Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
Mon Mar 11, 2013, 10:43 AM Mar 2013

The not-Keystone pipeline that few are protesting and few know about

<snip>

The main purpose of this effort was to challenge proposed changes to an aging oil pipeline that could have a serious impact on Vermont and our entire region. Recent weeks have seen visits to our state capitol by the CEO of the pipeline company – owned by ExxonMobil’s Canadian subsidiary – along with environmental officials from Alberta, confirming long-standing suspicions that companies are aiming to push forward with plans to use this old pipeline to pump tar sands oil from across the continent through northern New England.

The Portland-Montreal Pipeline was built more than 50 years ago and now imports up to 400,000 barrels of oil a day from the port of Portland, Maine to customers in Montreal and beyond, passing through ten northern Vermont towns. It is connected to a vast oil pipeline network across Canada, and companies like Enbridge – a main owner of Vermont’s largest electric utility, Green Mountain Power – are aiming to reverse the flow of a now-unused section of pipeline so they can transport highly corrosive and toxic material from the tar sands to be shipped out of Portland to Gulf refineries and to overseas customers.

Company officials continue to equivocate about their plans, but the evidence confirms plans to reverse the pipeline, including the reversal of a pipeline across eastern Ontario and efforts to build a new pumping station in Dunham, Quebec, just across the border from Vermont. With people across the U.S. and Canada challenging the Keystone XL Pipeline through Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas, and First Nations in British Columbia steadfastly opposed to the proposed Northern Gateway through British Columbia, this “Plan C” option could be seen as a path of least resistance for getting tar sands to the coast for export.

<snip>

http://www.salon.com/2013/03/11/vermont_rejects_tar_sands_oil/

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The not-Keystone pipeline that few are protesting and few know about (Original Post) cali Mar 2013 OP
kick. they're determined to get the filthy oil into this country cali Mar 2013 #1
k&r... spanone Mar 2013 #2
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
1. kick. they're determined to get the filthy oil into this country
Mon Mar 11, 2013, 06:54 PM
Mar 2013

I'll bet this isn't the only route they're plotting to hedge their bets on Keystone.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The not-Keystone pipeline...