Keystone Pipeline Leaks Again; Fuels Argument against Keystone XL Pipeline

The Keystone pipeline leaked 5000 barrels of food oil in Amherst, South Dakota.

Keystone pipeline spill pushes oil higher, fuels TransCanada opponents

Keystone Pipeline Leaks Again; Fuels Argument against Keystone XL Pipeline

The Keystone Pipeline leaked 5000 barrels of crude oil in Amherst, South Dakota. The pipeline will remain closed until given the approval my strengths are to reopen by the US Pipeline And Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). This spill is the largest that has happened on the Keystone pipeline so far, and it will take quite a while to clean it up. This spill has added fuel to the fire against the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which has not been built yet, even though it is been given approval by the Trump administration.

Even though this article seems to deal primarily with the economic effects of this leak, I am not going to spend much time on that particular aspect of this environmental disaster. Any oil spill is a disaster, no matter how small. However, my time is better spent dealing with the potential for a massive environmental disaster that could result if the Keystone XL pipeline is about to go forward. As far as I’m concerned, the Keystone pipeline, which has already been built and operating for quite a while, is the primary environmental threat. Hopefully, the Keystone XL pipeline will not be built, even though in my heart of hearts I know that it probably will be because fat-cat oil millionaires always seem to get their way.

That is why I’m not going to waste time talking about the economic impacts because I basically don’t give a tinker’s damn about whether or not a few greedy capitalists make money from their oil stocks. Having shown that they are the most of the economic prostitutes, or better put, corporate whores they are going to make their money no matter what I say. Why should I waste my time dealing with the obvious? However, the thought that TransCanada, the company that operates the pipeline, probably made millions of dollars from this oil spill makes me very angry.

Since the Keystone pipeline transports about 590,000 barrels of crude oil from Alberta’s oil sands to US markets in Texas, there is no justification for the Keystone XL pipeline, which is basically a shortcut. Unfortunately, this shortcut goes right through the heart of the precious Ogallala aquifer go to previous form, the primary source of potable water in the entire Midwest. Several states depend on the Ogallala aquifer for water which they used to not only irrigate their crops but consume as drinking water. It would only take only a small amount of dirty tar sands oil to pollute this entire region, thus depriving a huge amount of people drinking water. Simply put, the Keystone XL pipeline is not worth the risk.

The Keystone pipeline is more than enough to supply crude oil from Alberta to Texas. Building the Keystone XL pipeline, which is basically a shortcut for the existing pipeline, is not only unjustified but potentially greatly hazardous to the environment. It should be stopped at all costs.


Chalk One up for the Environment: Obama Finally Kills Keystone XL

The move follows months of widespread expectations that Obama would kill the pipeline. Source: Obama rejects Keystone XL pipeline Chalk One up for the Environment: Obama Finally Kills Keystone XL   I am very pleased that Pres. Barack Obama finally decided to kill the Keystone XL pipeline. By doing so, it guarantees that some …
Hillary Clinton Has Finally Taken A Glib Position On Keystone XL

Clinton called the pipeline a “distraction from the important work we have to do on climate change.” Source: Hillary Clinton Has Finally Taken A Position On The Keystone XL Pipeline | ThinkProgress   Hillary Clinton Has Finally Taken a Glib Position On Keystone XL   Last week, Hillary Clinton finally took a position against the …


More Dangers of Fracking: Two More Carcinogens

More Dangers of Fracking: Two More Carcinogens

Fracking_hidden dangersTwo more chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing (a.k.a. fracking) have been discovered to be carcinogenic, or causing cancer.  It is becoming increasingly obvious the dangers of fracking far outweigh its benefits.  Recently, two more chemicals used in fracking and been linked to cancer.  These two chemicals are ammonium and iodide.

Ammonium is produced from regular waste water and agriculture.  In other words, waste water from feedlots, which has become the primary method used in raising cattle, pigs, chickens, and just about every other form of livestock is the culprit for ammonium pollution.  Since it is a well-known fact that agribusiness is notorious for not disposing of feedlot waste water in a proper way, it’s very easy to see how ammonium is introduced into our ecosystem.

Iodide, on the other hand, is a chemical commonly used in water purification.  However, when iodide is combined with other chemicals, such as, bromide, fluoride, and chlorine, it can become harmful when introduced into the environment.  Both of these chemicals, ammonium and iodide in combination have been shown to cause cancer.  The environmental impact of fracking is showing itself to be dangerous enough to make the argument that banning fracking is necessary.

Info graphic that shows how fracking contaminates underground water.Other dangers of fracking are already well known.  Fracking is known to be a source of water contamination in groundwater.  I have an example of this groundwater contamination in my own family.  During the mid-eighties, there was a gas well about 200 yards from my parents home.  After the well was fracked , my father was forced to drill another water well because the existing well was unusable.

Another negative impact of fracking is how fracking also consumes huge quantities of water, which is combined with the chemicals used in fracking.  At a time when it’s been proven that our planet is running out of potable water, using any process which consumes huge amounts of water is unacceptable.

In dry states, like California, Arizona, and other deserts states fracking wastes huge quantities of water, which is already in short supply, because this part of the country has been suffering from a drought for nearly 3 years.  We can ill afford to waste water because we need to irrigate in order to grow the necessary fruit and vegetables for the population of this country.

The way I look it, feeding people is far more important than extracting natural gas, especially when the chemicals used in this process have been proven to be highly toxic.  Not to mention the disastrous effects if these chemicals contaminate existing groundwater.

Fracking should be banned immediately.