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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MineralMan

(151,540 posts)
4. While it would be nice to stop using oil, that's not happening.
Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:53 AM
Jul 2015

In the meantime, the oil will move from where it is obtained to where it goes. Right now, it's going in trains that carry over 1 million gallons each. Those trains pass through heavily populated cities and towns along the rail line. There's a huge rail yard in St. Paul, MN, where a lot of those trains get rerouted to their destinations. Its full of tank cars full of this oil.

From there, much of it travels along the Mississippi River on its way to the Gulf coast. That river begins in Minnesota. The main rail line going South travels along the river. Imagine a million gallons of crude spilling into the Mississippi.

The question is not whether the oil will be transported. It will. How it is transported and at what risk to the environment is the question. Look at a map that shows the Mississippi River. That's what's at risk with the current transportation method. Look carefully. A disaster is just waiting to happen, right now, not later.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»trans canada wants to inc...»Reply #4