Pipe or Tank

Last year in August my spouse and I took a trip along the Mississippi River from La Crosse north to Prescott, WI. As we stopped or passed through the varied small Wisconsin river towns we became indirectly acquainted with the fracking movement in North Dakota, and the tar sands production of petroleum in western Canada. Our acquaintance was through the number of trains, with multiple engines pulling long lines of tanker cars. Movement by rail is one option for moving the crude oil of the north to the refineries in other locations. The other alternate is the use of pipelines. The proposed Keystone XL pipeline, proposed by TransCanada Corp., which recently was denied approval by President Obama, was planned to haul Canadian crude of the tar sands south into the United States to Nebraska and points south. Pipeline companies have faced issues with faults in their lines, leading to environmental damage, but transport of petroleum products by rail also poses significant risk. The former was a concern of the Dane County Board of Adjustment in desiring insurance to cover costs for a proposed Enbridge pipeline through northeast Dane County, while the latter was shown in two separate derailment incidents in the span of two days in Wisconsin.

Engine of a tanker train, north of Alma, WI
Aug 2014 photo by author

We all use energy, and for the developed world, the top source is fossil fuels.  Oil, coal and natural gas heat our homes, fuel our cars, and produces our electricity.  The price of gas at the pump is relatively low compared to the past several years.  There are different explanations as to why there is a seemingly surplus of oil on the market that has caused the reduction in prices.  One reason for the increase in supply is due to oil production in both the United States and Canada.  While much of the U.S. was in the economic doldrums, North Dakota was booming, mainly due to fracking and directional boring which has the capability of retrieving oil from deep widely dispersed deposits. North Dakota is home to the Bakken formation, which stretches into Canada.  National Geographic, in 2013, reported that "when the frenzy ends, perhaps 20 years from now, as many as 14 billion barrels of high-quality crude may have been removed." To the north, Canada also benefits from the Bakken formation, but the province of Alberta also contains tar sands--from which petroleum products are derived.  Crude from the Bakken formation is dangerous--it contains a higher level of gas than usual and as a result has a lower flash point.  It is an explosion waiting to happen.  Another problem is that only recently has the federal government started to require an upgrade to rail tankers which have thin walls as many were built for the purpose of not hauling crude, but hauling corn syrup.

Keystone XL Pipeline phases

To transport large amounts of oil, from both Bakken formation and the tar sands, a large Canadian company had proposed a 36" pipe which would haul 860,000 barrels of crude a day from Alberta to Montana, into South Dakota and then to Steele City, NE.  The Keystone route would be a second pipeline running diagonally from Hardisty, Alberta to Steele City.  A current pipeline runs east from Hardisty then turns south near Winnepeg and then along the eastern parts of the Dakotas and into Nebraska to Steele City.  Ultimately, the pipeline ends in eastern Texas, home of many a refinery.  President Obama's denial of federal approval for the Keystone pipeline was, at least in sound bytes, based on climate change and that the route would simply continue reliance on fossil fuels.  While, I too am concerned about the use of fossil fuels and climate change, it is rather naive to think that denial of one pipeline will put an end to our fossil fuel based economy.  In fact, other alternatives have been in progress and are being planned to the controversial Keystone route.

Alma, WI derailment, November 2015

While the Keystone route has been in the permitting stage since Obama took office, other methods exist or are being planned in lieu of the Keystone pipeline.  Are railways used to haul petro products from the tar sands?  Representative Frank Hornstein of Minneapolis has said of this possibility "that has been a talking point for pipeline advocates.  It is not based on reality."  Contrary to what Representative Hornstein has said, the facts show otherwise.  A report from Canada says that Canadian Pacific (CP) and other railways in North America "have seen a sharp rise in demand for crude oil shipments amid an increase in oil production and persistent lack of pipeline capacity."  The news report goes on to say that hauling of oil rose 29% in 2014--$500 million--or 7% of total sales.  CP expected to haul 140,000 tank cars of crude in 2014.  CP is a common carrier and has to carry what it asked to carry.  In 2014 the CP Board of Directors questioned the hauling of hazardous products.  A derailment of crude is certainly bad publicity for the rail line.  Yet, with lack of pipeline capacity it is hauling crude oil.

Crude Oil Tankers

Just this weekend, within a two day span there were two train derailments in Wisconsin, one of ethanol a couple miles north of the small Wisconsin river town Alma in which 32 cars tipped over some spilling into the Mississippi River; the other, of 13 cars which occurred in Watertown, WI, carried Bakken crude oil.  It ultimately spilled some 1,000 gallons of heavy crude. At least it did not blow up.  The same trains pass through Minneapolis and St. Paul--a potential catastrophe. So, yes, railways are used to haul crude oil. Trains are getting longer too.  The Wisconsin Railroad Commissioner has noted that it used to be that a one mile train was long, today a two mile train is considered long.  Could you keep your patience while waiting for a two mile long train to pass? Some argue that it is more cost effective for crude to be transported through pipeline, but energy economist, Julie Carey, has noted that rail has some upsides that bring it closer to pipeline transportation costs.  Rail is quicker to market, has more end points in the distribution system, it does not need to be diluted, and railways haul two ways--one can haul dilution material north, and haul the crude product back south.

Watertown, WI  Crude Oil Train Derailment
November 2015

Beyond the railway options there are other pipelines looking to take up the slack of the Keystone route.  Let me touch on two.  The first is a route that currently contains four pipelines and runs from Superior south to Delavan, and further south into Illinois.  The crude will get to Superior from a pipeline in northern Minnesota.  One of these lines hauls a diluting agent north to the tar sand area from Chicago (the dilution agent is added to thin the tar sand crude so it can travel in the pipeline).  One handles a heavy crude, a third a lighter crude, and a fourth carries a heavy tar sand crude.  This last route is being upgraded with larger pumps to increase its pumping capacity, and will carry 1.2 million barrels a day.  The Keystone XL line disapproved by the President, would carry 860,000 barrels a day.  The owner of this route is currently doing survey work in a desire to construct a fifth heavy tar sand line that will handle 800,000 barrels a day.

Keystone Alternatives
The green route goes through the Great Bear Rain forest

Canada's desire for converting the tar sands to a heavy crude is shared by both conservative and liberal parties.  Newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau expressed disappointment with President Obama's decision.  Canada's desire leads to the second tar sand route under discussion, and partly approved.  This route, known as the Northern Gateway, runs through the Great Bear Rain Forest, a highly ecologically sensitive area which runs near the Canadian west coast.  The route being planned through this location would take the tar sand crude though the mountains, through the Great Bear Rain Forest to a port in British Columbia where it would then be able to be shipped to China.  As in the US, China too has an oil fix.  The route through the Great Bear Rain Forest has been termed a "Pipeline through Paradise" by National Geographic.  Canada's tar sands are second only to Saudi Arabia in known oil reserves.  Canada knows it has black gold--and it is doing what it can to get it to the major economies that are oil hogs. Not only is the area ecologically sensitive, but it is home to many native tribes, First Nation's.  Some have opposed the pipeline, some have signed on. Yet showing the power of oil, some tribes have suggested funding their own pipeline route to benefit the tribe.  Perhaps better than a casino cash, but is it not selling their soul?

Detail of the route through the Great Bear Rain Forest

It is rather naive to think that one of the largest deposits of oil on earth will go unused. Yes, tar sand oil is so dense it sinks in water.  Yes, it is more costly to extract.  However, even as the price of crude on the market has dropped, tar sand crude oil has increased shipments!  The companies involved in the Bakken and tar sands are playing a game with Arab conglomerates of the Mid-East to see who can underwrite what to keep their oil flowing.  Good for the consumer, bad for the earth.  For some reason people think that they have a right to use all of the earths natural resources, and future generations be damned.  Technology has saved us before, the thinking goes, it will save us again.  We transport the crude by rail, which threatens our cities, and waterways.  There have been three derailments this year in the Mississippi flyway which is a significant tundra and trumpeter swan migration route.  The most recent, an ethanol derailment, occurred during the peak fall migration season.  What is interesting about ethanol is that it cannot be piped below grade as it would suck the water out of the soil.  As a people we need to make choices.  But they need to be made in terms of facts and the good of the globe.  Keystone may have been a good decision, but it only puts further pressure on railway use, alternative pipeline routes (as Enbridge, another Canadian company, is exploring in Minnesota and Wisconsin), and the establishment of the route through paradise.  In any event, our thirst for oil has consequences. We want our oil, but complain when a pipeline bursts, or a tanker derails. Apparently we find the risks acceptable--at least until a major event occurs.

Tar Sand Location Relative Keystone and Northern Gateway Routes

It will take more than a lost pipeline to affect a national appetite for fossil fuels.  A reduction in our crude oil dependence  will require a change in our methods of approach, the form of our built environment, ways of travel, some of the commonly accepted measures of success, and our national values.  Individual choices, however, can make a dent in overall consumption.  This is best shown in that miles traveled by auto have tended to hold steady, or perhaps slightly increase, since the recession started several years ago.  However, I am sure when my spouse and I take our next trip along the Mississippi the long runs of trains tugging tanker cars of oil will once again be a common sight.  I just would not want to have to wait at a crossing for a two mile train.