Crude release from pipeline into Yellowstone River in Montana
03 July 2011
On Saturday, an as yet undetermined amount of crude oil was released into the Yellowstone River in Montana from an ExxonMobil Pipeline Company (EMPCo) pipeline.
According to a statement from ExxonMobil, the release originated from a 12” crude pipeline operated by EMPCo that runs from Silver Tip, MT to Billings, MT. The pipeline has been shutdown and the segment where the release occurred has been isolated. All appropriate state and federal authorities have been alerted.
State authorities provided an early estimate that about 1,000 barrels of crude leaked out. In its statement, ExxonMobil said that the amount was as yet undetermined.
ExxonMobil said that at this early stage,it has no information on the cause of the incident, and is working to determine the amount of oil released. ExxonMobil has activated its North American Regional Response Team to assist in the clean up efforts. A claims number 1-888-382-0043 has also been established to assist individuals who might have been impacted by this event.
It's amazing how we live in such a technologically advanced age, but still cannot build pipelines that won't leak. On the other hand, the oil & gas industry is more than a massive jobs program from upstream to downstream, its also creates a myriad of cleanup jobs, from the highly paid consultants preparing reports and conducting field studies and groundwater monitoring, to the techs on the ground literally cleaning up and containerizing contaminated soil & water. The irony is so many of these environmental jobs actually depend on continued contamination --- stop the pollution and people lose their jobs.
Posted by: ejj | 03 July 2011 at 05:50 AM
I would rather employ them doing something productive, like getting off fossil fuels by building fuel plants.
Posted by: SJC | 03 July 2011 at 08:08 AM
...lowest cost contractor... and maximum profits..?
This is a nasty thing to do.
Posted by: HarveyD | 03 July 2011 at 09:30 AM
The fines for spills must therefore be too small for spills and leaks, especially the non-headline grabbing "smaller" spills.
Give them a substantial penalty for a spill/leak and maybe the lowest bidder may not be the best deal.
Posted by: TM | 03 July 2011 at 10:00 AM
Maybe the smaller spills do not amount to much.
We kill 30+ thousand on the highways,
30+% from drunk driving
. . and the solution?
. . Umm, I doe-noe - legalize pot?
1000 gal of crude?
Lowest bidder instead of some "Postal service" type of govt agency?
Tempest in a teapot.
Posted by: ToppaTom | 03 July 2011 at 10:43 AM
Remember those natural gas pipeline leaks that were not prevented by scheduled replacement? Did Exxon ever inspect the pipe to make sure strong river currents did not damage it over time? I doubt that they did.
Posted by: SJC | 03 July 2011 at 01:47 PM
Just remember that as horrible as the spill is, it can be considered a jobs program with an economic multiplier effect, all which is billed to ExxonMobil. If cleanup crews are housed in motels in nearby communities, they can provide a boost to their economies (lodging, restaurants, bars, strip clubs, etc)...
Posted by: ejj | 03 July 2011 at 04:15 PM
I guess we should all hope for tornadoes and hurricanes then. Disaster replacement and repair adds to the GDP, but it is not productive. There is much more value building a new factory and expanding capacity then to replace one destroyed by disaster.
Posted by: SJC | 03 July 2011 at 04:58 PM
"On Saturday the shadow Congress passed the Sarcane Oxsilly Anti-metaphor Law (SOAL). The new law set to be implemented in January makes it illegal to wantonly emit metaphors without SOAL metaphor credits. Credits will be sold and traded to the highest emitters at a globally established metaphor emission market established near the ancient Machu Picchu sacred valley of the Incas, some 2430 meters (7970 ft) above sea level.
While skeptics have argued that the extreme elevation will be a deterrent to the credit program, others believe forcing metaphoric emitters to exercise regularly will have residual health benefits."
New New York Times, July 4, 2011, Fifth Dimension (NOT the band!)
Posted by: Reel$$ | 03 July 2011 at 06:08 PM
Oil is like cigarettes...something lawmakers would love to ban outright but collect too much money from taxes & it creates too many jobs (for cigarettes there are more legal & medical profession jobs) so they tolerate it & use it as an excuse to advance socialism and/or marxism.
Posted by: ejj | 03 July 2011 at 07:30 PM
When oil and cigarette era is over (by 2050 or so) it will be very easy to find replacement revenues such as:
1. A new 10% to 50% tax on all junk foods (would reduce health care cost and increase productivity)
2. A financial transaction tax (a mere 1% could rake in $$$B)
3. A carbon tax on coal fired power plants and other coal users.
4. Pollution taxes on all polluters.
5. A vehicle usage tax (per Km or per Kwh)
6. Progressive ++ registration tax on all vehicles over 2000 lbs.
7. Elimination of all fuel subsidies.
8. Elimination of all tax loop holes.
9. etc etc
Posted by: HarveyD | 04 July 2011 at 08:01 AM
Harvey appears to be tax drunk. How about a new paradigm where a flat tax on income, supplemented by a few "sin" taxes on intoxicants and value added items - is the whole tax base?
The challenge then is for the commonwealth to figure out how to build and maintain infrastructure with only the money they receive! Could they do it? End fat cushy pencil pushing jobs paid by the public??
Doubtful.
Posted by: Reel$$ | 04 July 2011 at 09:02 AM
Yes Reel$$...flat transaction taxes could work well if survival essentials (basic food-medical-drugs...but not junk foods, beer, hard liquor, restaurants, hotels etc)) are excluded, It is somewhat more complex to collect than income taxes at the source.
All current taxes could effectively be replaced by invisible (built-in) good and services 15% to 25% tax plus a financial 1% to 3% transaction tax.
Nobody really want a simplified system. The majority would miss their income tax returns.
Posted by: HarveyD | 04 July 2011 at 11:09 AM
Taxes are one way to offset externalized costs. If coal power plant pollution causes lung and heart illness, then the money can go to medical expenses. It is MUCH better not to pollute in the first place, but Republicans would claim that is a burden on business and would cause your electric bills to go up...fear mongering is going strong in the Wrong Wing.
Posted by: SJC | 04 July 2011 at 12:19 PM
I've heard that ExxonMobil has been the world's most profitable company since 2006, and that last year they earned $5 MILLION in profit *an hour* - that's every hour, of every day, of the whole of last year, and that is PROFIT as in "The excess of revenues over outlays in a given period of time (including depreciation and other non-cash expenses)"
Posted by: ai_vin | 06 July 2011 at 10:09 AM
Mediocrity and failure are to be admired.
People who PAY taxes are, by definition, greedy and should pay MORE taxes.
Why should the achievers keep their money? It should go to the underachievers.
Thus ultimately eliminating those greedy achievers.
It allows us to GIVE people or companies what they are "entitled to".
"I've heard that ExxonMobil has been the world's most profitable company since 2006,"
For shame - why can't they be more like GM ?
Posted by: ToppaTom | 06 July 2011 at 06:10 PM
The shame is not in their profitability. Its in their cheap response to the spill, and the idea that the oil companies still need corporate wellfare (taxpayer funded subsidies).
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#43648767
Posted by: ai_vin | 07 July 2011 at 07:56 AM