Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hatrack

(61,191 posts)
Mon Dec 23, 2024, 08:01 AM Monday

Uinta Basin Railway Is An Oil-Train Fantasy; Still, It's Excuse Enough To Let SCOTUS Go After Key Environmental Law

EDIT

Wildcat speculators, big oil companies, and state officials alike have been salivating over the Uinta Basin’s rich oil deposits for years, yet they’ve never been able to fully exploit them. The oil in the basin is a waxy crude that must be heated to 115 degrees to remain liquid, a problem that ruled out an earlier attempt to build a pipeline. The Seven County Infrastructure Coalition, a quasi-governmental organization consisting of the major oil-, gas-, and coal-producing counties in Utah, has received $28 million in public funding to plan and promote the railway as a way around this obstacle. The coalition is one of the petitioners in the Supreme Court case.

“We don’t have a freeway into the Uinta Basin,” Mike McKee, the coalition’s former executive director, told me back in 2022. “It’s just that we have high mountains around us, so it’s been challenging.” Of course, there is no major highway from the basin for the same reason that the railway has never been built: The current two-lane road from Salt Lake City crests a peak that’s almost 10,000 feet above sea level, which is too high for a train to go over. So the current railway plan calls for tunneling through the mountain. But going through it may be just as treacherous as going over it. Inside the unstable mountain rock are pockets of explosive methane and other gases, not all of which have been mapped.

None of this deterred the Seven County coalition from notifying the federal Surface Transportation Board, or STB, in 2019 that it intended to apply for a permit for the railway. The following year, the board started the environmental review process, including taking comments from the public. In December 2021, the STB found that the railway’s transportation merits outweighed its significant environmental effects. It approved the railway, despite noting that the hazards from tunneling “could potentially cause injury or death,” both in the railway’s construction and operation. It recommended that the coalition conduct some geoengineering studies, which it had not done.

Among the many issues the board failed to consider when it approved the project was the impact of the additional 18 miles of oil train cars that the railway would add to the Union Pacific line going through Colorado, including Eagle County, home to the ski town of Vail. Along with creating significant risks of wildfires, the additional trains would run within feet of the Colorado River, where the possibility of regular oil spills could threaten the drinking water for 40 million people. The deficiencies in the STB’s environmental impact statement prompted environmentalists to ask the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to review the STB decision, as did Eagle County.

EDIT

https://grist.org/transportation/oil-train-supreme-court-nepa-major-environmental-law/

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Uinta Basin Railway Is An Oil-Train Fantasy; Still, It's Excuse Enough To Let SCOTUS Go After Key Environmental Law (Original Post) hatrack Monday OP
I think that the claims of environmental impact are overblown Vogon_Glory Monday #1
There have been many articles about this project in the Environment & Energy Forum. For reference: mahatmakanejeeves Monday #2

Vogon_Glory

(9,596 posts)
1. I think that the claims of environmental impact are overblown
Mon Dec 23, 2024, 08:24 AM
Monday

Last edited Mon Dec 23, 2024, 10:42 AM - Edit history (3)

There actually was a rail line in the Uintah Basin back in the day. It was called the Uintah Railway and was abandoned in 1939. It hauled Gilsonite.

Also, unlike the far more volatile oil from the Bakken fields, Uintah basin petroleum is goopy and less likely to make a big mess in case of a derailment.

Furthermore, the route where those trains would run are along an established rail route that saw heavy rail traffic for decades (yes, I said DECADES) since its construction in the 1880’s. Admittedly the route hasn’t seen much use in the last 20 years or so, but that’s because the Union Pacific shifted much of its traffic north to its Wyoming main line. The track remained there in case the railroad decided to put it back into use.

I have little sympathy for the NIMBYs making a hue and cry about the resumption of rail service. I suspect that most of them moved in after the UP rail-banked its Tennessee Pass rail line. I doubt most real estate buyers bought their properties sight unseen and had ample occasion to see that the Choo-choo tracks were still in place. They had ample time to think through the implications and to realize that the train tracks might be put back into use. It’s like buying a house downstream from a crumbling dam: a potential risk they shouldn’t have ignored.


EDIT: Buying sight unseen is a little more difficult these days.

While I’m still on a tear about NIMBYs buying real estate with certain annoyances (Like choo-choo train noises), I would point out that real estate buyers with the means to buy real estate along the former Denver and Rio Grande Western’s Tennessee Pass/Royal Gorge route also have the means and opportunity to access 3 D maps that show the terrain where they’d be buying. I just accessed maps of Eagle, Colorado and Minturn, Colorado using (Strudle’s) map function.the train tracks are quite visible.


Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Uinta Basin Railway Is An...