iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Keystone XL Pipeline Eyed To Ease Truck Gridlock On North Dakota Roads

Reuters  |  Posted: Updated: 05/16/2012 11:34 am


By Roberta Rampton

WASHINGTON, May 15 (Reuters) - The McKenzie County Sheriff Department has a map of the narrow grid of two-lane highways coming out of an oil-rich corner of North Dakota, each rutted route lined with dozens of red stick pins marking the site of traffic accidents so far this year.

The map is a sign of how infrastructure has failed to keep up with the boom in U.S. oil production, as small roads built for grain trucks and cars are overwhelmed by trucks laden with equipment, sand and water used for drilling, and crude oil.

"The impatient drivers, when they're getting behind 18, 19, 20 trucks, you can't pass on a two-lane road. But people try it," said Cal Klewin, executive director of the Theodore Roosevelt Expressway Association, describing the dangerous traffic in the region.

For Republican Senator John Hoeven, examples of gridlocked roads in his home state help make the case for fast-tracking the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline, which would help take more than 100,000 barrels of oil per day -- about 500 trucks worth -- off of North Dakota roads.

Hoeven and other Republicans are pushing to include approvals for TransCanada Corp's pipeline in a new highway funding bill, the details of which are now being hashed out by 47 lawmakers from the Senate and House of Representatives, who face a looming June 30 deadline.

The pipeline would run from the Canadian oil sands south to Texas refineries, picking up oil from North Dakota and Montana along the way.

President Barack Obama put all but the southernmost portion of the pipeline on hold earlier this year, pending further environmental reviews. He has threatened to veto a highway bill overriding his decision.

Many Democratic lawmakers have argued the Keystone permit provision does not belong in the transportation bill. They say the fight to include it puts at risk as many as three million jobs fixing roads and bridges.

"We're talking about a highway bill, aren't we? This relates directly to highways," Hoeven said in an interview.

"Those pipelines take trucks off the roads," he said, pulling a road atlas out of his Capitol Hill desk to point out highways in his state suffering from traffic-overload.

Klewin's group is pushing for a four-lane highway to help move the trucks carrying supplies to and from drilling sites and reduce the number of red pins on the sheriff's map. The pipeline would also help, he said.

"I think we need both," Klewin said.

In Washington, lawmakers' staff have logged about 20 hours of work so far finding areas of agreement on the bill, said Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer, chairman of the conference panel.

"We haven't got down to areas of disagreement, and we will," Boxer told reporters, when asked about the Keystone pipeline.

The final bill will need to find enough votes in the House and Senate to pass, she noted.

"What I've said from the start is, if you load this up with controversy that can't get through either house, it's a problem."

Boxer said she will meet on Thursday with John Mica, the top House Republican on the conference committee, and will meet one-on-one with members over coffee on particular issues.

She said she will brief all 47 members of the committee this week on progress, and give a public update of the private talks to reporters once a week.

"I am optimistic the conferees will reach agreement on this bill," Boxer said, citing strong letters from business groups and unions urging lawmakers to finish their work by the deadline.

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW GREEN

By Roberta Rampton WASHINGTON, May 15 (Reuters) - The McKenzie County Sheriff Department has a map of the narrow grid of two-lane highways coming out of an oil-rich corner of North Da...
By Roberta Rampton WASHINGTON, May 15 (Reuters) - The McKenzie County Sheriff Department has a map of the narrow grid of two-lane highways coming out of an oil-rich corner of North Da...
Filed by James Gerken  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 49
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
05:04 PM on 05/25/2012
For a few dollars more per barrel to move crude by rail to St. James, La., the payoff more than pencils out, said Hamm, a billionaire oilman who is sending the bulk of his Bakken and Three Forks production to the Gulf Coast.
google it!
04:25 PM on 05/25/2012
Why not use the railroad? It would cost about $10 more per barrel than a pipeline.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nirek
Proud progressive Vietnam vet. against WAR
12:33 PM on 05/17/2012
Why is no one talking about the taking of land from folks for the pipeline ?
All for the profit of oil companies. Why don't they just build a refinery near the border of Canada and distribute the gas from both the north and the south. This would cut the distance of trucking?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
olitenup
11:28 AM on 05/18/2012
Because they are so filthy, toxic to communities around them, and God forbid the expense of building one would cut into their greedy profits, it is virtually impossible to build one today.

It is all about, and ONLY about the money, the rest of us be damned.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nirek
Proud progressive Vietnam vet. against WAR
01:19 PM on 05/18/2012
I knew that but wanted someone to tell us .
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Charles Vanderbilt
11:18 AM on 05/17/2012
The "highway bill" and the "pipeline bill" seem like mutual
enemies. If you build the pipeline, you eventually won't need
the highways for transport and if you build the highways you
won't need the pipeline. Make sense? ChuckV
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
captnEarl
10:23 AM on 05/17/2012
force this thick oily sandy gue thru pipes made in China at great pressure is in my opinion asking for blow-outs due to how corrosive the mix will be on the inside of the cheap steel pipes...if its going to be exported anyway why not ship it directly to west coast thru alberta, let China and India refine it themselves
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
floridan56
Irony: it's what's for dinner.
04:51 AM on 05/17/2012
I see now. The pipeline will help preserve our roads. What a nice and thoughtful thing.
How bout they just pay damages as part of the cost of their unsightly business. You think they care about the roads? It's the liabilities they are trying to dodge, once again, at Americas ultimate expense.
It's an ugly business, usually done in what were beautiful places.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
smoker
Qué Será, Será
10:46 PM on 05/16/2012
""Those pipelines take trucks off the roads,"

What about their jobs? And, what about the jobs accrued from building the roads?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nirek
Proud progressive Vietnam vet. against WAR
12:35 PM on 05/17/2012
And maintaining those roads. Jobs that are good ones.
photo
artleads
Let's have a national retreat.
09:38 PM on 05/16/2012
Eyed to ease gridlock? What'll they think of next? Why not build a rail corridor? Cheaper and better for Planet Earth. Hey, since they care so much about transportation, let TransCanada fund it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
floridan56
Irony: it's what's for dinner.
05:01 AM on 05/17/2012
couldn't agree more. Jobs, progress, with mass efficiency with likely prosperity, and a lessened need for petroleum fuels.

Big oil HATES thay whole idea.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
yeti7
don't need no stink'n badges
08:34 PM on 05/16/2012
and the rail traffic and we know how safe our trains are.
Pipeline is the safest by far
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
floridan56
Irony: it's what's for dinner.
05:05 AM on 05/17/2012
yeah. that's how I want to travel to work; on a wave inside of oil in a tube.

Maybe we could whip up a little progress in rail developement instead? = jobs galore both in labor, technology and manufacturing that promotes cleaner air for all of us to breathe. Really strikes me as a no brainer.
Must be why big oil hates that whole idea too.

Pipelines,... we all know already.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
yeti7
don't need no stink'n badges
09:09 AM on 05/17/2012
spend billions if not trillions of dollars on
rail, HS rail, that will benefit less than the 10% of the countries citizens. You want 90% of the tax payers to pay for your HS speed train ride? Ride the bus they come in Natural Gas, Electric and Hydrogen Fuel cell engine if it an environmental concern. Plus the bus can use it existing roads and highways where as HS rail will take up even more land and displace more and more people.
photo
Coffee4Me
To those who waited 6 hrs to vote, THANK YOU!
07:47 PM on 05/16/2012
If traffic is their best argument as to why pipeline construction should be expedited, it isn't necessary,
06:27 PM on 05/16/2012
Keystone is intended to ship oil to a port, where it can be exported. It has absolutely nothing to do with US energy independence. The primary reason for the push to build it is that the Koch brothers have a huge investment in Canadian tar sands.
03:08 PM on 05/16/2012
Let's think again.

The KeystoneXL pipe line requires an entire convoy of trucks just to build the thing. Then, you need to maintain it. What happens if the Keystone ruptures, like it did in Michigan. How will this affect North Dakota's water supply? (Again check out the disaster on the Kalamazoo for answers.)

Furthermore, the Keystone XL extension will NOT mean cheaper oil for North Dakota. Transcanada wants to extend the KeystoneXL pipeline to Port Arthur, Texas, for one reason only - They intend to export all the oil to Canada.

Democrats in Congress have tried twice to pass amendments that would keep KeystoneXL oil in the US. Both times this proposal was blocked by the GOP.

In addition to not telling the whole truth about KeystoneXL, Senator Hoeven is not telling the whole truth about fracking, the other popular means of getting energy. Fracking also requires massive convoys of trucks for supplies and chemicals.

And finally, Hoeven is not telling the truth about global climate change. How will that phenomenon affect North Dakota? Global climate change will not go away just because the GOP says so. By voting for Republicans, like Hoeven, the people of North Dakota are playing a frightening game of Russian roulette with their future.
billa518
Wouldn't it be nice if everyone stayed on topic?
07:40 PM on 05/16/2012
How will global climate change affect North Dakota? By making the winters milder and the growing season longer. In terms of the state economy, oil doesn't hold a candle to wheat.
I know people in North Dakota, I talked to them in April and they are frelling ECSTATIC.
photo
artleads
Let's have a national retreat.
09:43 PM on 05/16/2012
"How will global climate change affect North Dakota?"

Weird, unpredicatable weather. And tar sands mixed with wheat might not be appetizing.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
yeti7
don't need no stink'n badges
08:45 PM on 05/16/2012
Your comment on construction doesn't make much since it temporary in nature. But not building will mean a constant stream of trucks, train car and river barge traffic.
Maintenance is no problem. Are you overwhelmed by inspection vehicles for all the current oil & gas pipelines crisscrossing the states? Much of the right away and visual inspection are done by helicopter or plane . Other inspection are carried out within the pipe itself.
Global warming from a pipeline is a concern of yours?
photo
artleads
Let's have a national retreat.
09:46 PM on 05/16/2012
"Global warming from a pipeline is a concern of yours?"

Why, yes! Transporting enough tar sands to bring CO2 levels to 600 parts per million might do some weird and alarming things.
12:06 PM on 05/16/2012
North Dakota just surpassed Alaska as the second largest crude oil producer in the US. Transporting this oil by truck because we can't muster the political will to construct the pipeline, just demonstrates how broken we have become. The "Greens" don't want the pipeline because they (a) don't like oil and (b) hate tar sands oil and think stopping the pipeline will stop its development. Meanwhile, we are shipping millions of barrels of North Dakota oil by truck and rail, transportation methods that are much more expensive, much more dangerous, much more likely to spill than a pipeline.

Let's get this pipeline built.
photo
Finn43
R1b1a2a1a
02:07 PM on 05/16/2012
FOB, Warren Buffett is making too much money through BNSF for that to happen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
stopthemadness69
Real Americans care more about people than profits
02:19 PM on 05/16/2012
How about we demand we get to keep some of the oil if they are gonna run it through our country? How about we focus on leaving oil behind instead? How about ND plans ahead and buils roads to support their new industry?
02:54 PM on 05/16/2012
It should never move long distances by road.