Proposed Bakken Pipeline is not a public utility

In his July 8 column, 'Dakota Access Pipeline would be beneficial,” Ed Wiederstein misses several key facts that undermine his claim that the Bakken Pipeline is beneficial to Iowans.

First is the certain risk of an oil spill into our waterways or onto valuable Iowa farmland. Iowans cannot ignore the reality that pipelines do leak - simply look to this week's spill of 4,200 gallons of crude oil from an All American Plains Pipeline pump station in Illinois. Or the 100,000 gallons of oil spilled onto southern California beaches two months ago by a different Plains pipeline near Santa Barbara. Similar stories have unfolded in North Dakota, Michigan, Texas, and Arkansas. Oil spills are not anomalies. Coupled with the fact that the Bakken Pipeline is larger and has a greater oil carrying capacity than any of the examples mentioned, Iowans are rightfully concerned about the safety of this proposal.

Ultimately, the safety claims of the oil and gas industry don't match up with the reality of broken pipelines across the country. Comparing the relative safety of pipelines to rail or trucks is also a moot point. Dakota Access, LLC and Energy Transfer Partners are simply pipeline companies. They do not own the oil that the pipeline is proposed to carry. Whether or not the companies that own the oil cease to transport their product by rail or truck is not something that Dakota Access can control or claim to control.

Second, the proposed Bakken Pipeline is neither a jobs bill nor a jobs proposal. To trade off the value of our water, soil, and communities for jobs that aren't guaranteed would be shortsighted.

Independent economic analysis has called into question initial job estimates, provided in a study funded by the company, and found that very few Iowa jobs or economic benefits for our state.

Third, Dakota Access does not operate 70,000 miles of pipeline throughout the country. Their parent company, Energy Transfer Partners does own that much pipe, but those are predominantly natural gas pipelines. Not only was Dakota Access, LLC created for the sole purpose of pushing this project through Iowa, but the parent company does not have a proven track record when it comes to crude oil pipelines. A recent explosion on one of their natural gas pipelines in Texas underscores potential negative effects on even the types of pipeline they are most experienced with as a company.

Fourth, we cannot draw comparisons between this pipeline and roads. Roads are accessible to everyone. This pipeline would be buried six to eight feet underground and would pump oil that Iowans will not have access to in order to create profit for a Texas-based Fortune 500 oil company.

Lastly, if we are interested in 'securing a brighter future for all Iowans and Americans,” we must turn to alternative energy sources that will benefit our communities, economically and environmentally. The fossil fuel industry compromises public health at all points in the industry - from extraction, to transportation, to refinement and export. They are not the kind of folks Iowans should want to do business with.

Ultimately, Mr. Wiederstein's claim that emotions are blinding people from the facts about the proposed Bakken Pipeline is dead wrong. Century farms, family histories and our state heritage is being called into question by this proposal. It's right and just that Iowans are angry about this proposal. This anger must be heard.

' Nathan Malachowski is a community organizer for Iowa CCI. Comments: (515) 282-0484; nathan@iowacci.org