LINCOLN — Thirteen environmental groups, including several with ties to Nebraska, objected Friday to a proposed crude-oil pipeline that would cross a portion of the groundwater-rich Sand Hills.
U.S. Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., also expressed his concerns Friday to a top State Department official about taking “full account” of safety and environmental questions regarding the pipeline.
“With the ongoing tragedy in the Gulf of Mexico, federal regulators must take every precaution before proceeding with the pipeline,” Nelson said in a press release.
Friday was the deadline for public comment to the State Department, which is weighing whether to permit the Keystone XL pipeline linking tar-sand oil deposits in western Canada to a pipeline junction at Steele City, Neb.
The 36-inch pipeline would more than double the capacity for shipping tar-sand oil to the United States.
Proponents say the project will provide a safe and secure source of oil for the country, but opponents say tar sands are an environmentally unsound and energy-wasting source.
The groups filing the objections, which include the Nebraska chapter of the Sierra Club and Lincoln-based Wachiska Audubon Society, requested either rejection of the pipeline project or further review to ensure it will be safely operated and monitored.
Among the concerns expressed in a 35-page comment was that the pipeline could increase erosion in the fragile Sand Hills and contaminate the underlying Ogallala Aquifer. Two-thirds of the volume of the aquifer, which stretches across eight states, underlies Nebraska.
The groups also said that waivers to allow thinner pipe and to pump the oil at higher pressure in the Keystone XL should not be allowed.
“Placing an inherently dangerous high-pressure tar sands oil pipeline over and through this irreplaceable public water resource in Nebraska would be unconscionable,” said Ted Thieman, president of the Nebraska Environmental Action Coalition.
“If there was ever a situation that justifies an abundant use of the ‘precautionary principle,’ this is it.”
Jeff Rauh, a spokesman for pipeline builder TransCanada, said he had not had time to read the entire comment but that the company will meet all safety requirements.
“It’s not terribly unusual for groups to attempt to raise a number of issues to extend or discredit the process,” Rauh said.
He disputed a claim in the letter by the 13 groups that the pipeline was unnecessary and the oil from Canada not needed. Eighty percent of the 700,000 barrel-a-day capacity of the pipeline has already been leased, he said.
The Keystone XL pipeline would be a supplement to a second TransCanada pipeline, the Keystone, that went into service this week. That pipeline runs north and south from Steele City to Vermillion, S.D. Thinner pipe and higher pressures were allowed for that pipeline.
Plains Justice, a South Dakota group, said recently that TransCanada has purchased almost half of the pipe for the initial Keystone pipeline from a manufacturer in India found to be producing product with substandard joints.
Rauh said TransCanada conducts nine tests to ensure the integrity of the pipe it purchases and has recently added a 10th at the urging of U.S. regulators.
He said that extra test has been completed on 40 percent of the first Keystone pipeline and that no defects have been found.
Contact the writer:
402-473-9584, paul.hammel@owh.com
Copyright ©2012 Omaha World-Herald®. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, displayed or redistributed for any purpose without permission from the Omaha World-Herald.
