Pilgrim Pipeline Makes False Claims on Reducing GHGs

Pilgrim Pipeline Makes False Claims on Reducing GHGs
Date : Thu, 10 Dec 2015 13:05:18 -0500

For Immediate Release


December 10, 2015

Contact Jeff Tittel, 609-558-9100

Pilgrim Pipeline Makes False Claims on Reducing GHGs

Pilgrim claimed in a press release yesterday that their proposed bi-directional 178 mile pipeline carrying 200,000 barrels of Bakken crude oil each day will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, when it will actually do the opposite. This pipeline from Albany, New York to Linden, New Jersey will not take barges or oil trains off the market. It will actually put more oil on the market and increase greenhouse gases. This will lead to additional pollution from fracking, spills and leaks, which pipelines are prone to as well as pollution from burning the oil. Pilgrim would also cause water pollution by carrying the most explosive types of oil through important water resources like the Ramapo and the Highlands region. If there was a spill, it would threaten the drinking water supply for 3 million people. The pipeline would also threaten open space and risk public safety. Despite wide public opposition, the company said it plans to file for permits in New Jersey by the end of the year.

“Pilgrim is making claims that aren’t true and they can’t back up. Despite what they are spinning the public to believe, the pipeline will not reduce oil being transported on oil trains or barge. Pilgrim says that the pipeline will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but it will actually do the opposite. Pilgrim wants to put more oil on the market so they can make a profit. The major shipper of Bakken oil by barge currently is Buckeye Partners. They are not only a competitor to Pilgrim, but Buckeye has their own pipeline system and just completed a new one from Bayway to Perth Amboy. A spokesperson from Conoco Phillips, the owner of Bayway Refinery, where Buckeye gets its refined products, has even said they do not want to use Pilgrim either. What Pilgrim doesn’t want the public to know is that their pipeline will actually expand capacity and put more dangerous infrastructure into our communities, ” said Jeff Tittel, Director of the New Jersey Sierra Club. “Pilgrim doesn’t pass the straight face test and nor does their research. The studies Pilgrim is putting out are flawed because they are acting under the impression that Buckeye or other shippers will use their oil, when they will not.”

Pilgrim’s proposal is will not reduce the number of dangerous oil trains rolling through New Jersey and New York or oil barges on the Hudson River. Over two thirds of all Bakken Crude is shipped by rail. And Phillips 66, the owner of the state’s largest refinery, is investing heavily in rail transportation to haul oil across the country to its Linden plant, ensuring that more trains carrying millions of gallons of volatile Bakken Crude will be traveling through New Jersey. At the end of the day, Pilgrim’s pipeline proposal would not increase the amount of oil coming into the region nor would it create increased energy resiliency or independence. It is simply a financial opportunity for Pilgrim.

“ The public knows that this project is unnecessary and dangerous. Yet, Pilgrim is trying to spin them to believe pipelines carrying Bakken oil is safer than barge or train. There is no safe way to transport Bakken crude rail, barge or pipeline that is why public opposition and government opposition is so strong. Bakken crude is a ticking time bomb. However Bakken crude is transported: by pipe, train, or barge, it is a disaster waiting to happen,” said Jeff Tittel. “ No matter how new a pipeline is, all pipelines are prone to human error, accidents, and spills. The proposed route cuts nearby residential neighborhoods, schools, businesses, hospitals, and hazardous areas. There are also concerns a potential spill or explosion could have to green space and parks. We need to reject the various pipelines around New Jersey to protect us from a potential disaster.”

North Dakota Bakken Shale oil is one of the most explosive types of oil in the world. It is dangerous because volatile compounds are left in, instead of taken out because it would cost more to remove. There would also be a tremendous impact to groundwater impacting dozens towns drinking water in Highlands and Buried Valley acquirers. Devastating incidents around the country raise many concerns regarding the transportation of the dangerous They could build facilities to remove this compound, but it’s cheaper to transport them through our communities. Gasoline cannot be moved by rail, the same way Bakken is yet Bakken is more volatile and flammable.

“Not only does Buckeye or Conoco Phillips not want Pilgrim to transport oil, the city of Linden, where the Bayway Refinery is located and 27 other towns along the proposed route have passed a resolution against Pilgrim Pipeline. Counties and towns near and along the route came out in opposition because they have seen the devastating impacts from pipeline leaks and are well aware of the risks. 5 counties and both houses of the state legislature have also passed resolutions against this dangerous project. They know that Pilgrim Pipeline could be a disaster for their communities, especially for public safety and the environment, but the company is still trying to push this dangerous project through. What part of the word NO does Pilgrim not get?” said Tittel.

Instead of transporting Bakken oil, we need to move towards renewable energy that will not damage our environment, put the community at risk, and will help to combat climate change. Now more than ever, the world has stood up against continuing to promote fossil fuels. Even worse, this oil will not benefit us and will likely be exported if the export ban on crude oil is lifted.

“ If Pilgrim really wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, they should not promote a dangerous pipeline that will exacerbate climate change and hook us onto fossil fuels for another forty years. While world leaders are finalizing their plan to reduce our impact on climate change, this project will send us backwards, when we have clean renewable alternatives. We are even more concerned that Pilgrim’s real goal is to export overseas if the crude oil export ban is lifted,” said Jeff Tittel, Director of the New Jersey Sierra Club. “Instead of pushing misinformation along with their damaging pipeline, Pilgrim should really learn the lessons from the Keystone XL Pipeline battle and withdraw their plans like Keystone did. Pilgrim Pipeline is New Jersey’s version of the Keystone XL. What they have in common is that the oil will not benefit us; it will be exported while at the same time we would get all the damage from the pipeline spills, leaks, and explosions. That is why must re-double our efforts to reject this pipeline from harming communities across our state.”

See Pilgrim Pipeline’s press release below:

December 9, 2015

For Immediate Release
Contact: Paul Nathanson

1-800-414-6241, ext. 716

pnathanson@pilgrimpipeline.com

Study: Pilgrim Pipeline’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions to Be Lower than Current River Barge Traffic

Canton, CT — An independent study released by Pilgrim Pipeline shows that greenhouse gas (GHG) air emissions generated by the proposed pipeline would be 20% lower than the GHGs currently produced by barges transporting fuels along the Hudson River. The proposed 178-mile pipeline project, consisting of two separate, parallel underground lines running between supply and distribution terminals in Albany and Linden, New Jersey, could displace up to 2,000 barge trips on the Hudson each year.

Pilgrim submitted the GHG study, conducted by independent consulting firm Environmental Resources Management (ERM), as part of its New York State application. The study compares all emissions that would result from Pilgrim Pipeline operations, including electricity taken off the grid to power the pipeline, with the emissions generated by the diesel engines of tugboats that push fuel barges up and down the Hudson River. One fleet of barges delivers crude oil south along the river, and a different fleet of barges delivers refined products back up north, each returning empty to its point of origin.

The ERM report states, “The estimated annual total emissions of GHGs (in CO2e) for transporting the crude and refined products via pipeline are approximately 20% lower than transporting the same volume of crude and refined products by bargeOverall, the pipeline option does not represent a significant source of GHG emissions.”

“Pilgrim asked ERM to conduct this study because we are confident of the environmental advantages our pipeline brings to the table compared to barges, the main fuel delivery option in the Hudson Valley today,” said George Bochis, Pilgrim’s Vice President for Development. “We are pleased that one of the world’s foremost environmental consulting firms verified that our pipeline would generate lower greenhouse gas emissions than barges. As we’ve said all along, Pilgrim offers a safer, more efficient and more environmentally sound option to transport the region’s critical fuels.”

The proposed pipeline would carry refined products like home heating oil, gasoline, diesel, and kerosene to the north and crude oil southbound. The pipeline would handle an estimated 200,000 barrels in each direction each day (a total of 73 million barrels annually), roughly the amount of fuels currently transported along the Hudson by other modes of transportation.

Both the New York State application and the ERM study can be found on the Pilgrim Pipeline website at www.pilgrimpipeline.com.

###




--
Toni Granato Administrative Assistant New Jersey Sierra Club office:(609) 656-7612 https://www.facebook.com/NJSierraClub @NJSierraClub and @StopPilgrimNYNJ on Twitter
Received on 2015-12-10 10:05:18