Of course: Keystone XL opponents now turning to blocking rail transport in earnest

posted at 5:31 pm on November 23, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

I must say, I almost have to give them credit for finally, practically coming to grips with the fact that Canada’s energy companies have the will, and ergo, will find a way to develop, transport, and sell the products from their oil sands, with our without the still-pending northern extension of the already-completed Keystone pipeline — a market reality they have stubbornly neglected in many of their campaigns, op-eds, studies, and protests touting the prevention of Keystone XL as a means to thwart said oil-sands development. Case in point, via the NYT:

Suncor Energy, Canada’s top petroleum producer, announced on Thursday that it would expand its oil production in 2014 by 10 percent in another sign that the Obama administration’s delay in approving the Keystone XL pipeline extension is not holding back growth in the western Canadian oil sands fields. …

Suncor, which is based in Calgary, produces oil and gas around Canada, and has operations in North Africa and the North Sea. But its oil sands operations are the main driver for the company. In the most recent quarter, its oil sands output rose 16 percent from the year before for a record of 396,000 barrels a day, nearly 20 percent of the country’s total oil sands production. …

But over the last several months, oil companies have sought to go around the dispute by announcing plans for three large rail loading terminals with the combined capacity of transporting 350,000 barrels a day.

In acknowledgement of the above, perhaps, these self-titled environmentalist groups are now turning to blocking the means of rail transport, too, via Bloomberg:

Environmentalists opposed to the Keystone XL pipeline are expanding their fight against imports of Canadian heavy crude oil by trying to block rail projects that offer another way for it to enter the U.S. …

Environmental groups including 350.org oppose Keystone because they say it would promote development of oil sands, a type of crude that releases more greenhouse gases in its production and refining than other forms of oil. …

Opponents of oil sands are targeting rail terminal projects in California, Washington state and elsewhere and pushing federal regulators to mandate expensive retrofits to tanker cars that could impede efforts by producers to expand their fleets. The campaign represents a threat to Canadian oil, which together with natural gas is Canada’s largest export to the U.S. …

Kristen Boyles, a spokeswoman for Earthjustice, said one concern voiced by critics was that the terminals would receive oil sands products, which can be harder to clean up in a spill than conventional crude.

Yes, which is probably why you should stop blocking the pipeline, i.e. the safer terrestrial transport method through which the United States can receive oil from its biggest foreign supplier. What these groups plan to do when they also come to realize that, hey, fine — Canada will instead ship the oil to their coast and transport it by sea to China — I have no idea.

Again, it would be a lot easier to take these guys seriously if they weren’t vehemently insisting upon only the most unworkable of energy solutions at every turn. Environmentalists don’t seem to much care for natural gas, and especially not for the hydraulic fracturing process that helps to produce it; nor do they care for nuclear energy (speaking of which, even the editors of the New York Times just had an apparent epiphany that front). The only solutions that will do, apparently, are wind and solar — even though Europe, and specifically countries like Germany that put a lot of skin in the wind-and-solar game, are now furiously backing away from said sources and even ramping up coal production instead, that most hatefully dreaded of dirty energy forms, quelle horreur. Talk about counter-productivity.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Jeez these enviro whack jobs just won’t quit. The Canadians are not just going to sit on that oil, especially when the Chinese start waving around cash.

major dad on November 23, 2013 at 5:42 PM

Now this is terrorism.

22044 on November 23, 2013 at 5:44 PM

If they’re really committed they’ll lay down in front of the trains. No matter what.

Come on guys, show you’re at least as committed as Rachel, won’t you?

SoRight on November 23, 2013 at 5:45 PM

I would challenge these idiotic environmentalists to live by their own rules. If I had the power, I would deny them anything that was produced in any way by the use of “fossil” fuels. Let them starve. That is what they ultimately want for us. They believe the earth has too many people. They should be eliminated post haste.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on November 23, 2013 at 5:49 PM

If they’re really committed they’ll lay down in front of the trains. No matter what.
Come on guys, show you’re at least as committed as Rachel, won’t you?
SoRight on November 23, 2013 at 5:45 PM

I hope they do.

VegasRick on November 23, 2013 at 5:51 PM

Messing with trains means messing with Buffet.

Won’t end well for them.

If it’s bigger than a breadbox and makes a profit, they don’t like it. The environment is just an excuse. It’s profit that is the devil.

Meremortal on November 23, 2013 at 5:52 PM

Energy production creates jobs. In the Eagle Ford Shale, truck drivers make over $100k and they can’t hire enough of them. In fact fracking fields can’t hire enough of anyone– engineers, geologists, truck drivers, roustabouts… the unemployment rate in Midland, TX is 3.2%.

Can’t have meaningful jobs for people in Obama’s world, though.

obladioblada on November 23, 2013 at 5:54 PM

The “environmentalists” are like watermelons: green outside, red through and through.

Their solution to everything is more government, more regulation, higher taxes, and slower growth. This of course concentrates more power in the hands of politicians and bureaucrats, and by proxy and transference to the environmentalists, especially during Democratic administrations (but the agencies being staffed almost entirely by Democrats, even under Republican Presidents, too).

The FACT is that the tar sands WILL be developed, the petroleum WILL be extracted no matter what happens with Keystone XL. The only question is whether we will use our proximity to Canada to use that production to lower our own energy costs, or if it will be distributed otherwise.

Another FACT is that even if the USA had adopted Kyoto Protocol targets (which no country which did agree to can now meet anyway) and held to them, the net reduction in temperature increase in 50 even using the warming crowd’s own numbers would only be 0.1 degree Celsius. Most of the new “greenhouse gas” production comes from China, India, Brazil, Pakistan, Egypt, Indonesia, Vietnam, and other developing economies – who were excluded from being subjected to the limits!

The environmental movement has never been discouraged or dissuaded by facts, of course.

Adjoran on November 23, 2013 at 6:00 PM

Again, it would be a lot easier to take these guys seriously if they weren’t vehemently insisting upon only the most unworkable of energy solutions at every turn.

“Green energy” is a smoke screen. They don’t want energy, period… no matter what, end of story. Green energy is good for them to promote because it is completely uneconomical and actually is injurious to the industrial base (with a full assessment of their costs and impacts). Their words:

“A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States… [we] must design a stable, low-consumption economy.” -John Holdren (1973), Obama’s Science Czar
“Isn’t the only hope for this planet the total collapse of industrial civilisation? Is it not our responsibility to ensure that this collapse happens?” -Maurice Strong, ex UNEP Director
“We have wished, we ecofreaks, for a disaster… to bomb us into the stone age, where we might live like Indians…” -Stewart Brand, Whole Earth Catalogue
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us … the threat of global warming.. fit the bill….It does not matter if this common enemy is a real one or….one invented for the purpose.” -Club of Rome

anotherJoe on November 23, 2013 at 6:01 PM

Just taze `em until they flop off the tracks. :)

ThePrez on November 23, 2013 at 6:01 PM

One obvious look at North Dakota should make one realize what is happening there but then again we are talking about the left paying attention to more than unicorns and rainbows.

crosshugger on November 23, 2013 at 6:10 PM

Where’s Snidely Whiplash when you need him?

trubble on November 23, 2013 at 6:12 PM

If they’re really committed they’ll lay down in front of the trains. No matter what.
SoRight on November 23, 2013 at 5:45 PM

Yup, that’s what the cowcatcher is made for – no sense in not using it, I say.

whatcat on November 23, 2013 at 6:17 PM

Just taze `em until they flop off the tracks. :)

ThePrez on November 23, 2013 at 6:01 PM

How about “flop on the tracks”?

whatcat on November 23, 2013 at 6:18 PM

What these groups plan to do when they also come to realize that, hey, fine — Canada will instead ship the oil to their coast and transport it by sea to China — I have no idea.

I will roll on the floor laughing the first time a Red Chinese oil supertanker breaks up in the Pacific and the oil ends up all over our West Coast environazis.

slickwillie2001 on November 23, 2013 at 6:20 PM

Our country is UNDER ATTACK from the Agressive Progressive Left….and the party we counted on for years to fight against it….the republicans…we find out now are supporting the political enemy!!

In short the gop leadership isn’t worth a toilet full of ——.

#defundthepatheticgop

PappyD61 on November 23, 2013 at 6:21 PM

The environmentalists are behind the curve on the rail car safety issue:

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — Proposed new safety standards for rail cars that haul flammable liquids gained support from U.S. railroads Thursday, but it’s not yet clear whether the companies that own most of those cars will support the upgrades to prevent leaks.

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is considering a plan intended to fix a dangerous design flaw in a rail car commonly used to haul oil and other hazardous liquids from coast to coast.

Safety experts say the soda-can shaped car, known as the DOT-111, has a tendency to split open during derailments and other major accidents.

Concerns about the tank cars are higher now because of the fiery train crash in July in Lac Megantic, Quebec — near the Maine border — that killed 48 people, and because railroads are hauling significantly more crude oil.

U.S. railroads are supporting new safety standards for rail cars that haul flammable liquids to address flaws that can allow crude oil, ethanol and other substances to leak during accidents.

The Association of American Railroads said Thursday that railroads support making upgrades to the fleet of 92,000 tank cars that carry flammable liquids. Of those, 14,000 cars are newer cars built to current safety standards.

“We want to aggressively move on phasing these out,” Ed Hamberger, president of the railroad trade group, said of the older cars.

Of course, that doesn’t mean the environmentalists won’t stop trying to do to oil tanker cars what they’re trying to do to the Keystone pipeline. But the interesting part here is if they do that, they threaten to seriously cut into the profits of Burlington Northern-Santa Fe and it’s owner, mega-Democrat patron Warren Buffet. It will be fun to see which side Team Obama comes down on this one, and my guess is it’s not going to be with the guys who don’t have oodles of campaign donation loot to spread around.

jon1979 on November 23, 2013 at 6:26 PM

If the Environmentalist are REALLY SERIOUS they should swear never to use the benefits of modern technology. No COAL; no GAS; no petrolium; and certainly no NUCLEAR.

As a miner friend says: Let them FREEZE and STARVE in the DARK.

Missilengr on November 23, 2013 at 6:28 PM

If it’s bigger than a breadbox and makes a profit, they don’t like it. The environment is just an excuse. It’s profit that is the devil.

Meremortal on November 23, 2013 at 5:52 PM

Actually, I think humanity is their devil. These people are deeply, psychotically misanthropic. When they look at humanity, they see a species that (with the exception of themselves, of course) does not measure up to their standards, and thus does not deserve to exist.

Athanasius on November 23, 2013 at 6:30 PM

David Horowitz has a page in “Discover the Networks” about these activist “environmental” groups. There are loads of links to the other anti-capitaliist items on their agenda.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewGroups.asp?catid=60

Check out who/what they are and who is sponsoring them.

onlineanalyst on November 23, 2013 at 6:32 PM

Will opposition to rail transport for oil take hold in DC over all the political influence the greedy and slovenly Warren Buffet has?

slickwillie2001 on November 23, 2013 at 6:33 PM

Kristen Boyles, a spokeswoman for Earthjustice, said one concern voiced by critics was that the terminals would receive oil sands products, which can be harder to clean up in a spill than conventional crude.

Yeah, but not as monumental a task as cleaning up your Dem-run cesspools called “cities”.

Travis Bickle was right.

Dr. ZhivBlago on November 23, 2013 at 6:40 PM

Here is one of the cronies who funded Obysmal and who is playing a huge role in putting the kibbosh to Keystone XL. The fellow is based in San Francisco, the very place where Preezy is headed for a fund-raiser early this next week.
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obama-donor-may-benefit-from-keystone-nixing#.Ucu0OZyk8xE

onlineanalyst on November 23, 2013 at 6:46 PM

Any kind of appeasement to these enviros is foolish. They want all the goodies w/ none of the work, none of the ideas, none of the delivery.

Maybe they should live in a northern state for six months, say November through April. No hear except what your backyard windmill can produce. If they don’t like it, maybe they could move south where it is warmer but without any cars, planes, trains, buses, etc. I’m not sure how’d they’d get there but…. Prove it can work and some “evil” creator will make it work. Otherwise, put on four pairs of socks and hope you don’t get sick.

MN J on November 23, 2013 at 6:48 PM

Important issues noted in an article by Arnold Ahlert found in the last three paragraphs about Obysmal’s war on energy:

Driessen (in an article in The Washington Times) then illuminates the Obama administration’s modus operandi, explaining that “increasingly powerful bureaucrats–who seek and acquire ever-more control over our lives–remain faceless, nameless, unelected and unaccountable. They operate largely behind closed doors, issuing regulations and arranging sweetheart ‘sue-and-settle’ legal actions with radical environmentalist groups to advance ideological agendas, without regard for the impacts on our lives.”

Tellingly, on the same day the president gave his speech, CNNMoney.com published the results of a sobering survey conducted by Bankrate.com. It revealed that a whopping 76 percent of Americans are “living paycheck-to-paycheck.” Less than 25 percent of Americans have enough money saved to cover six months of expenses, 50 percent have a three month total, and 27 percent have no savings at all. “After paying debts and taking care of housing, car and child care-related expenses, the respondents said there just isn’t enough money left over for saving more,” the article reported.

That’s the real catastrophe most Americans face. Yet a president whose most recent pressing initiatives have included gun control, immigration reform and combatting global warming, not only remains willfully oblivious to that catastrophe, but bound and determined to exacerbate it.

In short, Obama is determined to destroy America in order to save it. Unfortunately, there is no “offset” for such unbridled hubris.

onlineanalyst on November 23, 2013 at 6:58 PM

These people fervently hope for the demise of the human race, the Last Man syndrome, so that the planet will be at peace. The planet is never at peace. They cannot ban volcanos, typhoons, earthquakes, tsunamis. Environmentalism has become a mental illness. When the USSR ended, all the Marxist loonies became environmentalists. Including the democrat party, and pivot to the divot Obama.

Dhuka on November 23, 2013 at 7:09 PM

Just taze `em. until they flop off the tracks. :)

ThePrez on November 23, 2013 at 6:01 PM

Fixed.

HiJack on November 23, 2013 at 7:09 PM

“…trying to block rail projects that offer another way for it to enter the U.S”

I predict that won’t last long. OBOZO’s top crony capitalist, buffett, has been making MILLIONS from his RR ownership and it’s transport of shale oil that could go more cheaply and safer through Keystone XL. All it will take is one phone call from warren to OBOZO and the lunatic-left eco-fascists will be commanded to STOP by their Dear Leader all actions that might affect affecting buffett’s RR traffic – and profits.

TeaPartyNation on November 23, 2013 at 7:17 PM

Again, it would be a lot easier to take these guys seriously if they weren’t vehemently insisting upon only the most unworkable of energy solutions at every turn.

You say that as though they want to be taken seriously and you want to take them seriously. These people aren’t interested in clean, safe energy. They are only interested in destablizing the great evil that is Western Civilization. These groups, even if many of their rank and file don’t realize it, are funded and manipulated by Communists.

Their motives are not altruistic. They don’t want progress. They want power and control. Give them no credence.

Ace ODale on November 23, 2013 at 7:17 PM

Of course, that doesn’t mean the environmentalists won’t stop trying to do to oil tanker cars what they’re trying to do to the Keystone pipeline. But the interesting part here is if they do that, they threaten to seriously cut into the profits of Burlington Northern-Santa Fe and it’s owner, mega-Democrat patron Warren Buffet. It will be fun to see which side Team Obama comes down on this one, and my guess is it’s not going to be with the guys who don’t have oodles of campaign donation loot to spread around.

jon1979 on November 23, 2013 at 6:26 PM

Team SCOAMT needs to survive just one more election, and then only the legislative portion of the team.

Or at least that’s all Obama’s thinking about.

Steve Eggleston on November 23, 2013 at 7:18 PM

Just taze `em until they flop off the tracks. :)

ThePrez on November 23, 2013 at 6:01 PM

or taze them until they CAN’T move off the tracks.

dmacleo on November 23, 2013 at 7:59 PM

There’s no way Boofay gave Barky all that campaign loot and would stand by quietly should his Keystone rail monopoly get broken up. He might even go, er, Oswald over it.

viking01 on November 23, 2013 at 8:13 PM

It isn’t about environmentalism, it’s carbonphobia. An irrational condition found in anti-capitalists as they seek to destroy capitalism via it’s Achilles heel, energy.

Viator on November 23, 2013 at 8:18 PM

At some point we’ll have to start burning environmentalists for energy.

JEM on November 23, 2013 at 8:20 PM

At some point we’ll have to start burning environmentalists for energy.

JEM on November 23, 2013 at 8:20 PM

That’ll likely require installation of patchouli pollution filtration systems on the boilers…

viking01 on November 23, 2013 at 8:35 PM

A number of these oil trains have been coming down the Susquehanna River, along the York/Lancaster Co border, on their way to an off-loading facility at or near Delaware City, DE. They have been a major photography subject for area rail fans (that’s “foamers”, to some of us), and the fact that Amtrak is allowing these trains to regularly run on the “corridor” during daylight hours, between Perryville, MD, and Bear, DE says a lot about how much priority they’ve been getting.


Photo of one of these trains
, taken at or near Bear, DE.

listens2glenn on November 23, 2013 at 8:43 PM

At some point we’ll have to start burning environmentalists for energy.

JEM on November 23, 2013 at 8:20 PM

.
I’m going to give that a “rim-shot”.

Start with Maurice Strong.

listens2glenn on November 23, 2013 at 8:44 PM

It isn’t about environmentalism, it’s carbonphobia. An irrational condition found in anti-capitalists as they seek to destroy capitalism via it’s Achilles heel, energy.

Viator on November 23, 2013 at 8:18 PM

.
It’s “carbonphobia” to the useful idiots who make up the lower levels of the environmental movement.

To those at the top, it’s about crippling and disabling the U.S.

listens2glenn on November 23, 2013 at 9:30 PM

“Environmentalists”, not what they really are, but what they claim to be, really want us all living in caves. They are the ultimate Ludites.

sadatoni on November 23, 2013 at 10:23 PM

What? I was beginning to think liberals liked poutiness.

(I am truly sorry to our friends from the north)

WryTrvllr on November 23, 2013 at 11:27 PM

poutines

WryTrvllr on November 23, 2013 at 11:27 PM

Any chance our commie EPA is funding these terrorists like they fund the Eco terrorist lawsuits against the EPA which they roll over to big settlements of taxpayer dollars?

Robert Jensen on November 23, 2013 at 11:49 PM

I thought Greenies liked choo-choo twains–just ask Governor Moonbeam!

Truth is, freight trains are much more efficient than passenger trains, and freight railroads make money without government subsidies.

Environmentalists don’t seem to much care for natural gas, and especially not for the hydraulic fracturing process that helps to produce it; nor do they care for nuclear energy (speaking of which, even the editors of the New York Times just had an apparent epiphany that front). The only solutions that will do, apparently, are wind and solar —

If they like wind and sunshine so much, let them try to survive an Alberta winter with nothing but windmills and solar panels–no heat or power from coal, oil, gas, or nuclear, and let them pedal bicycles through blizzards. That will keep them out of the way of sane people.

Steve Z on November 24, 2013 at 12:37 AM

There’s econuts starting lawsuits now in Montana to stop the coal trains from going through Missoula. They also want to stop the building of superports to handle all the coal. They want to have the epa regulate the climate change in foreign countries so that they can’t use the coal. It’s all out war on coal.

Kissmygrits on November 24, 2013 at 9:25 AM

There’s econuts starting lawsuits now in Montana to stop the coal trains from going through Missoula because of the dust and some might spill out of the hopper cars. They also want to stop the building of superports to handle all the coal. They want to have the epa regulate the climate change in foreign countries so that they can’t use the coal. It’s all out war on coal.

Kissmygrits on November 24, 2013 at 9:27 AM

sorry for the duplicate.

Kissmygrits on November 24, 2013 at 9:27 AM

These people have the same psychological make-up as the jihadis – they are the pure, the only ones with true vision and they are justified in using violence to bring about the salvation of mankind. There is no logic on earth that can dissuade these people from their righteous duty. They, like the jihadis, just have to be defeated.

inmypajamas on November 24, 2013 at 9:49 AM

Warren Buffet, call your office.

RebeccaH on November 24, 2013 at 1:28 PM

these self-titled environmentalist groups are now turning to blocking the means of rail transport

Damages

BDU-33 on November 24, 2013 at 1:28 PM

These are not really “environmentalists”: they are just leftovers of the eugenics movement in disguise.

This also explains the pro-abortion part of the Democrat base.

landlines on November 24, 2013 at 3:43 PM