By Ramona du Houx
January 27, 2013
Close to a thousand protestors rallied in Portland, Maine against tar sands oil pipelines coming through the state on January 25, 2013.
“Reversing the flow of the Portland Pipeline so tar sands oil can be delivered to Portland Harbor would pose some serious environmental risks and I’m going to ask the Obama Administration to do a full environmental review of any attempts to pump tar sands through that pipeline,” said Congresswoman Chellie Pingree. “Exxon Mobile shouldn’t be allowed to go ahead with this risky scheme without a Presidential Permit and I don’t believe the facts will support one.”
In the largest protest yet in the northeast against tar sands oil extraction, close to a thousand people from across Maine, New England, and from Canada carried signs and marched across Portland to rally at the Maine State Pier. The rally and march were held to oppose an emerging proposal to send dirty tar sands oil through the 236-mile long, 62-year-old Exxon/Enbridge pipeline across Canada, Maine and New England. Specifically, participants called on elected officials and the U.S. State Department to require a new Presidential Permit application and full environmental review before the company could reverse the pipeline to carry tar sands. Unless the State Department decides to require a new Presidential Permit, there may not be a permit application or adequate public input or environmental review in store for this line reversal and change to pipe tar sands oil.
“With climate change once again at the forefront of our minds, it is crucial that we work together to end our dependence upon on foreign oil and keep our community free of fuels like tar sands,” said Portland Mayor Michael Brennan. “We need to work together to expand the market for renewable energies and eliminate the demand for tar sands and other fuels that are not only a route cause for climate change but also carry real risks of pollution and spills in our backyard.” Portland City Council members are now considering a measure that would ensure the city does not use fuel made from tar sands oil in its vehicles or buildings.
Casco was the first Maine town to vote against the pipeline at its town meeting in December 2012. Several other towns are considering similar resolutions.
“I’m so proud to be here today to say ‘no’ to tar sands in Maine. The people of Casco have spoken that tar sands would be a bad deal. There is too much at risk for our town and our welfare.” said Connie Cross, a resident of Casco.
Unity College was the first college in the nation to divest its endowment from fossil fuels.
“People ask me about the scientific imperative to address climate change.” said Unity College President Stephen Mulkey. “Actually science doesn’t tell us what to do—it tells us about some of the disastrous consequences of doing nothing. This is a moral and practical imperative. That we must have this rally and march is evidence that our leaders are having the wrong discussion. This tar sands pipeline should simply be unthinkable at this stage of the climate crisis. We are out of time, and our kids will hold us accountable.”
The history of disastrous tar sands pipeline spills and escalating extreme weather disasters from fossil fuel-driven climate change, make tar sands oil especially risky.
“Unless we raise our voices and insist this reckless pipeline project is thoroughly reviewed and then rejected, it will go forward without ever considering the massive potential impacts to Sebago Lake, Casco Bay, and our climate,” said Environment Maine Director Emily Figdor. “It may take an army of us to go toe-to-toe with ExxonMobil, the biggest of Big Oil, but together we can convince President Obama to stop the project, protect the waterways we love, and tackle the climate crisis.”
The rally was held to demonstrate a wall of opposition to this risky proposal and to call on federal officials to ensure there is a full environmental review of this project—because the threats are too great for the environment and economy of Maine, New England, Canada and the Earth.
Maine is threatened by the emerging proposal to reverse the direction of an ExxonMobil/Enbridge oil pipeline and to start sending tar sands through it instead. The pipeline runs through Ontario, Quebec, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine to Portland Harbor. In Maine, the pipeline passes next to Sebago Lake, the drinking water supply for more than 15 percent of Mainers, crosses the Androscoggin and Crooked Rivers, and ends at Casco Bay, where it could endanger fishing and lobster industries.
“As a landowner living along the Crooked River and near the pipeline I absolutely oppose sending toxic tar sands through this pipeline,” said Lee Margolin a landowner and business-owner in Harrison. “The increased risk of a toxic tar sands spill is a health concern for me and my family first and foremost. I also own a small brewery that depends on clean water—I’m just one of thousands of businesses in the region that depends on a clean environment and clean water.”
Heavy, thick tar sands oil is more toxic, corrosive and dangerous to ship through pipelines, putting the region’s environment, water quality and economy at risk. Tar sands oil is diluted with toxic chemicals like benzene, and per mile of pipe, tar sands pipelines have leaked or spilled at three times the rate of conventional oil pipelines. When tar sands does spill, it causes more damage to the health of people and our environment by sinking into sediments and releasing toxic gases. Tar sands oil spills are also nearly impossible to clean-up, even at enormous expense, as evidenced by the 2010 spill in Michigan’s Kalamazoo River. That spill is still being cleaned today, at a cost of over $725 million and counting. Even in its more refined form of “Synthetic Crude Oil”, tar sands has a massive environmental and climate footprint.
“Today people from across Maine and the northeast are sending a clear signal that tar sands doesn’t belong here,” said Dylan Voorhees, Clean Energy Director for the Natural Resources Council of Maine. “A tar sands pipeline would be far too dangerous for our waters, our health, our climate, our economy.”
Worrisome signs all point emerging threat of tar sands to Maine and New England:
- In November 2012, Enbridge applied for permission to reverse and expand the portion of the pipeline across Ontario and Quebec ending in Montreal, specifically seeking permission to carry tar sands.
- An oil company affiliated with the Portland Pipe Line has an application pending for a pumping station in Quebec whose sole purpose would be to send oil south through New England.
- Over the last several months, officials with the pipeline company have handed out information touting tar sands oil to towns along the pipeline, while their oil industry allies have sent opinion pieces to Maine newspapers defending tar sands.
- In late 2011 the pipeline company and lobbyists for tar sands met with Maine Governor Paul LePage to promote tar sands oil, according to documents obtained through Maine’s Freedom of Access Law.
- In January 2013 the company publicly opposed a proposed resolution for the City of Portland to avoid purchase of fuels derived from tar sands.
- Research uncovered the fact that the pipeline running through New England – the Portland-Montreal Pipeline – is controlled by ExxonMobil. ExxonMobil has direct interests in the tar sands, and a poor environmental track record in pursuit of its massive profits.