[quote poster=BobbyATA; 14878; 266858]

You've been listening to that moron Darryl Hannah, haven't you? :p

There have been leaks. 11 of the 12 were small leaks at pumping stations which were cleaned up within hours (I believe the amounts were all under 2L, but it would take me a while to find the exact stats) with zero environmental impact. The twelfth and largest leak was, as I recall, a microfine spray leak that affected a field downwind. The amount leaked was less than the amount in your car, and it was also cleaned immediately with no environmental impact. (And it wasn't 'similar' pipeline - it was older and/or legacy pipeline.)

This is the safest pipeline technology ever developed. It far exceeds any current safety regulations. It has a barrier, so that in the unlikely event of a leak or spill, the bitumen would be contained. And that's an important fact that most people ignore - this pipeline would be transporting BITUMEN, which is thick, heavy, and slow moving. It takes bitumen months to move inches. After a full year of laying on the ground, bitumen would have moved only a few feet.

And to H4's point about TC releasing 'misleading' information about the type of pipelines currently running through the Ogallala - I went back to our archives yesterday. I'll do this in miles, because the stats were easier to remember: There are currently 21,000 miles of pipeline running through the Ogallala. Over 3,000 miles of that pipeline is transporting hazardous LIQUIDS, and some of it dates back to 1956.

In case that doesn't make my points for me, I'll say it again. This is the safest pipeline technology ever developed and far exceeds current safety standards. And it is transporting bitumen, which, in the unlikely event it were to escape from the safest pipe ever developed, would migrate at the pace of a dead frozen snail in Moose Jaw in January.

In any case, TC saw this coming and had already agreed on an alternative route with the powers that be. This pipeline will be built - the only question is where.