Breaks a danger in proposed pipeline
http://www.bismarcktribune.com/articles/2007/08/27/news/opinion/letters/...
Aug 27, 2007 - 05:27:25 CDT
By RAMONA KLEIN
Oriska
Canada wants to build a 1,830-mile, 30-inch crude oil pipeline, pumping 435,000 barrels a day or more, across 218 miles of North Dakota. This directly affects about 600 landowners, neighbors and anybody using water in this part of the state.
Keystone Pipeline is seeking Public Service Commission approval to use eminent domain to obtain 50 feet of permanent easement plus 60 feet of additional workspace.
It offers a small, one-time payment, providing for ownership for 99 years. Its attitude is: "Take our offer, or we will take your land anyway."
Our state constitution forbids private companies from using eminent domain except for a public utility or a common carrier. Does Keystone Pipeline meet the requirement of "public necessity," or is its sole purpose to pass through the state?
The PSC is in the process of deciding the public necessity and route issues.
Commissioners Kevin Cramer, Tony Clark and Susan Wefald can be reached at 701-328-2400 or by e-mail at (ndpsc@;nd.gov), (swefald@;nd.gov), (tclark@;nd.gov) and (kcramer@;nd.gov).
The last hearing will be at 9 a.m., Sept. 5 in the commission's hearing room in the state Capitol in Bismarck
The proposed route runs near Walhalla and the Pembina Gorge, along and crossing the Sheyenne River, within one to two miles of Lake Ashtabula, through some of the best cropland in the state, and through Fort Ransom State Park and Little Yellowstone Park. It crosses multiple aquifers and waterways.
The pipeline company has stated in its Web site (www.transcanada.com/keystone) that leaks are happening and expected. Most recent are the tragic oil leaks in July at Coffeeville, Kan., and Burnaby, British Columbia (google these locations for photos of the mess).
It will leak and could destroy our water sources and pollute hundreds of acres. The petroleum product comes from Canadian tar sands and contains arsenic, mercury, lead, etc.
Tax money paid to the state could easily be spent in fighting the leaks, loss of property value, water, etc. Imagine cleaning sludge out of the Sheyenne and Red rivers plus Lake Ashtabula and numerous aquifers.
Alternate routes creating less environmental impact are available. The pipeline doesn't want that, as it might cost them money.
Additional information is available from Lynn Wolff, Dakota Resource Council (lynn@;drcinfo.com) 701-298-8685. The draft of the federal Environment Impact Study is now available at public libraries or at http://www.keystonepipeline.state.gov.
