Basically you got two people fighting this, property rights and environmental groups. The enviros I can understand, but not the property rights not so much. It's a buried pipeline, not visible and once it's buried it's out of sight, out of mind unless there's an accident. Far less intrusive than a road, rail, or even power lines. Not to mention that we got nat gas and other pipelines all over the place already.
Not sure this is a hill I'd die on if it were my land. We got a guy in our county who's a die-hard libertarian that's fighting it because he says it's a corporation and not a legit public project. That may be so, but it's not a taking, just a utility easement. It's hardly a eminent domain issue like a new highway that permanently takes the land from you.
Totally agreed up to the bolded bit.
In a way you can say that even a buried pipeline is effectively taking land from you.
What depth is it buried at? Sure, right now the land may be pasture, but what if the owner gets a sweet offer from a real estate developer? Can't build houses on top of an oil pipeline.
How is it going to impact the drainage? If it's a standard pipe lay, it will provide a wick for removing water from the soil - again, not a problem in some cases, a huge problem in others. If the land is in a hollow it's going to get all the water from the higher elevations running down freely through the gravel surround and flooding out the land.
What happens during maintenence checks or a breakage? Again if it's pasture, you don't want to be putting your breeding animals in where they can be disturbed by heavy plant (or strangers) showing up without warning.
None of them are
big ways, but they do all have to be considered.
