(I remain confused about what 'principle' is being supported by trashing the State House. Perhaps it can be explained in comments. - promoted by Rob Kailey)
According to the Great Falls Tribune:
"More than 100 environmental activists from across the country descended on Gov. Brian Schweitzer's office Tuesday to demand that he rescind his support for the Keystone XL oil pipeline and the Exxon Mobile megaload transportation project.
Schweitzer met with the rowdy group of activists in the reception room of his office, but refused to meet their demands. Activists from Northen Rockies Rising Tide, Earth!First and other environmental groups said last week's rupture of an Exxon Mobile pipeline that fouled dozens of miles of the Yellowstone River downstream of Laurel is a prime example of why Schweitzer should "toss big oil out of Montana."
Great Falls Tribune reporter John S. Adams is, apparently, on scene and, according to his Montana Lowdown blog, will "have more on this as the day goes on, including photos and video from today's protest in Gov. Brian Schweitzer's office."
On Monday, Adams took a deeper look into the issue with his post, "Schweitzer still supports oil sands/Keystone XL despite tough talk on Yellowstone oil spill."
UPDATE from Reuters:
Montana pipeline spill may have carried oil sands crude
"An Exxon Mobil pipeline that ruptured, leaking oil into Yellowstone River, may have sometimes carried a heavier and more toxic form of crude than initially thought, federal regulators said on Thursday.
The U.S. Transportation Department's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration spokeswoman Patricia Klinger said her office had learned that the pipeline may have been used to carry heavier crude.
"I just found out that apparently, and the regional folks just found out, there is an interconnect on the pipeline that possibly does carry some oil out of Canada," she said in response to a question about tar sands crude in the pipeline....
Tar sands crude may cause more wear and tear on pipes because of its chemical makeup, including corrosive and abrasive agents, said Tom Finch, the pipeline administration's technical services director for the western regional office.
Federal inspectors were trying to determine if transport of tar sands crude could have triggered internal corrosion that may have played a role in the rupture, he said....
Richard Opper, head of the Montana Department of Environmental Quality, said he was surprised to learn the pipeline buried in the streambed of the Yellowstone may sometimes have moved tar sands crude from Canada.
"If the question is, did we know it was carrying tar sands oil? Hell, no," he said in an interview on Thursday. "If companies are changing the kinds of materials in pipelines to mixes that make them more likely they will leak or rupture, that raises huge concerns."
Entire story at:
http://www.reuters.com/article...
Update #2: July 19 - Judge stops transport of giant oilfield equipment through western Montana
The Missoulian is reporting:
A district court judge has upheld a request by Missoula County and three conservation groups to stop the Kearl Module Transportation Project - and its trucking of giant oilfield equipment modules through western Montana.
Judge Ray Dayton of Anaconda issued his decision to partially grant a preliminary injunction against the Montana Department of Transportation and Imperial Oil/Exxon Mobil shortly before 5 p.m. Tuesday.
Dayton ruled that the transportation department was out of line in approving Imperial's proposal to transport an unprecedented 200 Korean-made megaloads of processing equipment to the Kearl Oil Sands in Alberta, Canada, via U.S. Highway 12, Highway 200 and other two-lane roads in Montana.
He agreed with the county and its co-plaintiffs - the National Wildlife Federation, the Montana Environmental Information Center and the Montana Chapter of the Sierra Club - that MDT violated the Montana Environmental Policy Act because it approved an insufficient environmental assessment.
The plaintiffs maintained that the transportation department "failed to adequately consider impacts of the project and failed to adequately consider reasonable alternatives."
Among his points, Dayton said the impact of turnouts constructed along the route could not be fully determined because MDT couldn't say which ones were permanent and which ones were temporary.
He ruled that the environmental assessment didn't analyze whether construction at a similar cost along an interstate route was a feasible alternate. And he said MDT didn't take a "hard look" at the environmental impacts of the Kearl project because it relied on the work of a private consulting firm, Tetra Tech, which was hired by Imperial Oil.
Dayton said he could not rescind encroachment permits already issued by the transportation department.
"The practical effect of this ruling is that ... activity which requires no further permitting or authorization from MDT may legally proceed," Dayton wrote. "However, as issuance of further 32-J permits, and any other permits ... are hereby preliminarily enjoined, construction would be at Imperial Oil's peril, as it may ultimately be determined that such further permitting will be permanently enjoined."
|
