifer when TransCanada already has a pipeline route on the eastern side of Nebraska?”
TransCanada; spokesman, Shawn Howard says opponents are just being unrealistic. “Anybody who looks at this objectively knows that we are decades away from being able to turn off a fossil fuel switch and flip on an alternative energy switch without affecting our quality of life,” he says.
While this has a certain ring of truth to it we do perhaps have to be sure to keep our oil away from our water. Paul Krugman in today’s NYT’s suggests that one reason we cannot break our dependence on fossil fuels and make important investments in alternative energies is because our lawmakers are heavily invested in fossil fuel industries and owe so much to fossil fuel corporations. Mr. Krugman also suggests that the cost of solar energy is falling rapidly and that this alternative way to generate electricity may soon be widely available, especially if it could ever get the support of people who have a vested interest in keeping this source on the down low.

In addition there is so much desperation behind the moves being made to separate us from foreign sources of oil (which I believe almost all of us would like to see) the oil industry is not, apparently, going to be held responsible for cleaning up any environmental damage they do as a result of technologies like fracking and piping oil from Canada’s oil sands. This is another aspect of this controversy that is worth protesting as the consequences may, and probably will, come back to bite us all. Everything is interconnected.

So how do we balance our desire to be free of foreign oil, our voracious appetites for cheap power, our lawmakers voracious appetites for profit, and the absolute need to protect our environment? Let’s see if they back off from taking the pipeline across the Nebraska aquifer and keep that leg of the pipeline in the eastern half of Nebraska. Let’s see if “our” government heeds our concerns about hydrofracking. The track record is not good. I expect that, in spite of our objections, TransCanada, will do exactly what they want to do with the blessings of our federal government. We will have to keep trying to be heard and trying to conserve energy.
The Brissioni Blog has a page on Facebook.