Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Husker
As best I can tell, there are no pipelines that run through the aquifer where it is more than 50 feet saturated thickness.

I do not read the map the same way. Nearly all of the Nebraska section is more than 50 feet thick and has multiple liquid petroleum pipelines across it.

The existing pipelines cross through thicker section in Texas and Oklahoma as well.

In addition, can you tell me the concern of the aquifer going deeper while the oil is lighter than water and would float on the top?

26 posted on 11/14/2011 8:42:31 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: thackney

The current pipeline runs along the very eastern edge of the aquifer. The biggest problem is the presence of benzene should there be a leak. Here is a peer-reviewed study: http://boldnebraska.org/uploaded/pdf/worst-case-keystone-spill-study-stansburyEmbargoeduntil11amEDTJuly11.pdf

I understand that I’m not going to change your mind and you won’t change mine. What this issue comes down to for Nebraskans is costs vs. risk. For us, we are in favor of the pipeline, but want it to take a different route due to the risks.


27 posted on 11/14/2011 8:55:39 AM PST by Husker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson