re: #153 A Mom Anon

There is one possible benefit- the pipeline would reduce the need to transport the same tar sands petroleum products by rail, where there have been several high profile derailments, including one in Quebec that essentially leveled a town.

That benefit, however, is outweighed by the following facts:
1) the pipelines still cross sensitive wetlands and aquifers, that, if damaged, could cause irreparable harm;
2) companies are already routing that oil around the proposed pipeline and the purpose of the pipeline is to feed refineries on the Gulf Coast for export elsewhere;
3) This is from Canadian tar sands, and Canadians have chosen not to build refineries and pipelines within Canada to its own coasts for export; and
4) At current prices, it doesn’t make any sense to build out this capacity because it’s not cost effective to drill, refine, and bring to market.

That’s one of the reasons that tar sands were last to get tapped for oil drilling; they weren’t cost effective unless the cost of oil per barrel was up around $100 a barrel. With oil at half that price, there’s no incentive to tap that oil. And the other exporting nations aren’t cutting production either even though demand has slackened worldwide (but not in the US, where economic growth is still forecast - and the lower oil prices has meant billions more for people to spend on goods and services rather than flowing into the energy companies alone).