Elizabeth May:
"There is a catechism of the fossil fuel industry, with oft-repeated claims that seem by repetition to escape examination. Peter MacKay's recent opinion piece on pipelines was a veritable greatest hits compilation of such claims.....
.... When you next hear one of these claims from the fossilized hit parade, don't confuse them with facts."
Don't Confuse Peter MacKay's Pipeline Claims For Facts
He writes that "pipelines are by far the safest means of transporting oil." The first muddying of facts is the notion that we are talking about shipping oil. All the current pipeline proposals, including Energy East, are primarily about shipping unprocessed bitumen. Bitumen is in a pre-crude state and can only be casually referenced as "oil" if one accepted the idea that grain should be referred to as "croissants" when discussing markets.
The second problem with this much-repeated claim is the notion that it is "safest." The claim is not challenged because everyone recalls the tragedy of Lac Megantic and the unsafe transport of North Dakota Bakken crude by rail. No doubt that shipping highly volatile and explosive Bakken crude is dangerous, by pipeline or rail. Here's the surprising thing: when shipping raw bitumen, rail is the safest mode of transport.
Bitumen is a solid. In order to get bitumen to flow through pipelines, it must be diluted with a solvent, a fossil fuel condensate that industry calls diluent. Once mixed together, the substance is called "dilbit."
Dilbit is very nasty stuff. When it leaks -- and pipelines do have routine accidents and spills -- dilbit has proven itself to be nearly impossible to clean up. In environmental terms, it is messier than the crude that spilled from the Exxon Valdez.
No comments:
Post a Comment