Big Rigs
| Big Rigs |
 |
 |
|
The Coalition and our partners believe that the creation of a permanent industrial corridor from the Port of Lewiston through northern Idaho and western Montana to the Alberta tar sands deserves a comprehensive environmental analysis that considers the potential for: impacts to emergency services, increased accidents and road closures, economic impacts of displacing recreation, costs to taxpayers, and impacts to water quality, fish and wildlife habitat along the route. Say NO to a Permanent 'High & Wide Corridor Through the Blackfoot River Valley READ THE COALITION'S OFFICIAL COMMENTS TO MDT READ THE COALITION'S PUBLIC COMMENTARY ON KUFM READ A LETTER FROM 40 LOCAL, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS REQUESTING FEDERAL INTERVENTION We may have to say goodbye to quiet, pristine mornings on the river. Instead, imagine the noise, the wildlife fatalities, the threats to water quality, the traffic snarls, the obstructed views, and the inevitable hits to recretion-based, amenity-rich local economies if a proposal from ExxonMobil goes through. So far, the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) has produced only a brief Environmental Assessment (EA) on the proposal for a 'High and Wide' Transportation Corridor in western Montana. And unfortunately, the EA is an inadequate and short-sighted document on many fronts, starting with its portrayal of the project. According to a July 2009 presentation by MDT Director Jim Lynch to the MT Revenue and Transportation Oversight Committee, ExxonMobil's goal is to create "permanent "High/Wide corridors through Montana," which, he said, would have "considerable potential for impact." So it's confusing that the EA portrays the project as relatively benign: one year, 200 rigs, no environmental impact. There's no mention of the permanency of this industrial corridor once established, and how that computes in the coming decades, in terms of added haul traffic and its impacts on rural rhythms, blue-ribbon-trout streams, and the Montana way of life. The public comment period on the EA closed in May, and we have been waiting for a decision from MDT. We are hopeful that the decision will be that a full environmental impact statement is required. In the meantime, despite assurance from MDT and ExxonMobil that this project will in no way set the stage for a permanent industrial corridor, ConocoPhillips surfaced with a similar project-- to ship oil refining equipment over Lolo Pass to Billings. Fortunately, ConocoPhillips is facing roadblocks in Idaho that have serious implications for ExxonMobil's proposal. The Idho Supreme Court will ultimately decide the fate of the Conoco shipments, and MDT says it will not issue permits to Conoco or Exxon until Idaho gives the green light. Federal agencies are also beginning to take a closer look at the project, and the public has another important opportunity to officially weigh in. The Lolo National Forest (LNF) has withdrawn its earlier approval of the Exxon-funded burial of utility lines along Lolo Creek to make way for the massive loads, and now would like to hear from the public on the potential environmental impacts and what level of review should follow. We are pleased that the LNF has reconsidered its original approval. We are disappointed, however, that the LNF has yet to draw the connection between the utility line burial and Exxon's big rig transportation project-- even when it's clear that Exxon is funding the work. READ THE COALITION'S OFFICIAL COMMENTS TO THE LOLO NATIONAL FOREST A video from Jane O'Holly Productions on the potential impacts of the Kearl Module Transportation Project to Idaho and Montana:
A quick and dirty of the Kearl Module Transportation Project: The Route: The route begins in South Korea where the equipment will be pre-fabricated. It is then shipped to Portland, Oregon, and then barged up the Columbia and Snake Rivers to the Port of Lewiston in Idaho. This is where the big rigs come in. From the port, the rigs will begin a 1,600 mile journey along mostly two-lane state roads paralleling the Lochsa Wild and Scenic River along Highway 12, up and over Lolo Pass to Lolo, up Highway 93 and Reserve Street through Missoula, I-90 to Highway 200, through Bonner, along the Blackfoot corridor through Lincoln, over Roger's Pass to Highway 287 through Augusta and Choteau, then up Highway 89 up to Valier and the Canadian border, then on up to the Kearl Oil Tar Sands in Alberta. The Rigs: They're big-- otherworldly big, in fact, with massive wheels. They'll carry loads 30' high, 24' wide, and 162' long and weigh in at 330,000 pounds. Imagine a 2-story house, as long as a football field is wide, with as much mass as a blue whale winding along the Wild and Scenic Lochsa River, crawling up and over Lolo and Rogers Passes, and snaking along the Blackfoot River. The Time: The EA only considers a 12-month time period where 2 loads per day will be moved for a year beginning this fall. However, because the Kearl Oil Sands Project is expected to be active through 2060, we believe limiting the EA to a one-year time period with the proposed parameters doesn't take into account the real potential for decades of use and does nothing to guarantee that the shipments will be constrained to the "off-hours." Other entities involved in the project are at least acknowledging that we're not talking about a one-time deal here. The Port of Lewiston anticipates that "If one oil company is successful with this alternate transportation route, many other companies will follow their lead." It is obvious that this route is planned to be a permanent industrial corridor to be in use for the forseeable future. The Construction: The route and rigs are one component to this project. The other piece is the construction activities that will be involved. In Montana, these include:
The Risks: According to the EA, there are none. But, we're not so sure. In fact, we're very concerned about long-term environmental impacts on water quality and aquatic ecosystems, wildlife, emergency services, air quality, and communities. And what about impacts to our economy? What about our outfitters, fishing guides, and rafting companies who rely on access to these rivers on an almost daily basis? What type of financial hit will result from the delays caused by the construction and these enormous traffic-blocking trucks on the roads? How do the financial benefits from constructing a 'High/Wide' Montana corridor for monster rigs stack up next to what we stand to lose in tourist receipts from amenity-based recreation? And finally, do we really want to facilitate the development of Tar Sands in Alberta? We can't ignore the fact that these big rigs are destined for the Kearl Oil Sands Project in Alberta. These tar sands produce the world's most harmful type of oil for the atmosphere, emitting high volumes of greenhouse gases during development, which contribute to global warming. Tar sands oil production generates almost triple the global warming pollution as conventional oil production because of the massive amounts of energy needed to extract, upgrade, and refine the oil. There has been significant national and international outcry over the development of these oil sands. Montana still bears the scars from-- and pays the price for-- yesterday's mistakes and oversights in resource extraction. Is it smart to facilitate more of the same in the field of energy development when other far less harmful options exist? Comments to the Lolo National Forest: We are urging the Lolo National Forest to disclose the real purpose and need for the utility line burial project. As disclosed in the MDT EA and a Cultural Resource Survey prepared for Exxon's project, the purpose of all highway modifications is to facilitate movmement of massive trucks carrying mining equipment to the Alberta tar sands. The real purpose and need must be identified, and all the associated potential impacts and consequences must be considered, including: creation of a permanent high and wide corridor; potential impact to water resources and fish and wildlife habitat; potential impact to emergency services from the use of this scenic byway as an industrial corridor; the potential for accidents and resulting road closures; potential economic impact of using this environmentally-sensitive area as an industrial corridor; accelerated deterioration of infrastructure from use by over-sized vehicles. View a PDF of the Lolo National Forest's scoping letter and Project map, and see commenting tips below. Call your local, state, and federal elected representatives! Let them know that you have concerns over the MDT and the LNF's lack of environmental analysis and Big Oil's plans to create a permanent industrial corridor along rural Montana's roads and sensitive rivers and streams. Submit comments to the Lolo National Forest by October 15 to: MEC Project Project contact at Lolo National Forest: Boyd Hartwig, Public Affairs Officer: 406-329-1024; This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it SOME TALKING POINTS FOR COMMENTS: Dear Lolo National Forest: The purpose of the MEC project is to facilitate the creation of a permanent industrial corridor from the Port of Lewiston to the Alberta tar sands. The MEC Project scoping letter did not disclose the true purpose and need and I am concerned that the Lolo National Forest's failure to analyze this project as a whole will result in considerable impact. Please conduct a comprehensive environmental analysis that considers:
Thank you, Resident Name More Info: View the Lolo National Forest's Scoping Letter Links: Plans to Haul Big Oil Refinery Loads Sparks Battle (AP) Put it in "Park": Idaho judge curbs contentious "High and Wide" loads National Geographic Report on Tar Sands Press: |
