THE RAVAGES OF tar sands extraction in Alberta, Canada.
Sierra Club
By Roger Straw
MANY THANKS TO BENICIA HERALD REPORTER Donna Beth Weilenmann for her detailed report, “Valero rail project: City has no control over oil source” (June 12). It is unfortunate that City Manager Brad Kilger is quoted saying, “The city does not have the authority to control the refinery’s crude sources.”
The source of Valero’s crude is important — here in Solano County, and globally. Since the city can’t control it, perhaps those of us who live here should persuade our friendly giant Valero to stay away from Canadian tar-sands oil of its own volition.
The world is dying, not so slowly, from the burning of fossil fuels. The most polluting of these fuels is mined in Alberta, Canada, where investors are extracting a thick, tar-like substance called “bitumen” from deep layers of sand. This sludge is blasted out of the sand with heated water. Millions of gallons of water are used daily, which first must be heated by natural gas, so the process is not energy efficient and can never be truly competitive with regard to “return on investment” after all costs are factored.
Moreover, additional costs are too often not accounted for — in particular the destruction of miles and miles of pristine northern boreal forests, and in their place the creation of a hellish network of open pit mines, wells, roads, pipes and hundreds of toxic “lakes” from the water used in the extraction process. The destruction has expanded to an area larger than Ohio or Pennsylvania.
Next comes the problem of creating a “blend” of crude oil from the tar-like bitumen that is fluid enough to be transportable by pipeline (Keystone XL), or now by rail. The gazillion-dollar heated railroad cars, we are told by Mr. Kilger, who cites a study paid for by Valero, are “specifically designed not to rupture,” and the city, county, state and feds are all well-prepared to take care of any emergency.
Sure. Tell that to the residents who live near Kalamazoo, Mich., where my daughter was born. We have friends and family nearby there, and their story of leaked tar-sands crude is horrific. After spending more than $765 million on a three-year cleanup there, the Kalamazoo River is still plagued by sunken heavy balls of tar-sands bitumen, threatening habitat, wildlife and human health. For background, see “April Flooding Could Affect Cleanup of 2010 Michigan Oil Spill,” by David Hasemyer:
“Removing dilbit (diluted bitumen) from water is more difficult than removing conventional oil because the chemicals used to thin the bitumen gradually evaporate, while the bitumen sinks to the river bottom.”
Imagine that gunk flowing into our Suisun Marsh after a train derailment — what would that look like? For an idea, read InsideClimate News’ Pulitzer Prize-winning authors’ “The Dilbit Disaster: Inside the Biggest Oil Spill You’ve Never Heard Of,” about “a project that began with a seven-month investigation into the million-gallon spill of Canadian tar sands oil into the Kalamazoo River in 2010. It broadened into an examination of national pipeline safety issues, and how unprepared the nation is for the impending flood of imports of a more corrosive and more dangerous form of oil.”
We in Benicia — including our neighbors in positions of influence at Valero — need to do some very important homework and ask a lot of questions before this new crude-by-rail project is approved. Imagine a disaster here, or better yet, imagine no opportunity for one. The hearing at the Planning Commission is set for July 11. Comments should be sent by July 1 to City Manager Brad Kilger at City Hall, 250 East L St., Benicia, or by email to bkilger@ci.benicia.ca.us.
Roger Straw is a Benicia resident.
Sharing is caring!
That photo is downright surreal.
Editor – a correction, no doubt too late for the print edition: I mentioned “gazillion-dollar heated railroad cars” — Valero has claimed there will NOT be any need for heated railroad cars, because they won’t be shipping the heavy tarry “bitumen” (no need for heated cars in the case of blended varieties that are liquid enough for regular transporting by rail or pipeline). These blends will still be incredibly expensive and toxic in production, dangerous in transit and overall the most polluting of fossil fuels. It will be very important to learn what sorts of blended crude types they’ll be importing by regular rail car, and whether Alberta tar pits are the source of the blend components.
Just ask Valero.
If it means that Valero keeps refining and adding millions yearly to the city coffers, than yes.
I have not yet read THIS article yet, however, I must offer an opinion. I do not like the idea either. But, for decades, we have been getting electricity, granted a small amount now, from coal. And if this Country stopped burning coal now, many people here in California would immediately start complaining that their IRA’s and Stocks were going south, and they would start begging for more electricity from coal. And if you don’t know what damage coal has done, check it out over Schuine, Illinois. Yes, all those mud holes and rock hills were once (before the 1970’s) the best soil in the world! I know, I farmed it! Is the soil in Canada as good as that soil in Illinois? I don’t think so. So, what we have done in the past, and are continuing to do to get coal is probably MUCH worse, but NOBODY is saying anything about that.
My advise is reduce gasoline and electricity use NOW. Instead of asking the people in Canada to suffer, why not us?
Freedom and self-sufficiency should go in hand. In others words; if you don’t have it, make it yourself. It’s time for each and every American to become energy self-sufficient. This concept is by no means unattainable. Technology is a wonderful thing. Only Hal Draper would disagree that this is good thing. I don’t know, I just don’t want the quality of my life dictated by some people digging a huge pit-o-death, far-off in Inuit Country.
Thomas:
Are you in fact “energy self-sufficient” ?
Are you perhaps just blowing wind and “leading from behind” ?
I agree with Roger. We need to produce more oil right here in California
I do agree with you that we should produce more oil in California. But remember it will be fracking in the Monterey Shale Oil Field. It appears to me that the same folks that are going negative on the Alberta Tar Sand fracking will be the same ones that do not want fracking in California. I see no comments on the oil we are getting in Benicia by tanker. Is there Alberta Tar Sand oil being moved into Valero by tanker? I do believe there have been tanker disasters in the past. So just what is the issue Alberta Tar Sand Oil retracted by fracking, California oil retracted by fracking or just a negative approach to fossil fuel. The energy issue can and will be solved by fracking of oil and natural gas. It will bring many types of manufacturing that this country lost to overseas countries back to America. It is trime we get back on track and do what we do best. Tech and energy are the answers. Do not let negative approach to this issue stand in the way of a very important project. Go positive and look for solutions. Work together to resolve any and all concerns.
The petroleum/energy industry makes me vomit…when’s the last time Valero belched a good “flaring” cloud for all of us to inhale? NO to the stinking Keystone project and bitumen garbage from Canada..let them pipe it laterally across their own resources to their own ports…Alternative fuels! If we can get to the stinking moon and beyond, why not some REAL alternative fuel solutions? It rains sunshine every day of the week…who’s working on expanding wind energy?? Wake up, US!! No to FRACKING and Bitumen gunk! –Peter Bray
What about offshore California?
No thanks to turning it into an oil hole like the Louisiana coastline–I trust the petro-industry as far as I can throw them—Think ALTERNATIVE ENERGY!–.pb
The bigger picture….Who are you going to trust oil company executives or climate scientists?
From the above commenter: “No thanks to turning it into an oil hole like the Louisiana coastline–I trust the petro-industry as far as I can throw them—Think ALTERNATIVE ENERGY!–.”
More updated tar sands news the community and our appointed and elected officials can use….
“The Dry Weather That’s Hitting The Tar Sands Industry Is ‘A Preview Of The Future,’ Scientist Says.”
“The Alberta Energy Regulator suspended 73 licenses to temporarily divert water from the Athabasca, Peace, and Wabasca rivers on July 24, after unusually dry weather caused water to fall to at or below healthy maintenance levels. Now, scientists are saying this could become a regular issue for Alberta’s tar sands industry.”
“Tar sands mining is a type of surface mining in which the top layer of organic matter — trees and plants — is scrapped off, and heavy crude oil is filtered from the sand and clay below. Three barrels of water are needed for every barrel of oil extracted from the tar sands, according to Friends of the Earth. ”
“More than 90 percent of this water, 400 million gallons per day, ends up as toxic waste dumped in massive pools that contain carcinogenic substances like cyanide,” the group says. Processing the oil from tar sands is incredibly carbon-intensive, and because of tar sands, the energy sector has become Canada’s biggest source of greenhouse gases. ”
“As global warming worsens, some regions, including Alberta, can expect more and more dry summers, scientists say.”
“This is absolutely a preview of the future,” Simon Dowell, a climate scientist at the University of British Columbia, told Think Progress.”
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/08/21/3693873/alberta-drought-affecting-tar-sands-operators/
Peter,
You are so right!!!!!
Yes if we can get to the moon why not solutions on fracking. Fracking is here to stay. So lets just work out the solutions instead of beating a dead horse. It can and will be resolved to everyones satisfaction except the anti fossil fuel crowd. Alternative energy will be a part of our energy needs as we move forward. But not near as much as the anti fossil fuel crowd thinks. Geography will play a big part in its complete domination of energy. It will be just a player in a much bigger field but will not dominate. Just let high tech and scientist do their work on this issue to resolve it to all most everyones satisfaction. Complaining about it will not be a solution action will. Go fracking.
And what will you do with your contaminated groundwater from fracking? How much damage do you think you can do to the earth permanently? Read “Gasland” or see the film…Fracking sucks more than pondwater—pb
We need to make a list of acceptable sources of crude oil. Any suggestions?
Yeah, wind, solar, get real about getting OFF Frinking oil! If it weren’t for Thomas Edison we’d all still be harpooning whales for our whale oil lamps…Kennedy put us on the moon to get there before the Russians did..How about we get off oil before the Chinese and their billions of hungry faces want us for lunch? or the Indians? Where did guts and courage go in the US? Into “derivative” greed and blatant stupidity? Congress is in a race with itself for mediocre stupidity…Think America, we can’t even keep our high school kids in school to graduate..what a collection of morons we turned out to be…Anybody listening out there?–pb
Peter stated: Read “Gasland” or see the film…
New York Times: 19 errors in Gasland.
Only 19? I’ll bet Cheney’s Energy Plan exempting Fracking chemicals from the Clean Water Act has that many, but that’s an OK Republican action, huh?–pb
Cheney’s Energy Plan exempting Fracking chemicals from the Clean Water Act has that many
That is one of the 19 errors which you did not read.
Not to worry the high tech and scientist will solve the water issue. As I have said before fracking is here to stay. Lets all work together to make it work. I remember when oil tankers cleaned their tanks right out in the bay across friom Benicia. Not any more. Guess what more tankers than ever before are about the bay. Does anyone know if Valero is now getting Alberta Tar Sand oil by tanker? I do not think so. Lets get all the facts correct and solve this fracking issue which is really about fossil fuel not fracking.
High tech and scientists?? You gotta be kidding—an underground tunnel to take N. CA water to S.CA? That’s a solution? What becomes of the Delta, the farmlands? “High tech” and “scientists” are as complacent as a new “iPhone” or Lexus ad in TV…We can’t even figure out our disappearing bee problem–High-tech’ers and scientists aren’t solving Global Warming either—it’ll take “bright people” to do so, not your average, money-soaked “mediocres,” very much still in their box-like thinking— Good luck with that—pb
Farmers and So. Cal have all ready solved their water problem. Drip irrigation and capturing the water. They are way ahead of No. Cal. After fracking gets going full force there will be plenty of money for our politicians to spend on education. This state will have the leading education system in the USA. All thanks to very bright minds that will solve the fracking issues. Get ready for a booming enconomy or you will left out of the great state of California economical progress. Get with it and join the crowd.
So then why do Gov. Brown and Sacto minds want a tunnel system for more water for So. Cal? And who wants to go to LA by high-speed rail or even by slow bus?? Like why go to LA anyway? Ticket sales that slow in Disneyland?–pb
We all attend Roger’s services, just knowing he’s on the planet–pb
“Millions of gallons of water are used daily, which first must be heated by natural gas, so the process is not energy efficient and can never be truly competitive with regard to “return on investment” after all costs are factored.”
For whatever reason, these types of factors routinely go ignored.
The point is, they should never go routinely ignored…we are a species so accustomed to mediocrity we are setting fire to ourselves with Global Warming and inhaling the sewage of our air daily–It’s beyond time to wise up…pb
You might be right. So it is very simple. Just give us examples of your claim. I will listen.
Livesay: Nobody has to give you examples of anything, go survey the increasing asthma rates in the US, stick your nose into something besides right-wing paradigms of “money-first, consequences later.” Wake up. Your mindset would be happy with DDT on Safeway shelves if you could make a buck from it. Wake up!–pb
Thomas you might be right. So why are we still doing this wonderful stuff.? Thomas I would like your chart on why this is not ciompetive. I am sure you can do that. Thomas I assume you have a chart on why this is not competive. We would all like to see it.Thanks.
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/Images/thermo1.gif
Reading this article and the comments is amazing. First, the article clearly shows no serious research was done. Why else would Straw mention gazillion dollar rail cars, only to recant. Brings into question other issues like millions of gallons of water used daily, energy inefficiency and so on. Answer one question for me. Does anyone really think the Canadian tar sands would be expend more energy than it produces? As for alternative sources of energy, I am all for them. Lets go with nuclear. It is the only PROVEN energy source that can produce enough energy to meet the needs. Wind and solar have their place, but not when it comes to replacing petroleum. A couple of other comments. Fracking has been around for decades. It is not new. Peter, lead us. Ditch your car. Go completely off the electric grid. Go back to hand tools. Then talk about vomit and go on and call anyone who does not agree with you right wing names.
I use hand tools daily, and am not about to go Amish and make wicker baskets to carry carrots to market on foot. Nuclear sucks, where are you gonna place the waste, in your backyard? Nobody wants it. Three Mile island, Chernobyl, and the Japanese fiasco should have taught us all by now that anything man-made has flaws and what’s your contingency plan for a melt-down? As to Fracking, study the movie or book, “Gasland,” and give some real thought to the vulnerability and geology of the earth…What kind of chemicals are you injecting there? For what duration? You want those in your groundwater? I don’t. What kind of “hardly rocket scientists” are you trusting to monitor the health of the planet? Water is a limited resource and injecting into bitumen to make it fluidized enough for pumping sounds like another half-baked humanoid/Dick Cheney/solution…so long as it’s in somebodyelse’s hell-hole backyard, everything is just ducky–I don’t agree…look for another real Thomas Edison, and give up whale-oil mentality thinking…our species makes Border Collies look severely intelligent by comparison…pb
Three Mile Island is a PERFECT example of how the safe guards in place worked. Chernobyl is an example of what happens when those safeguards are left out of the construction. As for Japan, the initial problem was the requirement that a backup power supply, diesel, be used, which became flooded, causing the problems. If the backup power had been from the plant it would have been a different story. And dont forget one of the strongest earthquakes in recorded history. You want alternative power, we all do. But wind and solar cannot replace hydrocarbons at this time. But go ahead and keep bringing up names like Cheney for the scare effect. The man has not been in office for 5 years and out of the oil business for longer. Did not realize he was so damn powerful to have such a long lasting impact.
Cheney is an indicator of a given mindset that excluded the press from Energy Dept. meetings, fabricated phony reasons to go to war, and excluded Fracking chemicals from EPA jurisdiction…his mindset is not concerned with the longterm, only the quick acquisition for immediate political or economic gain. You got my point, if you need to diminish it to exalt your own, have a ball. His damage still returns repeatedly. pb
My only comment Peter is why hasn’t the President changed everything Cheney did? You keep bringing up Cheney’s name and the man has not been in office for years. Maybe Obama should start to stand up and right these social injustices you cite. And do NOT blame it on republicans.
John stated:First, the article clearly shows no serious research was done.
The observation is very accurate, as there are several areas which warrant closer scrutiny, in addition to those you mention:
1)the process… can never be truly competitive with regard to “return on investment” after all costs are factored
For five years I split my time 60-40 between working in Calgary, mostly on numerous Tar Sands related projects, and in Western US on other projects. Several points regarding the above comment:
$7.00 per barrel was considered to be the average Oil extraction costs by conventional methods (this was 2005-2010), versus $14.00 per barrel for Tar Sands.
To be profitable on traditional crude the value of $50.00 per barrel was used and for Tar sands oil $75 was the norm.
The above figures were used by engineering companies to calculate the ROI and costs for various projects. Yes the numbers varied, but the ratio of cost/value usually was consistent.
Oil was selling for $125 a few years ago and is now in the $90-100 dollar range. Tar sands oil is very profitable at these figures.
Companies from: Canada, USA, Netherlands, Japan, China, Russia, England and others are all spending massive amounts of money in the billions on various investments; Research, development, building infrastructure, transportation methods (pipelines, roads, RR), they have done so for many years. Does the author expect us to believe they would be doing so if they did not see the expectation of profitability? These are the “greedy” oil companies after all.
2) Pictures: THE RAVAGES OF tar sands extraction in Alberta, Canada. — The second picture shown is mislabeled, as it should read: “during”, not “after” strip mining. In the process used, the top soil is stripped away and saved, the below grade soil is then stripped of the contaminating dirty oil, which is removed, processed and sold at a profit. When the oil has been completely cleaned out of the contaminated area, the top soil will be replaced, graded and replanted under the watchful eyes of appropriate authorities. The funds for these costs are mandated, set aside and are guaranteed through a bonding process. Given enough time (20-40 years), the most of the area will be restored to a ‘natural’ state.
Excellent reply Dennis.
Good info DDL, enviro folks often paint a distorted picture.
They aren’t the only ones.
Thanks Bob and RKJ.
DDL:
“Natural state?” That sounds like a sub-plain “sinkhole” to me where there was none before…Volume out minus volume back in = lower in height–DUH!–Where do you dump the water waste that was used in the flushing process that is currently held in “toxic” holding ponds? You gonna want that blowing across your adjacent cattle ranch, range land, how far before it hits metrolpolitan/residential areas where real people live?–Tar sands technology sucks…maybe “60 Minutes” ought to do an investigatory piece about Fracking and Tar Sands in general and really expose the crap-side of oil technology —pb
Experts have claimed that the EROI for oil sands are close to 1:1 when taking into account tar sands’ full life cycle—including extraction, transportation, refinement into higher quality products, end use efficiency and environmental costs.
Looking at three different sources it appears that tar sands EROI is comparable, or within the ranges given, for: Bio diesel, Ethanol, Solar and geothermal.
A better comparison would be determining energy balance. Energy balance = (energy produced)/(energy used). For example, the energy balance of certain types of ethanol is superior to all types of crude oil.
This article is about anti fossil fuel. It brings in fracking as a scare tactic. Gets an emotional rise out of the renewable energy crowd with no solutions. It is about time that we put our scientist to work on fracking to make it clean. The scientists seem to have all the answers on global warming/climate change. So maybe they could now put their energy into fracking issues. As I have said the Califoirnia State Legislature is preparing bills for water use, identifying chemicals and other regulations used in fracking. Recently the State Assembly voted against a moritorium on fracking. Controlled by the Dems with a super majority. We must and will move forward on fracking. Emotional scare tactics is not the approach to get the answers. I do believe we will find out that the City, planning commission and Valero will give us all the info and answers to move this project forward. Being negative never gets anything done.
Livesay:
It has nothing to do with scare tactics, it’s simply widening the awareness level to include all the ignorant, stupid, mediocre mindsets that have to do with energy policy in this country and globally. The biggest and most blatant dog barking on this issue is NOT necessarily the brightest…Your pompous arrogance on multiple issues on these editorial pages long precedes you…You are ONE voice only, try to remember that…you are NOT a self-elected representative of anyone but yourself..Good luck with that—pb
I make a comment and and present some recent results and get attacked for that. Does anyone think the article is pro fossil fuel? Some that comment are anti fossil fuel. . I happen to be be pro fossil fuel. Personally attacking someone for their opinion is not going to resolve the fracking issue. It will move forward.
The bottom line here is that tar sands extraction and processing is one of the greatest social and ecological injustices of our time. Few realize how ugly things have gotten in northern Alberta. This is about us being aware, and not taking these things for granted.
If Canadian petro-industrialists are so in love with that stuff, they should pump it across their own country and sell it in their ports–who wants that crap? Let the Canadians decide that they have foul crap on their hands and figure what to do with it domestically…Let’s hear what their voters say…pb
Peter stated: they should pump it across their own country and sell it in their ports–who wants that crap
Peter,
The Canadians have been pumping crude from the tar sands to the world market for years out of Kitmat and Burnaby.
I’m just happy as berries for them, let’s do more to accelerate Global Warming, and toss out our science books altogether. Oil, oil, oil, gimmee oil, I wanna bathe in it and get rich in it too. I wanna breathe fossil fuel exhaust until my lungs are black and I’m a cadaver…Yippee! Money, Money, Money, Gimmee a BP Leak until I squeak! I’ve seen the light and it’s NOT whale oil! Bitumen, Bitumen, Bitumen, I’m now one of you guys!—I’m gonna go chop down all my trees too, I wanna wasteland of coal dregs on my lawn!–Yippee—pb
Peter, no need to go off the deep end, we’re probably just going to get smacked with an asteroid anyway.
RKJ:
I plan to leave this earth better than I found it…goosing a cloud is not a pastime i prescribe to.–pb
There is no doubt that the public are aware. I do not know where you or anyone gets the idea that fracking is the greatest social and ecological injustices of our time. Many folks are aware of northern Alberta. Canada has the problem and will do something about it. The only solution to many is to not do fracking. Yes that is a solution but not a very smart one. As I have said before where are scientist on this issue. Do you not believe they coul;d help. At the same time the enviros want to take away farm land for solar. Very strange solution.
” I do not know where you or anyone gets the idea that fracking is the greatest social and ecological injustices of our time.”
Bob – Please refer us to where this was stated. We would all like to know. Bob, you should be able do this. Perhaps a diagram would help.
Thomas read your comment. You said it.
You used the term tar sands extraction and processing is one of the greatest. So what are the others? I assume you put fracking at the top. Are we not talking about fracking. Is this what this article is all about. Fracking. Descripe it any way you want Thomas. That is what you meant, Fracking.
“I assume”
This about sums it up.
Bob, Never did. I never even touched on fracking, Nor does Mr. Straw’s piece.
Try extracting tar sand. Is that not fracking? Sorry Thomas the article is all about extracting tar sand oil. I do believe they call it fracking. Sorry Thomas that is what you and the Rev are talking about Fracking.
Thomas you are right about not touching on fracking. Tar Sands extracting in Alberta is not considered fracking. So I was not correct on your statement. Many associate fracking with tar sand extracting because of the use of water and chemicals. Even many think the results are similar but a different process. Siorry for the confusion.
BL – Apology accepted. Now please behave yourself. You might want to offer apology for more than just your “confusion.” How about sorry for seemingly endless off-topic repetition? Count ’em: 30 times above (not counting the 3 in this last apology) you used the word “fracking.” This following an article having nothing to do with fracking, but rather the massive destruction of Boreal Forests with indiscriminate Canadian pit mining of tar sands for bitumen pitch – now being targeted for rail shipment, perhaps to Benicia. This is serious for us. Get with it!
Roger stated :but rather the massive destruction of Boreal Forests with indiscriminate Canadian pit mining of tar sands
This is an example of what makes dealing with environmental extremists so difficult. The same tactic was used in ANWR, where terms such as “massive” were used, but not always in context to the big picture. If I may attempt to do so :
The boreal forests of Canada cover approximately 1,160,000 square miles. By the size given in the article “Ohio or Pennsylvania” the area being mined represents less than 4% of the total forested area. Yet this amount is totally unacceptable to the EE’s.
If California were to represent the total acreage of the boreal forests, the area we are talking about would be the size of Fresno County.
Yet to save this area from ‘indiscriminate mining’ ( which is anything but), the EE’s would ask that all operations be halted and tens of thousands of people be put out of work affecting four to five times that number when one counts families and ancillary businesses.
But what difference does all of that make if the trees and grass are saved in this small area of the total forests.
Tears were probably shed when the buggy whip industry collapsed and all those jobs were lost, too. But the world keeps turning.
That reply sounds famiiar. How many buggy whip jobs were lost. Could it have been a lost busuiness and folks just hung on to long. Not A good response.
I’ll take that, from the least-informed commenter here who didn’t even know what fracking is.
I do know what fracking is and also how Alberta Tar Sand Oil is extracked. My comments did put them together as being one because some of the posts see the same enviro results. The article states that the source is important. Then goes on to talk about the pollution of fossil fuels and how the world is dying from the burning of fossil fuel. The writer put them together as one regardless of how they are extracted. I just followed the writers lead as did some other posts. I have only seen the term North America not Alberta. So yes I do consider that a scare tactic.
NOW you know what it is.
Dennis stated: “This is an example of what makes dealing with environmental extremists so difficult. The same tactic was used in ANWR, where terms such as “massive” were used, but not always in context to the big picture.”
I don’t think of myself and others who are concerned about the land and creatures in Canada as “extremists” or even “tacticians.” You are certainly aware that there are extremists at the far ends of every debate. Some would say your predictable defense of conservative values – now to include tar sands strip mining – is extreme.
Oh, and the “big picture” highlighted by your citing of square mileage in Alberta might surely be expanded include global warming and our need to find alternatives to the open pit mining of bitumen.
Some would say your predictable defense of conservative values – now to include tar sands strip mining – is extreme.
Of course ‘some’ would say that, as both ‘they’ and ‘some’ say a lot of erroneous things.
But I am perfectly willing to allow strip mining, as long as it is in full compliance with established environmental laws, as well as the financial set asides for the restoration of the area, after the ancient oil has been cleaned up ( a sum in the 100’s of millions).
On the other hand, it seems that those who support your side would prefer to see the entire operation shut down, hundreds of billions then wasted, people unemployed, towns and cities economically devastated, Alberta left with a huge budget shortfall and millions of Albertans faced with huge tax increases.
In all seriousness…. which position then represents the extreme?
DDL that was good.
I would say that. You’ve been an extremist in these pages for some time. Seems there’s no low of conservative orthodoxy to which you won’t sink.
Reverend Straw just where have I not behaved? Very confusing comment. Reverend Straw I will not apologise for anything that I have said. So I will ask you Reverend Straw are you in favor of fracking? Reverend Straw you say perhaps to Benicia. Do you know where this product is being targeted for shipment? I do not think you know. You say it is serious business for Benicia. Please Reverend explain in detail this serious business. Just who are the people of influence. The most polluting of these fuels is minded in Alberta Canada, so Reverend just where is your evidence. You have not stated the process for approval of this rail project. If it had been below a certain dollar level would it have had to go through this process? I would assume you know the process. Reverend please explain the process so the residents will understand just what you are talking about. Are you against fossil fuel extraction? Did not Valero follow all the rules in their application and completely state what they wanted to do. Simple Reverend a rail line to except raill shipments. Is that your objection?. Now what if that rail line was to accept solar panels, would that be acceptible?. I believe what your article says is a classic example of scare tactics. Reverend I do believe that is just what you are doing. No thought about the positive side or facts that would prove otherwise.
Wasn’t there supposed to be some kind of troll policing to stop this Livesayan nonsense? “Scare tactics” — that is rich!
Living under a troll’s bed is a very scary place–pb
Wasn’t there supposed to be some kind of troll policing to stop this…
It would appear that the editor has indeed stepped into the fray to try and change the direction of the postings. Indeed I have noticed that the worst offender appears to have been banned from the board, as I have noticed that the one to whom I refer has been absent for some time.
Livesay:
Ramp up solar and wind technology and make it profitable for every rooftop in America to buy and install one…that will take up NO agricultural land, the space already exists!–try thinking out of the box for a change, Mr. Livesay, you are not a Thomas Edison…The best you can do is demean females that disagree with you–how trite and petty!–pb
This sounds good, I don’t understand why the Carquinez straight is not lined with wind turbines.
Probably for the same reason Ted Kennedy did not want wind turbines on Martha’s Vineyard…NIMBY.
If people are really serious about helping the environment then this NIMBY attitude must go
Ted’s dead. Chappaquiddick was a long time ago, too. Get some new material. Find someone else to hate on for a while.
I love it: A bright, liberal female enters the sleeping old Conservatives’ Morning Moaning Dracula Center where smelly, oily gases and strip mining prevails, Global Warming is not allowed to be spoken, science is forbidden, and bottom lines are exchanged for pesos and euros and yen, and once again, the wagons are drawn into a tight circle, carbines and whalers’ harpoons and buggy whips are brandished for a showdown, an encounter with a foreign intruder, cigar smoke rises…a flag is raised over the circled wagons, it looks like Darth Vader, no, Dick Cheney, no, Jeb Bush, no, George W. Bush, no, Ronny Reagan and Nancy Reagan’s Ouija Board stenciled in red white and blue…Wow! That’s a flag that’ll scare just about anybody…Call in the troll police, Bray’s at it again…Hurry, somebody’s not buying the standard brand of packaged sandwiches…Adolescent slumber parties under a blanket over a cardboard table in the living room were never this much fun…pb
Home solar is way to expensive in the USA, if you can get a 20 panel home solar installed in Australia for 5000 dollars ( 7500 but govt. kicked in 2500) why can’t we get the same or similar here? I think Solar companies are just being greedy by the high prices here. The company my friend in Australia used was Marsol solar , which does us no good here but I thought I would mention their name. Plus their cost of living is higher there.
Complacency is the biggest friend of greed in the US with mediocrity and sloth coming in close seconds…PB
Solar on farm land in California is trying very hard to take up farm land. That is a fact. Roof top issue is already happening. Its the farm land that is now the target of the renewable energy folks. Not good.
I suspect there’s far more roofs available in total acreage than farmlands and that would minimize new gridwork and give PG&E of San Bruno fame a run for it’s poiltical money–Homeowners could be their own power generators…OH, wouldn’t that stir up the dysfunctional PUC?……If we can get to the Frinking Moon and Mars, why don’t we solve our own energy and decaying infrastructure problems first? Duh!–Let’s be mediocre, Oh, let’s be Mediocre, Mediocre can be fun…pb
As far as the reclamation of areas that have been mined to their fullest extent, yes using topsoil during the restoration process can improve the productivity and rate of revegetation. However, the topsoil must retain it’s advantageous chemical, physical, and biological properties . This is not usually the case, as the soil is adversely affected by the removal and storage. Factors including the stripping, storage time, and management of the topsoil often determine degree of damage. Stockpiling also has adverse effects on biological properties. Anaerobic conditions are created in the deeper depths (Johnson et al, 1991). Decreases in microbial activity and infection potential of stockpiled soil are common . The number of bacteria, fungi, and algae are found to be reduced in the stored soil when compared to undisturbed sites . Biomass carbon of stockpiled soils have been found to be significantly lower . All this can lead to reduced nutrient cycling and lower availability of nutrients, having adverse effects on the establishment and production of plants when revegetating.
One should to keep in mind that if the reclamation of soil was as easy as all that, the agriculture industry would not have to employ the vast amounts of chemicals and fertilizer to keep the productive. Sometimes that is not even enough.
Thank you, Thomas, for your detailed comment, “As far as the reclamation of areas that have been mined….” We have seen a good example of reclamation nearby: go check out the so called “reclaimed” lands surrounding the Syar rock mines at the intersection of Lake Herman Road and Columbus Parkway. http://maps.google.com/maps?um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=Syar+Industries+Inc,+Lake+Herman+Road,+Vallejo,+CA&fb=1&gl=us&hq=Syar+Industries+Inc,&hnear=0x80856dc3d8b31e41:0x4add1307970d6a3a,Lake+Herman+Rd,+Vallejo,+CA+94591&cid=0,0,2556774601130895741&sa=X&ei=L0q-UZyZD-bkyQGYiIGIAg&ved=0CHEQ_BIwAQ
Looks like the trees grew back just fine in this example, despite the reduced bacteria, fungi, and algae.
It’s not just about trees.
Comparing the reclamation project of Syar Industries (Lake Herman rd., Vallejo) to the Great Boreal Forests of Canada seems to be quite a stretch (being kind) more information for the community to consider…
http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/Global/canada/report/2010/4/BorealForest_FS_Footnote_rev_4.pdf
From the above article:
“We in Benicia — including our neighbors in positions of influence at Valero — need to do some very important homework and ask a lot of questions before this new crude-by-rail project is approved. Imagine a disaster here, or better yet, imagine no opportunity for one. ”
From the article below by professor Noam Chomsky for the community to consider…
“Blurring of borders and challenges to the legitimacy of states bring to the fore serious questions about who owns the earth. Who owns the global atmosphere that is being polluted by the heat-trapping gasses that have now “passed a long-feared milestone,… reaching a concentration not seen on the earth for millions of years,” with awesome potential consequences, so we learned a month ago? Or to adopt the phrase used by indigenous people throughout much of the world, who will defend the earth? Who will uphold the rights of nature? Who will adopt the role of stewards of the commons, our collective possession? That the earth now desperately needs defense from impending environmental catastrophe is surely obvious to any rational and literate person. The differential reactions to the crisis are a most remarkable feature of current history. In the forefront of the defense of nature are those called “primitive”: indigenous, tribal, First Nations in Canada, aboriginal in Australia, and in general the remnants who have survived the imperial onslaught. In the forefront of the assault on nature are those who call themselves the most advanced and civilized, the richest and most powerful nations.”
http://www.zcommunications.org/we-must-defend-the-global-commons-against-commercialization-environmental-catastrophe-and-autocratic-rule-by-noam-chomsky
More tar sands news you can use…
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/06/18-6
Hooray for South Portland, Maine!—pb
From the above article:
“We in Benicia — including our neighbors in positions of influence at Valero — need to do some very important homework and ask a lot of questions before this new crude-by-rail project is approved. Imagine a disaster here, or better yet, imagine no opportunity for one. ”
Question: Will the Planning Commission and the City Council do their homework?
From the article below:
“Since we first wrote you, in September of 2011, the risks of tar sands oil and the threats of dangerous climate change have only become clearer,” the laureates write.
They continue:
Tragic extreme weather events, including hurricanes, drought and forest fires in your own country, have devastated hundreds of millions of people around the globe. Recent tar sands oil spills in Kalamazoo, MI and Mayflower, AR, have served as a harsh reminder that shipping the world’s dirtiest oil will never likely be safe enough for human health and the environment.
Alberta’s oil sands are Canada’s fastest growing source of greenhouse gas pollution and emissions are projected to double over the next seven years. […]
As leaders who have spoken out strongly on these issues, we urge you, once again, to be on the right side of history and send a clear message that you are serious about moving beyond dirty oil. [read the full text below]
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/06/19-4
Our species should do something intelligent for a change and reject the Keystone pipeline. –pb
From the above article:
“We in Benicia — including our neighbors in positions of influence at Valero — need to do some very important homework and ask a lot of questions before this new crude-by-rail project is approved. Imagine a disaster here, or better yet, imagine no opportunity for one. ”
Below more tar sands information and info-graphic for the community to consider…
http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/06/20/infographic-debunking-prosperity-and-national-security-myths-around-keystone-xl-pipeline
Just as I suspected…I hope Mr. Livesay and Lund take a close look at this…The Keystone Project is dead in my mind…and I’ll distribute this graphic everywhere if i can download it successfully—Non-science repubs will gladly turn this planet into an oil toilet–pb
More tar sands information from a “whistle-blower” for the community to ponder…
An excerpt from the article below:
” A ‘culture of noncompliance’ and ‘coercion’ dictate building practices at TransCanada Corporation–the company behind the proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline carrying ‘ significant ‘ public safety risks declared former employee Evan Vokis.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/06/11-5
The topic is not Keystone.
Livesay:
It’s related to Keystone, you DENSE doughnut! Try to show an utterance of intelligence. pb
A deeper more profound look at our neighbor to the north and the tar sands saga for the community to consider…
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/07/01-8
More tar sands news for our Planning Commission, City Council, and the larger community to consider…
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/07/02-3
What is petcoke and why does it matter? More tar sands information for the community to consider…
http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/07/02/other-coal-export-boom-us-exported-second-highest-petcoke-amount-ever-april
President Obama is closing down coal plants. Just another scare tactic.
Big oil vs. small town
From the above article:
“We in Benicia — including our neighbors in positions of influence at Valero — need to do some very important homework and ask a lot of questions before this new crude-by-rail project is approved. Imagine a disaster here, or better yet, imagine no opportunity for one. ”
From the article (below) a key excerpt for the community to consider…
‘Big Oil is sparing no expense in its bid to crush efforts by residents of South Portland, Maine who are taking the fossil fuel industry head-on to save their waterfront from tar sands.”
‘”Campaign finance reports revealed Friday that the oil industry has poured over $600,000 into a campaign to defeat the Waterfront Protection Ordinance—a land-use zoning ordinance up for referendum in the November election, that is backed by grassroots organizations and would block oil industry efforts to build a tar sands export facility.”
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/28-2
Will do you know for a fact that Tar Sand crude will be brought to Benicia Valero? Or is it more scare tactics.
We need more Chomskys and fewer butt-sitting members of Congress…pb
More from Noam Chomsky:
“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum….”
“If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.”
“Education is a system of imposed ignorance.”
― Noam Chomsky,
More tar sands/climate change news you can use…
From the article below:
Key quote:
“This is nothing like we’ve ever seen before in Alberta,” Alberta Premier Alison Redford said on Sunday.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/06/24-8
Very interesting info. But what does it have to do with three rail lines in Benicia by Valero. Yes I do understand Portland Maine not wanting a Alberta pipeline with Alberta tar sand oil to a port in Portland for export. But again that is not what is happening in Benicia. Oil spills and accidents do happen. It does not matter if it is by tanker, pipeline or rail. They do happen. So just what difference does Kalamazoo or Arkansas rail spill have to do with Benicia. Much different oil that could/would be coming to Benicia. The scare tactics are directed at Alberta tar sand oil in its very thick tarry product. Has Valero ever said that is what they are shipping to Benicia. I do not think so. So the simple answer is that Valero has already answered that question. So what I would ask all the nay sayers is very simple=Just what do you want to know about the oil that is coming to Benicia. Valero has answered that question. . Now if you want to talk safety that is a different topic.. I suggest you talk to Valero about their safety record. Please Will stop the scare tactics.
Bob Livesay: These are not scare tactics, Bob, this is telling the full picture about the Tar Sands Mess and that’s what it is, a mess. Try not to be so linearly confined to your own dogma, your narrowness on every issue paints you into a corner continually and hence your credibility is a small squeak in the wall. I suggest you try a communications class at a local junior college. Or loosen your hat band and let some air in…O2 without oil vapor will not kill you…pb
“Do Benicians want Tar- Sand Oil oil brought here”. Peter that is the topic of the article. The pros and cons of Alberta tar-sand oil have nothing to do with the three rail lines that Valero wants to build. Valero has already answered the question on Alberta Tar Sand Oil coming to Benicia. So the Alberta tar sand extraction is an entirely different subject that can and will be discussed over and over agaiin. The articles that Will is posting have nothing to do with tar-sand oil being brought to Benicia. That question has already been answered. So the continuing negative articles posted by Will have nothing to do with bringing in tar sand oil to Benicia. That question has been clearly answered by Valero. A question I would ask Will and Peter is do you know the origin of the tanker oil? Is it coming from the state of Washington? Does Valero at present bring in Alberta tar sand oil by tanker or pipeline? Those are questions you should be concerned about. Peter if you or Will would write an article on the Forum Page about the negative results of extracting Alberta tar sand oil many of Will’s and others postings would make sense.. Peter I comment on the article and do not make a personal attack on you. Lets talk about what the article is about not something that is not about Benicia. Write the Forum article Will or Peter and you could get some very interesting comments about tar sand oil from Alberta. I am looking forward to the article.
There are already plenty of articles on the extraction of Alberta Tar Sands, so why on the planet would I write another one? Any curious individual can do a websearch. I am not an engine for your juvenile mischief or entertainment. You run in circles Mr. Livesay for the sheer joy of occupying time and space. I just don’t enjoy your chronically static, “money first, to hell with the environment” viewpoint. If it’s any consolation to you, i suspect you and I have cancelled each others votes for the past 20 or 30 years on all elections and issues both locally and nationally. Enjoy your life. Find some other fool to joust with. –pb
I’m fine with Valero processing any hydrocarbon source that they want. They will keep it in the pipes.
I’m all for green when it economically works, unfortunately it doesn’t at present
What if they don’t keep it in the pipes?
Then they clean it up. No big deal
“Yeah, ask the Alaskan and Louisiana coastline people if it wasn’t a “big deal.”–pb
Rail cars here, not ships and offshore rigs
“A spil is a spill is a spill.”…That’s not a quote from Robert Frost…pb
Except a spill on ground is infinitely easier to clean up than a spill in water, especially deep water.
Which still makes it a horrible, community wrecking mess.
They can also build a concrete primary and secondary containment area along the tracks and inspect it weekly for cracks
So P. Bray. Do you drive a gasoline powered car or truck? If yes where do you think the crude comes from that is converted to gasoline? If you drive an electric vehicle what generates the power? If you walk everywhere then your words mean something. Looking forward to hearing about how you get around
My words are just fine and stand as they are. I’m looking for progress, not complacency with the status quo.–pb
This is a familiar and bogus argument. We all live in the world. Some of us are trying to make it better.
Many do think that fracking and the Alberta tar sand strip mined oil as getting similar enviro results. That is why is appears enviromentalist will talk about fracking and tar sand strip mined oil in the same way because of enviro results.. It is all about fossil fuel.
BL:
The energy business is in the toilet and the public is hammering them about Keystone AND Fracking, get used to it…not all the public is asleep to the right-wing paradigm of oil and energy at any environmental cost—Throw in PG&E’s San Bruno ineptness, and you’ve got a genuine can of worms displaying mediocre mindsets and people die–go figure—pb
You’re the one who conflated the two.
As I read all the comments I have come to a conclusion. There are some concerns about something that has not happened and may never happen. It is all about Tar Sands Oil. Nothing wrong with those concerns. So it appears their answer is just stop it. That sounds easy on this issue. But it does not solve the problem of that product or any other product coming into Benicia or other places. I like the approach that something should be done to prepare for any issue that could happen. Valero has and will do all that is necessary to make it safe and clean. What Valero is proposing is a rail facility going through the proper process. The City, Planning Commission and the Council will be involved. I do suggest that everyone go back and read the June 12 article. It was very clear on the issue.
Congratulations, Roger! You’ve managed to bring a wonderful red herring to the Benicia Herald blog table. Meanwhile, nobody in congress is talking about fracking right now. The big agenda item is immigration reform–just in case you haven’t noticed.
A dysfunctional Congress doesn’t lead anything, never did, never will. Waiting for Congress is like watching paint dry–Zippety Do Dahs–pb
There seems to be a lot of concern about Tar Sand Oil from Alberta being sent by rail to Valero in Benicia. The only statement that I have seen is “access to additional North American crude”. I do believe the USA is in North America. Could that oil come from California, Texas, Utah, Dakotas, La. or other areas of the USA? There is also a statement that says instead of not in addition to supplied by tanker.. According to Reverend Straw he says Valero will not be shipping the heavy tarry bitumen. The comments and references are to issues that refer to Tard Sand Oil from Alberta and possibly other areas of North America. Kalamazoo, Arkansas spills, leaks etc. are used as examples of tar sand oil spills. If Valero says it is not shipping heavy tar bitumen why all the scare tactics ?. All Valero is asking for is additional rail entrance to their refinery. If the concern is oil spills why are they not talking about tanker and pipeline line spills and leaks. That is how Valero receives its crude at present. Or is this just an opportunity to jump all over fossil fuel? My opinion is that is exactly what the agenda is. Anti fossil fuel and using Alberta Tar Sand Oil as the driver. Just an opinion.
Bob Livesay: The issue is the proliferation of Tar Sand/Bitumen petroleum coming into Benicia and do we want it processed here. NO! Some of us don’t want it processed here or anywhere. Try to stay focused on the issue as much as it irritates the BeeJesus out of you that you have strong voices against you again and again and again. – pb
Peter where is the info that the proliferation of Tar Sand/Bitumen petroleum is coming into Benicia. How is it coming in and from where what percent of the oil product that Valero uses is TAR Sand Oil I see no info. The issue is the three rail lines and the process to complete it. The three rail lines is the issue not Tar Sand Oil.
Livesay: Tune in to the other posts given here and not just squat on your own limited viewpoint…do your own research like everyone else-You are a limited squatter on a forest of information–WAKE-UP! I refuse to do your homework for you. You are not a debate, you are a knot in a piece of wood. Go figure!–pb
I do know what I am talking about Peter. I do my research.
From the article below:
Key excerpt:
” However, company executives make it clear in comments to investors that Canadian tar sands are being targeted.”
Source: “Canadian tar sands crude heads to Bay Area refineries.”
CC Times
June 1, 2013
http://www.contracostatimes.com/breaking-news/ci_23366256/canadian-tar-sands-crude-heads-bay-area-refineries?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com&IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com
I suggest everyone read this article. Then tell me that Valero is going to bring in Alberta Tar Sand oil in heated rail cars.
I do believe all the Tar Sand issues were answered at the EDB meeting Wednesday night. Lets now get behind the rail track and move forward and back this project. Please no more scare tactics that were never talked about. Only the anti fossil fuel crowd was talking about it. This project is a verry positive enviro undertaking. It should make all of the residents very pleased with the thought that went into it. Thank you Valero you are a very good partner to the City of Benicia.
Forget it, Livesay!–PB
How many times have you told us Peter that you do not pay Bob any attention, or that your computer has an Ap to eliminate all things Livesian?
Yet you hang on his every word, while relishing the opportunity to belittle him. I see your previous rudeness was removed, for good reasons.
Why not practice a little civility?
DDL: And you think Livesay has any credibility? You support apparently his every whisper and nuance. Enjoy him.–pb
I enjoy reading different sides, opinions to an issue. If your not closed minded (left or right) you may learn something
Good comment RKJ. I think when folks are presented with facts on an issue from a company like say Valero it is very difficult for some folks to open their minds to those facts. I post not to change anyones mind but to present the facts on an issue. .
What does credibility have to do with civility?
I guess DDL it depends on who you could be talking about.
Yeah, I should applaud when Livesay demeans bright female liberals who disagree with him…Go figure how that is civil…pb
The good thing that the editor did is stop all that nonsence. Some did very well in keeping it civil others did not. This article is about Tar Sands oil coming to Benicia not Bob Livesay. We get better answers when we remain civil and stay on topic.
PeterBray said: I should applaud when Livesay demeans…
How does Bob’s responses to others justify your responses to him?
It’s an old archaic rule, punch the bully in the gut when he attacks a defenseless female just because he’s already sorted out that she’s a liberal female. Never heard of it? It’s a part of Lizard Warfare. Check your Fourth Grade RuleBook…gets their attention every time…especially when I’m implied to be an “Enviro-Greenie” and a “Liberal-Socialist Democrat.” Better check the horse you’re riding on, it might be one from Livesay’s stables, or do you always agree with him?…pb
PB stated: when he attacks a defenseless female
How is that possible in this forum where men and women are on equal footing? If the person you are defending is, as you describe, then she cannot be described as defenseless.
We are getting away from the original point made, that being civility is not an unreasonable request.
DDL:
They’re not on an equal footing, Livesay demeans right out of the barn…go back and review his snide comments over the past 6 months…Make all civility adjustments retroactive to then and then maybe we can all play by the same rules. This forum always decays into slumber party squabbles over the same idealogues and their seemingly autocratic rule—what a pathetic waste of energy…pb
Livesay: Try being half the gentleman you expect all others to be without goading by the editor…I don’t recall voting for you for any elective office, nor do I recall you being appointed as the Only Knowledgeable Voice in Benicia…Sorry I had to demean you to get you to listen, but “Enviro-Greenies,” and “Liberal-Socialist-Democrats” all came across your lips, not mine—-If the shoe fits, buy two—pb
Pure political ID.
Peter if the shoe fits wear it with pride. If not maybe you should change your tune. I follow the comment lead and respond to it. At this point I would rather stay on topic. I would hope you would do the same. I like the topic of the article and will at this point only respond to comments that are on topic.. Try it Peter.
Peter just what do you mean by “forget it”?
Livesay:
A verb and an object of the verb in response to your previous posting, welcoming us all to be good little carbon burners and accept the seemingly inevitable that Alberta Tar Sands will go anywhere on the planet that the petro-moguls and their lackeys want it to go..and that above all Global Warming by your research is not a problem on this planet…Sorry, but I’ll follow Dr. Hansen’s research, formerly of NASA, and not your Twiddle-dee non-science assessment…Good luck, and I repeat, in case that’s not yet clear, “Forget it..”–PB
A lot of talk about train accidents and that gunk going into Suisun Marsh. Well would not a pipeline burst or tanker hitting one of our bridges cause considerable damage. These are called accidents. In 2004 diesel fuel was spilled into the Suisun Bay adjacent to the Suisun Marshes. So what is next? Stop all pipeline and tanker delivery to Valero. There goes Valero and the close to 25% they contribute to the general budget. There goes the city at the same time. Lets work together to make this safe for all. Good solid planning will make this project work for Benicia. Using scare tactics will not help or prevent this project from going forward. I think you will find that Valero is a willing partner and prides it serlf in its safety record and also regulation priocedures. They are a responsible business.
Sorry for the typos
The one thing that has not been discussed about this project is the financial impact short term and possibly long term. At present Valero is about 25% of the general fund budget. The short term advantage of this project is taxes and employment. The long term advantage is additional jobs and sales tax from Valero. Is the financial issue the only consideration? No. But it should be front and center along with the enviro and safety issues review. We should have review by the watch dog group and residence input. At the same time our Resdident Resaerch Review Reporters are hard at the scare tactic solution. Trying very hard to convince the residents, Planning Commission and the council/mayor of their concers. At this point it appears they are being backed by the mayor. Now that is not very open minded. I do believe we will hear from this anti fossil fuel group and their demands. I s]ay demands because it appears this could be their first step toward driving Valero out of Benicia. Now if that or a reduction in operation happens bye bye Bernicai. That is not a scare tactic that is a fact. I hsave yet to see this group lay out any financial consequence on this project if it stopped That could be a nice thing to bring forward to the public.
Bob said: it appears this could be their first step toward driving Valero out of Benicia
If any refinery was justified in shutting down due to community opposition, it would be Chevron in Richmond.
Agree
For the community to consider:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/07/06/dozens-missing-after-oil-train-explosion-levels-canadian-town-center/