iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Keystone XL Hearing: State Department Heads To Nebraska

GRANT SCHULTE   09/27/11 07:42 PM ET   AP

LINCOLN, Neb. — Dueling protesters tangled during a raucous hearing in Nebraska on Tuesday over a proposed Canadian oil pipeline that opponents say could harm U.S. drinking water – a claim that supporters say is unfounded and offered by fear-mongering environmental groups.

U.S. State Department officials received an earful from supporters and opponents of the 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline that would cross part of Nebraska's vast underground water supply as it moved tar sands oil from Alberta, Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. Adversaries booed, jeered and shouted encouragement to their allies at the federal hearing in downtown Lincoln.

Environmental groups fear the pipeline is being rushed toward federal approval and will eventually leak, fouling underground and surface water supplies, increasing air pollution around refineries, and disrupting wildlife habitats. They have criticized what they consider inadequate pipeline safety and emergency spill responses, and accused company officials of bullying some landowners with pressure tactics to get their land.

Calgary-based TransCanada, which would operate the pipeline, says the $7 billion project would meet strict environmental standards, including 57 conditions above those required by industry standards.

Dr. Amanda McKinney, a southeast Nebraska physician who stood at President Barack Obama's side in 2009 to tout his health care initiative in Washington, D.C., said the decision will reflect his administration's priorities.

"If this administration cares about the health of these people, then it must stop this pipeline," McKinney said. "We cannot afford to spill this toxic tar sands oil into our soil or groundwater."

The hearing marked the second day of hearings this week in the six states the pipeline route will cross. The debate has drawn the greatest attention in Nebraska, where the proposed route would cross part of the Ogallala Aquifer, which supplies drinking water to about 2 million people.

Many of the more than 200 speakers who signed up to share an opinion fell into one of two camps: Business and union representatives who say the project will create tens of thousands of jobs, pitted against environmentalists, landowners and others who said they were concerned about possible leaks.

McKinney said the jobs touted by pipeline supporters "would be better utilized building wind turbines and solar panels."

Industry officials said the fears are based on misleading information.

"We don't have the luxury of taking philosophical stances on visions of what things would be like if oil and gasoline weren't interwoven so tightly in our daily lives," said Mark Whitehead, president of the Nebraska Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association. "The fact is, petroleum has done more to improve our standard of living over the last century than any single innovation."

Robert Jones, the TransCanada vice president in charge of the Keystone XL pipeline project, said environmental fears about the project are unfounded.

Jones said pipeline technology improvements since 1970 have reduced the chance for leaks, and a direct hit from a backhoe would not puncture the pipe. He said the company voluntarily plans to treat the Sandhills region as a high-consequence area, similar to a heavily populated city and subject to more frequent safety checks.

The sides staged dueling rallies in front of the Pershing Center with signs, songs and a black, inflatable mock pipe that opponents hauled down the street.

Pipeline supporters in bright orange waved signs outside the Pershing Center that read, "Keystone Unlocks Good Jobs for Nebraska," and "Reason, Not Extremism." Opponents sported red Husker t-shirts with black arm bands and flashed "Protect the Sandhills" signs.

Some handed out shirts that said, "But Dad, our cows can't drink oil." Inside the arena, where signs were banned, one opponent used her speaking time to read a six-stanza poem: "Behold! A Pipeline Cometh!"

Pipeline opponent Dan Rudnick of Lincoln said he'd like to see state and federal action to at least reroute the pipeline around the Ogallala Aquifer.

Nebraska State Sen. Ken Haar urged officials to take more time to consider the project or reject it outright. Haar, an outspoken pipeline critic, drew a standing ovation after he spoke. When his time ended, pipeline supporters shouted, "Time's up!"

"With all due respect to this committee, I would say today that the national interest is being defined by the federal government and TransCanada, and that you don't give a damn about Nebraska," he said to loud whistles and applause.

Nebraska State Sen. Jim Smith, a pipeline supporter, said the proposed route is the safest, most efficient and most environmental of all pathways considered. As he finished, protesters shouted: "Shame on you!"

Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman has urged Obama and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to deny a federal permit for the pipeline, which would carry Canadian oil through part of the Ogallala Aquifer that also supplies drinking and irrigation water to South Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas. Heineman, a Republican, said he would support the pipeline project if TransCanada moved its route.

The State Department, which must approve the pipeline because it would cross the U.S.-Canada border, is expected to decide by the end of the year.

Despite reassurances, the project has become a flashpoint for environmental groups, who say the pipeline would bring "dirty oil" that requires huge amounts of energy to extract and could cause an ecological disaster in case of a spill. Opponents have urged Obama to block the project as a sign he is serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.

Environmental activists, including actress Daryl Hannah and NASA scientist James Hansen, have been arrested in ongoing protests outside the White House during the past two weeks.

Supporters say the pipeline has received a vigorous three-year federal review that has uncovered no major concerns. They argue that the pipeline will create thousands of construction jobs and reduce the nation's dependence on Middle East oil.

"It's going to come from somewhere," said John Blasingame, who trains unionized pipe workers in Omaha. "Nobody's willing to give up their automobile. None of these people who are against the pipeline are willing to give up their automobile."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

LINCOLN, Neb. — Dueling protesters tangled during a raucous hearing in Nebraska on Tuesday over a proposed Canadian oil pipeline that opponents say could harm U.S. drinking water – a claim...
LINCOLN, Neb. — Dueling protesters tangled during a raucous hearing in Nebraska on Tuesday over a proposed Canadian oil pipeline that opponents say could harm U.S. drinking water – a claim...
LINCOLN, Neb. — Dueling protesters tangled during a raucous hearing in Nebraska on Tuesday over a proposed Canadian oil pipeline that opponents say could harm U.S. drinking water – a claim...
LINCOLN, Neb. — Dueling protesters tangled during a raucous hearing in Nebraska on Tuesday over a proposed Canadian oil pipeline that opponents say could harm U.S. drinking water – a claim...
Filed by Joanna Zelman  |  Report Corrections
 
 
  • Comments
  • 64
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
04:59 PM on 09/28/2011
Too many people claim this will help end America's addiction to Middle East oil and ensure energy security. Well, that is just not true. Bush 43 signed a bill into law the makes it illegal for the U.S. to buy oil that has a larger carbon footprint than "conventional oil" using taxpayer money. IF the pipedream becomes the nightmare it is destined to be, the refined oil will be sold on the global marketplace and not end up in the gas tanks of Americans.

And the whole red herring of "creating jobs" is a farce.

http://www.tarsandsaction.org/cornell-global-labor-institute-study-finds-keystone-xl-pipeline-create-jobs/
02:44 AM on 09/28/2011
Thank you (to all of the positive comments for moving or stopping this pipeline). I was at the hearing today and the bulk of the pro-pipeline comments came from out of state union members who were bussed in and paid to comment. I am pro-union and I understand their point of view and their marching orders but this is the wrong fight. I actually encountered a group of union members from IL on the sidewalk who thought the pipeline should be rerouted after hearing the facts of the Ogallala Aquifer (it would mean more work and be safer).
Nebraskans aren't the type of people to protest or raise a ruckus over anything... but putting a pipeline over the largest fresh water source in the country seems like a bad idea (since their first pipeline has already leaked 12 times in one year).
08:21 PM on 09/27/2011
Also, what's wrong with refining the oil in Alberta? Why does it need to be piped through our heartland more than several hundred miles to be refined?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:20 PM on 09/27/2011
Good point.
08:20 PM on 09/27/2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XQOJipRlJ8 This commercial just came on my television and I was fuming. Having read about and understood the dangers this poses, I'm am convinced that, in the name of profits, there's nothing that wont have to suffer--the environment, the people, everything--it's just a big 'Eff it all.'
FreeHat
Really?
06:24 PM on 09/27/2011
Has there ever been a reported story regarding an oil pipe bursting and effecting ground drinking water supplies? I wiki'd it but came up empty.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dispagi
All comments certified organic, non-GMO
06:52 PM on 09/27/2011
1980 A pipeline Dispatcher ignored established procedures for dealing with a pressure surge, causing a double rupture of a 32 inch steel petroleum products pipeline on March 6. One break, where the pipe had been thinned by corrosion in a casing under a road, caused the release of 8,000 barrels (1,300 m3) of aviation-grade kerosene adjacent to route 234 near Manassas, Virginia. Before being fully contained, the kerosene had flowed into Bull Run River, and had entered the Occoquan Reservoir, a source of drinking water for several northern Virginia communities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pipeline_accidents
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deweaver
Scientist, businessman, semi-retired
07:00 PM on 09/27/2011
Reality is not relevant to environmental believers.

There have been fuel pipelines impacting shallow aquifers, but most drinking water aquifers are deeper. It is easy to clean up hydrocarbon pollution in ground water, just expensive. Though the cleanup cost is often much less than the legal cost.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
hazbro24
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro- HST
06:10 PM on 09/27/2011
LOL at the Nebraska sign. Home of arbor day.

Not a tree in sight.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fgbouman
Curmudgeon & Designer
05:53 PM on 09/27/2011
The paraffin from Alberta's oil sands has such a low energy return on energy invested that this pipeline makes no economic sense unless they rape our commons. This is encouraging a further despoiling of our heritage for which our grandchildren will have to pay the piper. This should not even be on the table.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deweaver
Scientist, businessman, semi-retired
07:03 PM on 09/27/2011
If it doesn't make economic sense, why are people and private corporations investing billions of their own money in oil sands. Only governments tend to do things that "don't make economic sense".
05:01 PM on 09/27/2011
The jobs and $$$ impact to the fine folks in the Sand Hills would be huge, I'm sure. But as a lover of the beef, corn and game that my state provides, I believe the risk to aquifer alone is enough to say "NO". I appreciate the effort put forth in mitigating risk as much as possible, but TransCanada must reroute or cancel.

I'm a native Nebraska, eater of meat, hunter and fisher. I am also a Conservative that says, Conserve this land for future generations.
photo
TYRANNASAURUS
UGH!....people taste like crap!
04:53 PM on 09/27/2011
That photo of NEBRASKA says everything.....wide open expanses of nothingness.... no hills, trees just grass for the cow and hogs.... Woo Woo,
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:26 PM on 09/27/2011
Trex
the Great Plains are a whole lot more than meets the eye!
photo
TYRANNASAURUS
UGH!....people taste like crap!
08:18 AM on 10/01/2011
Well I'll just keep flying over them...there's too many other really exciting places to visit in the world.
03:08 PM on 09/27/2011
All of you should read the following story from Monday's Huffingtonpost.

Jeremy Rifkin: The 'Democratization Of Energy' Will Change Everything

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/26/jeremy-rifkin-democratization-of-energy-green-technology_n_980222.html?utm_campaign=092611&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-green&utm_content=FullStory

There will be another story on Thursday.

Here are excerpts from Mr. Rifkin's most recent book.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeremy-rifkin/the-third-industrial-revolution-_b_964049.html

Watch his short video here:

http://www.foet.org/

You can purchase Mr. Rifkin's book,

"The Third Industrial Revolution: How Lateral Power Is Transforming Energy, the Economy, and the World" Here:

http://www.amazon.com/Third-Industrial-Revolution-Lateral-Transforming/dp/0230115217/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317111172&sr=8-1

After reading this material, the supporters of this pipeline might finally remove the blinders, open their eyes, and begin to understand, as many Americans already do, why the pipeline supporters are barking up the wrong tree.

It will NEVER succeed. It will be swept aside like a home in a tornado before it ever gets off the ground. The 3rd Industrial Revolution will sweep it away.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:07 PM on 09/27/2011
Sounds pretty obvious you don't live in the area if you actually believe "It will be swept aside like a home in a tornado before it ever gets off the ground."
05:22 PM on 09/27/2011
I'm using that term because of a big fight we are having in Honolulu over our false energy God's ( Hawaiian Electric - HECO) attempt to continue burning oil, including biofuel for the next 20 years to maintain its state-sponsored monopolistic control over our energy future because burning stuff is all this tired old dinosaur and Neanderthal knows how to do to produce electricity. See charleneongreen.org for more information if interested.

We have plenty of geothermal, wind, solar, and ocean energy that is being curtailed so HECO can continue to burn oil to keep its profits up and keep its fire burning power plants going.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheIndependenceParty
Cranky yankee and a rehabilitated ex-Republican
03:05 PM on 09/27/2011
The Oilheads who are for the pipeline really haven't thought this through to its logical conclusion, or are being paid not to.

The pipeline offers not one drop of oil independence to the United States. We just have a risky pipe running the bredth of our country at risk of terrorism, earthquake, fire and other disaster. Canada is shipping it to a port to sell to other parts of the world, so THEY don't even grow less dependent on foreign oil.

This is ALL about making money for Big Oil, ... Period.
02:32 PM on 09/27/2011
The people of Nebraska and all the states that are in the pipeline's path should do the same thing the Bolivian people are doing right now to prevent a road being built through a national park/rainforest preserve.  They are organizing massive protests that block roads and marches to the capital.  Their actions are producing real results.  The government is now backing down from approving the construction of the road.  BLOCK ROADS PEACEFULLY!  IT REALLY WORKS!
photo
yukonsam
This space reserved for self-referential irony.
02:30 PM on 09/27/2011
Canada could build refineries on site; they don't need a 1700 mile pipeline for that. What they need is to get it to a warm-water port. That suggests to me that the oil is not intended for the U.S. domestic market at all but for export, before or after refining. Net impact on U.S. "energy security" -- zip.

It would create a short-term construction boom, no doubt, and there are people desperate enough to fight for that with whatever it takes, including outright fabrications and vicious attacks. If it was my family going hungry and the social safety net was being shredded, I might be forced to toe the company line just to survive.

But these people don't need a temporary boom. They need long-term, sustainable economic viability. It's past time to stop treating the symptoms and go after the disease.

This pipeline is a raw deal for everybody but Keystone in the long run... and ultimately, it's not even good for them.
photo
Aladdin Sane1
"Are you the police?""No, ma'am, we're musicians."
03:53 PM on 09/27/2011
"What they need is to get it to a warm-water port."

At the rate the Arctic is melting they could soon build the pipeline north to do that...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nomadrdw
Zen Druid
04:09 PM on 09/27/2011
and of course no one is even bringing up a couple of facts here...
Canada's own environmental laws prevent them from building it there. and even if the didn't, the native tribes have blocked it coming through their land.
and one thing that i have not seen mentioned in the American press, at least 50% of the jobs will be foreign nationals. to translate for those that don't recognize that term, it means the will NOT be American citizens.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deweaver
Scientist, businessman, semi-retired
07:11 PM on 09/27/2011
Did you just make up that 50% will be foreign nationals number? It doesn't make sense, building pipelines uses lots of heavy equipment operators, many of which will come from outside Nebraska, but that doesn't make them "foreign nationals".
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:22 PM on 09/27/2011
What if the gov says none of that oil or it's refined products can be exported? For use in US only. Otherwise much this product will go on the world market, the US will benefit very little. Is there a way to avoid the Ogallala Aquifer? I agree our efforts need to be in something other than oil and coal, but it's going to be impossible to stop oil and coal - they are too powerful and will be for a while.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheIndependenceParty
Cranky yankee and a rehabilitated ex-Republican
03:08 PM on 09/27/2011
You really don't understand it seems. It is not our oil, ... it comes Canada, and belongs to big oil.

We are just the path they want to use to get it to market.

To claim the oil for the US, we would have to declare war on Canada.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
beckjr2000
been there done that & tired of it
01:05 PM on 09/27/2011
Remember! You can't justify the costs of "Green Energy" until you able to either drive up the cost of existing energy systems 7 to 12 fold or simply destroy the ability of produce energy cheaply!
photo
yukonsam
This space reserved for self-referential irony.
02:12 PM on 09/27/2011
By bringing costs onto the balance sheets that should have been there all along.
02:34 PM on 09/27/2011
Oil, coal and nuclear energy are subsidized.  They are ARTIFICIALLY CHEAP.  Regardless, the price of fossil and nuclear fuels is going to rise no matter what happens, since they are finite resources.  As supplies dwindle and demand goes up, the price skyrockets.  Expensive fossil and nuclear fuels are inevitable.  Nuclear is already too expensive.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
beckjr2000
been there done that & tired of it
10:06 AM on 09/28/2011
Interesting how you and others keep pushing the costs of our military and Government operations as cost that apply only to the conventional energy sources. Don't you realize that these "costs" would apply equally to Green Energy? No matter how you cut it today's "Green Energy Solutions' are no where near being cost efficient. The technology being used is not new.