Environmental Impacts of the Pipeline

One of the first issues that jumps to many people's mind when considering a new oil pipeline are the potential environmental impacts of the project. To adequately assess the potential consequences of this project, we need to consider the pipeline from several points of view:

Will the pipeline be built through new corridor? If so, how fragile are the ecosystems in those areas?

Yes, the pipeline will be built through approximately 56% new corridor, according to the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council's (EFSEC) analysis of Olympic's application. Variances in the route could place up to 80% of the route in new corridor. This means that heavy machinery and construction crews could be moving though and working in fragile wilderness areas in our state. The pipeline would cut through Snoqualmie Pass which the Wilderness Society recently listed as one of the ten most endangered wild lands in the United States - somewhere we definitely don't need it.

Once built, will the pipeline acceptably manage spill risks?

Transporting petroleum is very risky. Statistically, pipelines are a safer form of transportation than trucks or train, but not nearly as safe as barges and tankers. From 1982 to 1992, barges/tankers proved to be 240% safer than pipelines. (Source: Pates, Reducing the Rise of Pipeline Accidents: The Virginia Experience, Environment Virginia Symposium, Lexington Virginia (April 11, 1996.) In addition, 90% of the barges on the Columbia River are double-hulled. By contrast, Olympic's proposed cross Cascade pipeline would be only .25-.28 of an inch thick and would have no immediate leak detection system. In addition, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) admits that the Department of Transportation "lacks an adequate system to address corrosion control, inspection and testing of pipelines, methods to limit the release of product from failed pipelines and analyze operator performance." (Source: NTSB press release, January 23, 1996.) Finally, it is important to stress that when a buried pipeline leaks it is not immediately, visually evident to the operator as leaks are to workers on barges. This fact can and has significantly slowed the response time of clean up crews. For more information on the safety record of pipelines and barges on the Columbia, please visit our Department of Ecology Data page.

Will a new pipeline encourage environmental goals such as conservation and a diminished reliance on fossil fuels?

A basic tenet of environmentalism is that our reliance on private cars (and petroleum) is extremely harmful to our environment in two ways. First, burning petroleum pollutes our atmosphere, and second, using private cars to move around encourages sprawl, moving development further and further into wild areas. We are all well aware that petroleum sources will eventually dry up. Knowing this to be true, it is incumbent upon us to seek out alternative fuels and encourage programs of conservation and mass transit. What kind of a message would it send to the petroleum industry if Washington were to approve a new $105 million oil pipeline? We would not be telling the industry to clean up their act and develop alternative fuels, we would be sending the message that we are satisfied with the status quo. In short, building a new pipeline is in direct conflict with the environmental goals of mass transit, energy conservation and alternative fuel development.