It's time to get down and dirty with the detractors of the Keystone XL. The pipeline would be cleaner than rail. It's just that simple. They should think for a second (because that's all it should take) to imagine if every drop of oil had to be transported by rail, how dirty that would be...........and that's after the steel and tracks and cars were manufactured. Think of all the cars idling at rail road crossings etc. This is not to say VLOs investment is misplaced. The rails are a hedge against a outage, a disaster (like a earthquake) and possibly profiteering by the pipeline company who thinks the refinery (and it's customers downstream) are at it's mercy. In those cases a alternate infastructure is critical and i have no doubt the jobs related to rail transport are safe because of this. The clean and green argument is the main reason this line should be approved. One single coal fired power plant is dirtier than the entire canadian operation. This amount of oil transported by rail would be incredibly dirty. So let both partys drop their favorite party lines because who ever wrote the scripts were lying. Is it possible that only independent are allowed to tell the truth?
Let's keep a balanced perspective when digging up dirt. Your comments seem to presume oil flows through a pipeline like it is being sucked to the Gulf of Mexico as if through a drinking straw. Pumping stations are powered by burned fossil fuels just like locomotives and experience spills just as unit trains may. Railroads are on the verge of a change as revolutionary as the conversion from steam to diesel-electric, with CAT, GE and the Class I railroads collaborating on development of natural gas locomotive power to reduce pollution and operating costs. Problem with that scenario is that railroads collectively are the largest consumers of diesel fuel. Imagine the effect on refiners, especially if the Navy follows suit.
Avi, since it's evident that I'm not "digging up dirt" on anyone and wrote straight off the top of my head, let's move on to your other hypothisis. It's not a "balanced" opinion. Oh, yeah, I've worked pipelines and know a little about pumping stations too.......most are powered by natural gas. So your balanced idea is kill the pipeline and concentrate on rail? Because that's what it sounds like to me. I think I clearly stated that I feel VLO did NOT make a mistake investing in railcars because they are a big company that shouldn't let themself be "over a barrel" or at the mercy so to speak by any one component in their operation. I'm not certain you like the new natural gas technology that rail is going to ( i've read articles including warren buffets take on this issue) and it sounds like you are at the same time applauding it and dumping on it because it will hurt diesel sales. Could you clear up your position on it. Yes I an aware of the spill in the kalamazoo, the spill in the yellowstone, the 30 ft blow out of the bison, the leaks (mostly in the pumping stations) of the original keystone, the leaks of the lines around houston, the blow out of the horizon.................................none would deter me from saying oil transport by rail is much much dirtier. It's just too much oil to move. And I know how much a DDG,LPD,LHA all run per hour and can safely say that you don't and are an alarmest by thinking it could ever change in the near future. Not many navel vessels run by natural gas and the cost of a refit is impossible at this juncture.
Dominik, Your lies are getting old. This is formal process that has to pass every legislative arm in every state and federal jurisdiction. It's up for his signature in late june. Then you can opine on that. Both the Governor of Nebraska, the EPA, the D.O.T and countless other agencys have to sign off on the plan and route. If you like dictatorships ,and i expect you do, move to one.