I'm not claiming that pipelines never have a failure. They have, and multiple times.
But they have a better history than any of the other methods of transportation comparing volumes/distance transported versus spill.
And we have had spills, and the aquifers have not be trashed.
Of this I have no doubt.
And we have had spills, and the aquifers have not be trashed.
Good. All I am asking is for a full assessment without socialized costs.
Look at it this way: An agent of the American taxpayer, the FAA, told the airlines that it was just dandy to install cheesy cockpit doors on airplanes so that they could install an extra first class seat. That meant that the taxpayer owned the risk of terrorists blowing through said doors. Three thousand dead in New York would argue that it was a bad deal, a deal made because the taxpayer owned the risk.
It is not until all risks are accounted, internalized, and weighed objectively that a transaction can truly be optimized. So, if the insurers of the pipeline company were fully accountable for all costs associated with the risks of ownership, including the risk of terrorism and the cost of restoration, then I would have no problem with any of it. I just have little confidence that this is actually the case.