Post by FWS on Jul 17, 2014 13:36:51 GMT -6
Oil pipeline across Iowa is another kettle of fish
By Kathie Obradovich
Des Moines Register
July 14, 2014
The proposal to build an oil pipeline all the way across Iowa may force politicians here — including Gov. Terry Branstad — to refine their positions on certain issues raised by the politically charged debate over the Keystone XL project.
Branstad said Monday that he didn’t have a position on a proposal by a Texas oil company to build a pipeline through Iowa from the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota. He said he had not heard about the Energy Transfer Partners project before it hit the newspaper last week. “I just want to learn more about it,” Branstad said.
The 1,110-mile underground line would run diagonally across Iowa from Lyon County in the northwest corner to Lee County in the southeast.
Branstad supports the Keystone XL pipeline, which still awaits federal approval. The Keystone project would run through Nebraska, but wouldn’t come into Iowa. The Iowa Republican Party platform includes a statement supporting construction of the Keystone pipeline, “giving jobs to thousands of loyal Americans.”
The issue isn’t entirely partisan. Last week, Jim Mowrer, the Democratic candidate for the 4th District U.S. House seat, said he supported the Keystone pipeline even though he didn’t consider it a long-term solution to America’s energy needs.
Branstad on Monday didn’t raise the potential for jobs related to pipeline construction in Iowa. He did note the project would need a “very extensive” and time-consuming regulatory review and approval from the Iowa Utilities Board and the state Department of Natural Resources. Environmental groups and advocates have already raised concerns about the potential impact on waterways and farmland.
“There’s a lot, I think, to be learned about this in terms of whether or not this is something that’s feasible, and obviously you’d have to work with all of the farmers whose property would be affected by it,” he said. He said any pipeline passing through Iowa farmland has to deal with issues such as drainage tiles and river crossings.
Asked why he’s willing to support Keystone while taking a guarded view of the Iowa project, Branstad said, “The Keystone pipeline has been around a lot longer and it doesn’t go through the state of Iowa. And this one is a new proposal that does go through the state of Iowa.”
It’s easy to take a bumper-sticker political position on the Keystone project, based on job creation and a partisan view of the Obama administration’s regulatory actions. It’s a lot harder to minimize the potential impact when the thing is running through your backyard and you’re the one responsible for it being safe.
The proposal for an Iowa pipeline also brings home issues related to private property rights that have come up related to the Keystone project. Branstad on Monday noted that the government’s ability to seize private property for the public good should be used sparingly. But he included a pipeline as a project that could use eminent domain, along with roads and bridges.
“I think what people get concerned about is when property is taken from one individual and then utilized by another one by a commercial development that might be an opportunity for someone to make a profit,” Branstad said.
Energy Transfer Partners isn’t exactly running a charity, however. It’s a publicly traded, Fortune 500 energy company that is presumably looking to make a profit. The issue is already bubbling up in the race for governor.
Branstad has criticized his Democratic opponent, state Sen. Jack Hatch, for voting against legislation in 2006 that restricted government’s ability to seize private property through eminent domain. The Republican Governors Association ran a TV ad attacking Hatch, a property developer, on the same issue.
“The governor should tell the RGA to stop blaming Jack Hatch for something Branstad himself is doing,” Hatch campaign manager Grant Woodard said Monday. “Branstad supports the state taking people’s property to run a commercial pipeline through 17 Iowa counties, creating profit for just one company.”
Branstad’s reticence may have as much to do with being blindsided by the pipeline proposal as it does with the particulars of the project. But as Iowans begin to consider the potential for 350,000 barrels of crude a day running through their state, the politics of pipelines will get very slippery.
By Kathie Obradovich
Des Moines Register
July 14, 2014
The proposal to build an oil pipeline all the way across Iowa may force politicians here — including Gov. Terry Branstad — to refine their positions on certain issues raised by the politically charged debate over the Keystone XL project.
Branstad said Monday that he didn’t have a position on a proposal by a Texas oil company to build a pipeline through Iowa from the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota. He said he had not heard about the Energy Transfer Partners project before it hit the newspaper last week. “I just want to learn more about it,” Branstad said.
The 1,110-mile underground line would run diagonally across Iowa from Lyon County in the northwest corner to Lee County in the southeast.
Branstad supports the Keystone XL pipeline, which still awaits federal approval. The Keystone project would run through Nebraska, but wouldn’t come into Iowa. The Iowa Republican Party platform includes a statement supporting construction of the Keystone pipeline, “giving jobs to thousands of loyal Americans.”
The issue isn’t entirely partisan. Last week, Jim Mowrer, the Democratic candidate for the 4th District U.S. House seat, said he supported the Keystone pipeline even though he didn’t consider it a long-term solution to America’s energy needs.
Branstad on Monday didn’t raise the potential for jobs related to pipeline construction in Iowa. He did note the project would need a “very extensive” and time-consuming regulatory review and approval from the Iowa Utilities Board and the state Department of Natural Resources. Environmental groups and advocates have already raised concerns about the potential impact on waterways and farmland.
“There’s a lot, I think, to be learned about this in terms of whether or not this is something that’s feasible, and obviously you’d have to work with all of the farmers whose property would be affected by it,” he said. He said any pipeline passing through Iowa farmland has to deal with issues such as drainage tiles and river crossings.
Asked why he’s willing to support Keystone while taking a guarded view of the Iowa project, Branstad said, “The Keystone pipeline has been around a lot longer and it doesn’t go through the state of Iowa. And this one is a new proposal that does go through the state of Iowa.”
It’s easy to take a bumper-sticker political position on the Keystone project, based on job creation and a partisan view of the Obama administration’s regulatory actions. It’s a lot harder to minimize the potential impact when the thing is running through your backyard and you’re the one responsible for it being safe.
The proposal for an Iowa pipeline also brings home issues related to private property rights that have come up related to the Keystone project. Branstad on Monday noted that the government’s ability to seize private property for the public good should be used sparingly. But he included a pipeline as a project that could use eminent domain, along with roads and bridges.
“I think what people get concerned about is when property is taken from one individual and then utilized by another one by a commercial development that might be an opportunity for someone to make a profit,” Branstad said.
Energy Transfer Partners isn’t exactly running a charity, however. It’s a publicly traded, Fortune 500 energy company that is presumably looking to make a profit. The issue is already bubbling up in the race for governor.
Branstad has criticized his Democratic opponent, state Sen. Jack Hatch, for voting against legislation in 2006 that restricted government’s ability to seize private property through eminent domain. The Republican Governors Association ran a TV ad attacking Hatch, a property developer, on the same issue.
“The governor should tell the RGA to stop blaming Jack Hatch for something Branstad himself is doing,” Hatch campaign manager Grant Woodard said Monday. “Branstad supports the state taking people’s property to run a commercial pipeline through 17 Iowa counties, creating profit for just one company.”
Branstad’s reticence may have as much to do with being blindsided by the pipeline proposal as it does with the particulars of the project. But as Iowans begin to consider the potential for 350,000 barrels of crude a day running through their state, the politics of pipelines will get very slippery.
