Western Railroad Discussion > Farmer: "Train is more dangerous than the Keystone XL"

National Public Radio has a multipart series about the local views of the farmers in York County Nebraska, where the pipeline's land acquisition has been difficult.

Some locals believe that the pipe is unnecessary, and leaks will poison their land and the aquifer underneath. One farmer who has resisted signing a lease notes the railroad, less than a half mile away. "I'm much more concerned about all that lighter fluid in those tank cars" he said, presumably describing ethanol tank cars. A train whistle punctuated his comments.

I would have expected the reporter to mention that the pipe is safer than the railroad, but the frequency of serious accidents on either is well under one one hundredth of one percent.

the same farmer observed that his dad sold the gas company rights to run a natural gas pipeline through his property in 1951. Got $180 for it, nothing more, and the pipe is still in the ground. I couldn't tell whether he was holding out for a lot more money than TransCanada is offering, or whether he doesn't want the new pipe on his land. Period.

(Should be on line later tonight.)

Yes, I listened to the report as well.

The farmer isn't an expert. Neither is the reporter. The reporter is working a particular angle that has nothing to do with the railroads and so she won't correct the farmer's statement. I'm sure the farmer is worried after news reports and maybe past local issues. Its up to the railroads and other associated experts to correct misconceptions and misinformation, especially when its statistical. It up to responsible leaders to educate themselves and set policies that apply the correct information. If those groups don't make an effort they are ceding the "high ground" (the possibility of getting the correct information out there), and we will be forever subjected to incorrect interpretations.

RickL

The farmer is more likely to get hit by a train when he crosses without looking, than a derailment. Pipelines don't move, but they can leak! And you don't know they are leaking until the explode!

Rob

Not quite true on "You don't know they are leaking until they explode". I had a gas line leak in front of my house and I heard it. Walked around until I found it and called the gas company. Yes yes, I know but out here we go outside when they say a tornado is coming too. Well you got to know from which direction, right?
The gas leak in my yard never exploded, just made a hissing noise.

I live in York County. The farmers here are well, farmers. The Ogallala Aquifer is the main concern in the state. York County also has the richest farmers in the state, so sometimes I think it all goes to their heads.

York county was host to a 28 car loaded coal train derailment earlier this year. The media from that may be why this farmer is so against it. While no one wants to think about a derailment and even more so one involving something explosive, with 70 trains a day through here, BNSF does pretty good keeping the cars off the ground.

As stated above though, most of the state is against it because of the water under the ground.

Traingeek087



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/14 17:33 by traingeek087.

That farmer needs to take a look at a pipeline map of Nebraska. The eastern third of the state is full of pipelines and the southern part has quite a few too. And, natural gas can make a mess out of water too. But, the point is pipelines in Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas are everywhere and there has not been much of a problem with them. They are regulary patroled looking for leaks.

But, if oil leaks from pipe you won't have to go look for it as it will be most obvious.

How much impact will falling oil prices have on the Keystone XL's prospects? Will it be worth piping the oil from Canada when it could possibly come from other sources? What if Venezuela ever gets its house in order and starts shipping more oil?

Its the Gulf Coast refiners/export terminals that want it. Even with the cost of oil dropping its seen as a significant cost savings. It will get built. The materials and eqpt are already contracted in most cases and pipeline construction resources are already scheduled.

RickL

The thing about Keystone XL is that, once the construction is done, it really doesn't employ many workers at all. People say that we need the energy, and yet it is to ship Canadian oil to foreign buyers. It'll never wind up in US gas tanks. I just don't see any big benefit. Let the Canadians move the oil through their country.

radar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The thing about Keystone XL is that, once the
> construction is done, it really doesn't employ
> many workers at all. People say that we need the
> energy, and yet it is to ship Canadian oil to
> foreign buyers. It'll never wind up in US gas
> tanks. I just don't see any big benefit. Let the
> Canadians move the oil through their country.


Canadian citizens and residents have been having an enormous trouble working out an energy policy. The First Nations and the residents of the lower mainland in BC have been fighting more pipelines and crude by rail. Ontario and Quebec have been fighting changes to oil and gas pipelines.

It's a messy, ugly, and complicated fight. The way a democracy should work these things out.