[Vision2020] Questions for Exxon-Mobil at Moscow Hearing June 28 11-1

[nickgier at roadrunner.com]

Greetings:

I have a bunch of questions that I want to ask at the hearing tomorrow (City Council chambers 11-1), but I know I won't be able to ask them all. Feel free to use any and all of them in addition to your own.

I've appended the questions below and also a draft of my radio commentary/column for the week, which backs up the questions with hard data, mostly drawn from www.fightinggoliath.org.

Note to Lin: I hope that I'm not stealing some of the thunder you want to unveil in Lewiston and Koosia.

I'm full prepared for some locking-of-hands-across-the-road civil disobedience if these bozos ignore us.

Nick


Questions for Imperial Oil/Exxon-Mobil Canada.

1. Why wasn’t the equipment built in Alberta where there are skilled metal workers who want the work?  Really cheaper with transportation and road upgrades costs factored in?

2. Why did you hire a Dutch transport company? Couldn’t you find an American company?

3. Is this going to be a long-term route for shipping more than the 207 modules?  Do you make this kind of road upgrade investment for only one equipment order? 

Questions for the Department of Transportation.

1. Have you measured the road correctly? Why do the locals who have done so come to different conclusions?

2. Have you factored in all the exigencies with regard to congestion?  Are the turnouts actually spaced properly if there are delays caused by bad weather and accidents?

3. Is it wise to allow Big Oil to hire our off-duty highway patrolmen?  What if there are, during this long period of time, emergencies where these people will be needed.

4. Have you seriously considered the impact on the tourist industry, which is worth $149 million a year in this area? 

IDAHO’S HIGHWAY 12 AND EXXON-MOBIL’S MEGA-SHIPMENTS

DRAFT (unfinished)

Written as if the hearing is finished and I had a chance to ask all my questions

Will be published in Idaho State Journal (July 4) and Sandpoint Reader (July 1)

I’m indebted to the good people of www.fightinggoliath.com for much of this information

By Nick Gier

On Monday and Tuesday of this week the people most affected by Exxon-Mobil’s plans to ship huge tar sands processing equipment up Idaho’s Highway 12 finally got a chance to voice their opinions.  In January of 2009, without consulting the people of Idaho, Governor Butch Otter told Big Oil that he “has pledged our support and cooperation.” Those who showed up at the Moscow hearing were angry that Otter presumed to speak for them.

I asked the Imperial Oil-Exxon-Mobil Canada representative why the equipment was not manufactured in Alberta.  There are highly skilled metal workers there and they are hopping mad that the contract went to a South Korean firm instead.  

Exxon-Mobil is paying Sungjin Geotec $250 million for 207 modules, but one has to add trans-Pacific shipping to the Port of Lewiston, overland transport from there to Northern Alberta, and upwards of $40 million upgrading U.S. and Canadian roads. I can’t believe that Alberta metal workers offer was higher than these total costs.

To add insult to injury Exxon-Mobil has hired a Dutch firm to do the overland transport. The Alberta tar sands industry, using the most destructive extraction procedures in history, is robbing American and Canadian workers of much needed employment and has the gall to ask Idahoans and Montanans to bear most of the risks of transporting foreign made equipment by a foreign shipper over narrow and winding roads. 

Exxon-Mobil will hire off-duty Idaho police to escort the loads, but at an estimated 9,000 hours for 207 modules, citizens are concerned about how that might impact the highway patrol’s ability to respond to emergencies elsewhere in the state. They should hire their own private escort service, without the sex of course.

The second question I asked at the hearing was whether or not there will be more shipments of this size and whether this route will offer long-term access to Alberta’s tar sands. Sungjin Geotec has announced that it expects to sign another $1.2 billion contract with Canada’s Big Oil.  At an average of $1.2 million per module this means that an additional 1,200 shipments will travel alongside one of Idaho’s most pristine wilderness river systems.

The Port of Lewiston is applying for grants to upgrade its facilities to accommodate these mega-loads. Port authorities reason that “if one oil company is successful with this alternative transportation route, many other companies will follow their lead.”  In a February 2009 letter of support the Idaho congressional delegation “there exists the potential to import hundreds of component modules through the Columbia/Snake River System and Port of Lewiston.”

The commissioners of Missoula County have been informed that Highways 12 and 200 will become permanent “high and wide” industrial transport routes to northern Alberta. An Alberta industrial association predicts that “this route will become the highway for energy-related products from not only South Korea, but even-lower-wage suppliers such as China and Vietnam.”

My next question at the hearing was about the mega-loads negotiating the narrow and curvy highway, which runs 174 miles from Lewiston to Lolo Pass. The Idaho Department of Transportation appears certain that it can be done safely, but local residents are dubious. The modules are 29 feet wide but the highway is at most 23 feet wide, which means that they will extend dangerously beyond the fog lines on both sides.

Local outfitter Lin Laughy reports that "in lots of places you can stand on the fog line and spit in the river. This isn't just one place or two places. This is for miles." At the Fish Creek bridge the total clearance will be 6 inches right at the edge of the Lochsa River.

Rock faces and trees will undoubtedly be hit with the real possibility that a module or a truck will land in the river. As Laughy states: “The crane at the Lewiston port can't even pick these things up. That's why they have to slide them off the barge.” The obstruction would dam the waters and destroy portions of the highway. 

At 300 tons a module would become a permanent fixture, violating forever the natural beauty of a Wild and Scenic River.  Even more likely is that the modules would slip off the dollies and land in the middle of the road. Big Oil will say that this would never happen, but that’s what BP said about drilling 3 miles down in the Gulf of Mexico.

The Canadians can decide for themselves whether they want to destroy their own wilderness to feed the world’s oil addiction, but we should have the right to protect our own wilderness land and rivers and businesses adjacent to Highway 12.

Idaho authorities don’t have to listen.  Our best hope is Montana.

Indebted to Fightinggoliath.com


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Hiway12.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 15037 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20100627/464cc6aa/attachment-0001.bin