Repost from STAND.earth [Editor: STAND is asking for your signature on a petition. Go here. – R.S.]
NO MORE TAR SANDS TANKERS IN CALIFORNIA
The science is in— tar sands oil is much dirtier than conventional crude. It has an outsized climate impact, is terrible for air quality, and when it spills it’s much harder to clean up than conventional crude oil. And now Phillips 66 wants to expand its refinery to process more tar sands in the San Francisco Bay Area.
This would significantly increase the amount of oil tankers coming into the Phillips 66 refinery in the bay! In addition to its negative impacts on California,increasing tar sands production is bad for indigenous communities at the source in Alberta, and transporting it via oil tankers threatens devastating oil spills in the waters of British Columbia, Washington, and Oregon as well.
It’s important that the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, Gov. Newsom, and other key decision makers do everything they can to stop Phillips 66 from completing this expansion project.
Thanks to public pressure from people like you, in 2017 we defeated Phillip 66’s plan to build an oil train terminal in San Luis Obispo that would have also imported tar sands. Phillips 66’s marine terminal and refinery expansion is their last ditch effort to bring more dangerous and dirty tar sands to their Bay Area refinery and we need your help. Will you join us in urging Gov. Newsom and other key decision makers to reject this harmful proposal?
To BAAQMD, Contra Costa Board of Supervisors, Gov. Newsom, and other key decision makers in California:
Tar sands oil harms our air, water, climate, and indigenous communities. We respectfully urge you to reject Phillips 66’s refinery expansion that would double the number of tankers delivering to their refinery and allow them to process tar sands.
Derailments raise questions about the surge in oil trains
By Gillian Steward, Mon., March 11, 2019
A train derailment is shown near Field, B.C., on Feb. 4. A Canadian Pacific freight train fell more than 60 metres from a bridge near the Alberta-British Columbia boundary in a derailment that killed three crew members. The westbound freight jumped the tracks at about 1 a.m. near Field, B.C. (JEFF MCINTOSH / THE CANADIAN PRESS)
Now that so much oil is being shipped by rail from Alberta to points south and west, the sight of a crumpled freight train on the banks of the Kicking Horse River high in the Rocky Mountains has taken on a new twist.
Normally most of that oil would be shipped by pipeline but with the Trans Mountain project and other pipeline expansions stalled or abandoned, the oil industry has taken to shipping the stuff to refineries and ports by train.
A coalition of Indigenous and environmental groups along with the B.C. government successfully stalled the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion that would carry diluted bitumen from Alberta through B.C. But is this what they wanted? Trains loaded with oil navigating narrow mountain passes, rolling through small communities?
Three crewmen were killed in that horrific derailment in early February when a loaded, parked, Canadian Pacific train of 112 cars started to roll down the track west of Lake Louise.
According to the Transportation Safety Board, it barrelled along for three kilometres before 99 cars and two locomotives toppled off a curve ahead of a bridge and into or near the river.
The only saving grace from this accident is that none of the derailed cars contained bitumen, heavy oils, or other petroleum products. If they had there would have been a toxic mess that would no doubt have cost millions of dollars to clean up.
There have been other CP derailments since. Not as deadly as the one in the Kicking Horse Pass but enough to raise questions about the dangers of shipping oil by train instead of pipeline.
On Feb. 28, 20 rail cars went off the tracks west of Banff. Three days later rail cars carrying diesel fuel and grain went off the tracks in Golden B.C. The next day 20 cars on a CP train derailed in Minnesota. And just this past Saturday two CP trains collided in the rail yards in Calgary forcing at least a dozen cars off the tracks.
Again, there were no dangerous goods spilled. But I have seen trains with well over 100 oil tankers roll through Calgary. During the 2013 flood a CP train carrying petroleum products derailed on a bridge and hung precariously over the surging Bow River.
According to the National Energy Board trains are shipping record amounts of oil. Between December 2017 and December 2018 crude oil exports by rail more than doubled to 353,789 barrels a day — add on domestic shipments and the total is even higher.
And it isn’t about to slow down.
Alberta Premier Rachel Notley recently announced her government will spend about $3.7 billion to lease about 4,400 new rail cars to move up to 120,000 barrels per day by 2020, with shipments starting as early as July this year.
Apparently, trains loaded with oil rolling through B.C. isn’t what John Horgan’s government had anticipated when it vowed to use all the tools in its tool box to block the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.
Because now the B.C. government wants more regulatory control over rail shipments of heavy oil even though rail transportation falls under federal jurisdiction. And it wants to know exactly how much heavy oil is being shipped by rail in B.C.
So far that information has only been made available to federal agencies. B.C. will argue its case before the B.C. Court of Appeal on March 18.
It’s obvious that the B.C. government and its supporters don’t want any bitumen or heavy oils transported through B.C. This is not just about the expansion of one pipeline, it’s about stopping heavy oils, a key resource in Alberta, from being shipped anywhere by any means in B.C.
But now the B.C. government is dealing with the law of unintended consequences.
Holding up the Trans Mountain pipeline has led to more oil trains, and heightened the possibility that one of them could derail and spill barrels of heavy oil.
Horgan is no doubt praying that there will be no derailment of oil cars anywhere in B.C. Because if that happens he will have a lot to answer for.
Political news coverage tends to focus on strategy over substance, and that’s making it less likely that the public will agree on big policy ideas when we need them the most.
The Green New Deal is an ambitious proposal that outlines how the U.S. might begin transitioning towards a green economy over the next ten years. It includes steps like upgrading our power grid and renovating our transportation infrastructure. But most people watching news coverage likely don’t know what’s in the Green New Deal. And that’s because political news coverage tends to focus on strategy over substance, fixating on a bill’s political ramifications rather than its ability to solve a problem. That approach to news coverage is known as “tactical framing,” and research shows it makes audiences at home more cynical and less informed about big policy debates. The result is a cycle of partisanship, where solutions to big problems like climate change are judged on their political popularity rather than their merit.
Vox.com is a news website that helps you cut through the noise and understand what’s really driving the events in the headlines. Check out http://www.vox.com.
On Strikethrough, Vox producer Carlos Maza explores the challenges facing the news media in the age of Trump. Follow Carlos on Facebook for more: https://www.facebook.com/CarlosMazaVox
Watch our full video catalog: http://goo.gl/IZONyE
Follow Vox on Facebook: http://goo.gl/U2g06o
Or Twitter: http://goo.gl/XFrZ5H
Vallejo City Council to get update on VMT/Orcem on Tuesday
By John Glidden, March 9, 2019 at 6:22 pm
The site of the Vallejo Marine Terminal/Orcem Americas project proposed for South Vallejo is shown. (Times-Herald file photo)
As the relationship between City Hall and VMT continues to sour, a short-handed Vallejo City Council will receive an update Tuesday regarding the decision by city officials to pause the release of a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the proposed South Vallejo project.
This week, city officials informed representatives with Vallejo Marine Terminal (VMT) and Orcem California, LLC, that due to VMT’s lack of responses to several questions posed by City Hall, which they say is needed, the document’s release date has been pushed back.
“The city needs to know with certainty who is responsible for the project, and any conditions of approval which might attach to the land use entitlement being sought,” staff wrote in the report to the council about City Hall’s decision to hold the FEIR. “The city is prepared to resume processing once VMT is in a position to operate and clarifies that it does want to pursue the appeal by furnishing the needed information, or, alternatively, it gives all of its interest to Orcem, or some other party in interest to continue processing the appeal.”
Vallejo has been attempting for months to have VMT’s new principals, William Gilmartin and Alan Varela, sign an assignment and assumption agreement confirming they have assumed all responsibilities of the business from the original VMT principal Blaise Fettig and former past project manager Matt Fettig.
“…it is unclear whether the purported principals have the authority to manage and bind VMT to agreements that are necessary to finish processing the EIR, or if they are prepared to assume the responsibilities left behind by the previous principals,” staff explained.
Gilmartin and Varela have yet to sign the document.
Meanwhile, the issue between VMT and the city hasn’t stopped Orcem from demanding the city release the FEIR for public review. In recent weeks, Orcem has paid for several print advertisements in the Times-Herald, challenging City Hall to release the document.
The most recent advertisement was printed on Wednesday — the same day as Vallejo’s State of the City event.
“Let’s put an end to the delays,” Orcem’s quarter-page ad reads. “Let the public see the FEIR. Let the City Council vote.”
The advertisement does not include any mention of VMT.
Staff additionally said VMT has stopped collaborating with City Hall by not executing needed agreements to update the Environmental Justice Analysis (EJA), hasn’t provided funding for their half of the EJA, and failed to provide answers to Vallejo’s data requests for the Barge Implementation Strategy and Fleet Management Plan.
Attorney Krista Kim, who represents Gilmartin and Varela, has communicated to the city that Varela and Gilmartin want to meet with city staff next week to “discuss a few important matters as those discussions are very relevant to how VMT would respond to your letter.”
The letter in question is a Feb. 25 piece of correspondence informing VMT of the city’s decision to stop the appeal process due to the lack of relevant information from VMT.
In Match 2017 the Vallejo Planning Commission rejected VMT/Orcem’s application to build a a deep-water terminal (VMT) and cement facility (Orcem) on the same 31 acres at 790 and 800 Derr St. next to the Mare Island Strait in South Vallejo.
The applicants subsequently appealed that decision to the City Council. In June of the same year, councilors directed staff to complete the FEIR so they could review the potential impacts the project might cause if built.
Those opposed to the project say it will pollute the surrounding area, while harming residents and wildlife. Orcem/VMT deny those allegations, saying the project is safe. They further argue the project will provide jobs and tax revenue for the city.
Vallejo Mayor Bob Sampayan confirmed that Vice Mayor Pippin Dew-Costa, along with councilmembers Rozzana Verder-Aliga, and Hakeem Brown are attending a conference in Washington, DC and will not be at Tuesday’s council meeting.
The Vallejo City Council meeting begins at 7 p.m. Tuesday, inside the Vallejo City Hall Council Chambers, 555 Santa Clara St.
The science is in— tar sands oil is much dirtier than conventional crude. It has an outsized climate impact, is terrible for air quality, and when it spills it’s much harder to clean up than conventional crude oil. And now Phillips 66 wants to expand its refinery to process more tar sands in the San Francisco Bay Area.
You must be logged in to post a comment.