Posts Tagged ‘ shipping ’

Schweitzer Waves White Flag on Big Rigs

(reposted from 4&20 Blackbirds) (we hope they’re not angry)

By JC

super sized

It seems that in lieu of any rational economic development proposals from Governor Brian Schweitzer (D-Imperial/Exxon) to mitigate the impacts of the collapse of the housing construction (timber) industry and Stone Container, it is best to lay down and let another multinational corporation walk all over us:

“If I could wave a magic wand and get Stone Container open again and get the timber industry going again, I’d do that,” Schweitzer said Friday. “In lieu of that, $68 million worth of road work and flaggers and utility work along the highways – I guess we’ll take it. It’s $68 million worth of jobs [associated with the Kearl big rig project].”

Well, no. 32 million of those 63 million oil dollars are the cost of transport. Not jobs or mitigation costs. Those are dollars paid to out of state/country employees to move the dang things–not jobs for locals. Never mind that the project will disrupt traffic along highways 12 and 200 in western Montana, and create safety hazards and emergency response nightmares. It’s full speed ahead, damn the EA:

“[Schweitzer] scoffed at fears that western Montana will become a permanent vessel for big rigs to the Canadian oil fields and elsewhere.

“That’s not the proposal at all,” he said. “This is temporary for 200 loads and nobody’s proposed a permanent corridor. That’s why it’s an (environmental assessment) and not an (environmental impact statement).”

Except, Governor Big Oil, Exxon did “Propose to create permanent ‘High/Wide Corridor’s through Montana”, as revealed in this MDOT presentation prepared by MDOT Director Jim Lynch last July:
permanent corridor

Of course, in the another quote from him in the Missoulian article, he contradicts himself by saying he’ll try harder the next time a proposal like this comes along:

The governor said he pitched hard – “but I’ll pitch even harder next time” – to see that the equipment to be hauled through the state is built “in some place like Great Falls or Cut Bank or Havre, as opposed to being built in Korea.”

So you say we need an EIS if it is going to be a permanent corridor? Then you’d better order Exxon and MDOT to get to work on an EIS. Or are you just a liar? How dumb do you think we are that you think we can’t read and put 2+2 together???

Even Missoula’s City Council recognizes the falsehoods behind those who want to dismiss this project as a one-off needing just an EA, and have prepared a resolution dated May 10th, 2010 that one would assume would be presented to City Council soon:

WHEREAS, the construction required for these large loads will create a permanent high/wide corridor through Montana and Missoula that will attract the interest of additional oversize trucking projects destined for Alberta, as set forth in the draft Environmental Assessment’s (EA) Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Impacts section and in MDT Director Jim Lynch’s 2009 “Proposed High and Wide Corridors Briefing” to a Montana Legislature committee; and

WHEREAS, the draft EA’s Purpose of the Project does not address the creation of a permanent corridor to serve future oversize;

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Missoula City Council hereby declares that complying with the spirit and letter of MEPA and NEPA will require environmental review taking the form of a programmatic joint EIS under MEPA and NEPA and urges MDT to begin such a process in cooperation with affected or involved federal agencies, fully involving the public and exhaustively evaluating the impacts of creating a permanent high/wide commercial transportation corridor from the Port of Vancouver to the Alberta tar sands.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of May, 2010.

So folks, get out there and make sure this resolution passes City Council, and get on Schweitzer’s case about his blatant lying here.

And the Clark Fork Coalition noted in its Take Action bulletin that:

“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.”

Somebody needs to get his head out of Imperial/Exxon’s ass the sand and call for a full blown EIS.

Advertisements

Mammoth trucks to invade northern Rockies, advance climate change

Mammoet. Dutch for “mammoth” …and that is exactly what we’re dealing with. Most people in northern Idaho and western Montana have probably heard about the giant trucks that are slated to cross the region on their way to Canada.  Most don’t seem to know much else about it, though, which is not surprising. The Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) and the companies involved have been conspicuously quiet about the whole thing. Very little information has yet been made available, despite how soon the project is set to go forward. Inquiries to the MDT have been deflected to the companies and the companies are dragging their feet on reaching out to the public.

Example of Mammoet in action

The trucks belong to Mammoet, a dutch company that specializes in, well… big stuff. They are the ones who lifted the Russian submarine “Kursk” up from the ocean floor, for example. Here in North America they primarily move giant pieces of mining equipment to the Alberta Tar Sands, which is exactly what they have recently been contracted to do. While the world condemns Canada and the U.S. for the countries’ lack of dedication to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and as citizens and sovereign First Nations across Canada fight desperately against further developement of tar sand operations in Alberta, the largest company in the world is quietly planning to spend the next couple of years transporting the devices of its apocalyptic industry across the Northwest.

Example of Mammoet in action

Giant “modules” are being built in Korea and shipped to the Port of Portland, OR. There they will be loaded onto barges for transport up the Columbia and Snake Rivers to the Port of Lewiston, ID.  Then Mammoet trucks take over.

The massive dimensions of the largest of the trucks, at twelve times the size of normal tractor-trailers, require that two lanes be used during transport, which on narrow roads like U.S. Highways 12 and 200 means that the whole road, both directions of traffic, will be shut down while these trucks go through at as little as five miles per hour on hills.

Once these trucks start rolling, it will be virtually impossible to travel anywhere along the route without suffering delays, especially over Lolo and Rogers Passes.  Shipments are expected to occur three to five times per work-week for about a year and a half, including through the icy winter, for a total of over 200 shipments.  By law, traffic can only be held up for ten minutes at a time, but once hundreds of turnouts have been built and countless power lines, signs and traffic signals have been refabricated to allow for these trucks’ massive size, there seems little likelihood that these laws will be enforced against a company (ExxonMobil) with an economy six times the size of Montana’s.

Example of Mammoet in action

For turnouts (places for the trucks to pull over for traffic to pass) to be built, unknown ecological damage must occur.  Of particular concern is the Lochsa River corridor in Idaho, a steep and narrow valley of almost no developement and many groves of old-growth cedar right along the roadside.  For turnouts to occur every couple of miles, as the travel plan demands, they must be built either out into the river or else large portions of mountainside may have to be  carved out.  The impacts of these turnouts on the health of the river ecosystem and the species (some endangered and endemic) that rely on it are as yet unknown.  There is some doubt that a thorough and honest environmental impact assessment will be possible before the project begins if the company intends to stay on schedule.

MDT does not yet know what level of environmental review will be required before issuing the permits, however, Jim Lynch, Director of MDT, has said that only the direct impacts these shipments will have on the state will be considered for issuance.  They will specifically ignore any concerns about the effects of tar sand mining or the oil economy on the global environment. All of these permits combined will provide for each state only a few hundred thousand dollars while the economic impacts of traffic delays may far exceed that.  Modification of the roadways appears to require only a few months of construction –if the initial test run occurs this summer as scheduled (no construction has begun as of this writing). Jobs creation, therefore,  will be minimal and temporary.  The ecological damage caused by road work, not to mention by the Canadian Tar Sands themselves, will be extensive and permanent.

Example of Mammoet in action

In Idaho, and possibly Montana too, the success or failure of the initial test run this summer will determine whether the rest of the permits will be issued (though the turnouts will have to be built even just to make the test run).  While the State sticks its fingers in its ears when confronted with the obvious fact that allowing these shipments to pass through constitutes complicity in climate chaos, it is up to us in the Northwest to do our part, in solidarity with Albertans, to stop this project from going forward.

As more information is made available to the public, we will post it here.  For more background information about tar sand mining, click here.  To learn more about how you can help confront Northwestern states’ complicity in destructive tar sand mining, contact us or check out the Alberta Tar Sands links in our Allies & Resources page.  The only information produced by MDT about this for the public, including the precise route, can be read here.

Advertisements