Pipeline protests: A decry of fossil fuels, not a voice for the environment.

[Elderberry]

Oil & Gas 360 by Kevin Olson 8/27/2020

Abstract

Pipelines transporting crude oil, natural gas, and refined products have been a controversial topic for lawmakers, environmental groups, and energy producers throughout the last decade. Since pipelines are the cleanest and safest method of transporting hydrocarbons, the logic behind these protests remains lost on many individuals. But, what the general public must understand is that many protesters are not necessarily trying to shut down pipelines, they are trying to eliminate the use of fossil fuels and force an immediate shift to renewable energy.

Introduction

In recent months the topic of pipelines and pipeline protests have made headlines time and time again. Many of RARE PETRO’s content segments have also covered this topic like in The Impact of U.S. Regulatory Bottlenecks on Domestic Production or the June and July Basin Breakdown Discussions. It is time to take a step back and truly investigate the pros and cons of oil and gas pipelines in the United States to determine whether or not the headline making protests make any sense.

To begin: a brief history lesson of pipelines. China built the first hydrocarbon pipelines in recorded history out of bamboo around 500 BC. Meanwhile, the first oil pipeline in the United States is believed to have been built in 1862 in Pennsylvania [5]. Before that, boats and wagons were most often used to transport oil from one location to another. So with pipelines being around for so long, why the sudden increase in protesting their existence? They have been proven time and time again to be the safest, cleanest way to transport hydrocarbons. The driving factor is a deep rooted stigma against the oil and gas industry. What the general public must understand is that many protesters are not necessarily trying to shut down pipelines, they are trying to eliminate the use of fossil fuels and force an immediate shift to renewable energy. It is not common knowledge that there are 2.6 million miles of pipelines currently crisscrossing the United States delivering trillions of cubic feet of natural gas and hundreds of billions of tons of liquid petroleum products each year to cities across the nation [2]. As a result, U.S. infrastructure is quite literally built on these pipelines as they supply a massive amount of energy to power cities and heat homes. Although environmental activists are pushing for government regulation to eliminate oil and gas pipelines, it is still the safest and most environmentally conscious method for transporting hydrocarbon products. Eliminating them will force companies to use methods of fossil fuel transport that are less environmentally friendly to meet domestic energy demand.

Recent Hydrocarbon Pipeline Protests

More : https://www.oilandgas360.com/pipeline-protests-a-decry-of-fossil-fuels-not-a-voice-for-the-environment/

[Smokin Joe]

In the 1970s the Soviet Union invested in some of the older, former "conservation" organizations, and in some of the new environmental organizations, for the purpose of hampering industrial development in the West.

Their investment was wildly successful, and continues to pay dividends to this day.

With the rise of and infiltration of the Democrat Party by, communist idealogues (progressive, Socialist, all steps in the plan and rebrandings of Marxism), it is no accident that the Democrat Party was affiliated with one of the standard bearers of the Anthropogenic Global Warming set, now rebranded as "Climate Change".

We don't fight against people genuinely concerned for the environment, who would accept the safest methods of transporting needed energy and chemical feedstocks, safest both for humans and the environment, but we fight against people for whom no facts will ever matter, whose goal is the destruction of America as we  know it, who seek to weaken this nation at its core.

When it was said we'd never bring enough wells on line, that we had hit peak oil, we, in the Oil and Gas industry moved that mountain and found more oil and better ways to produce it than ever before.
America survived the War on Coal without the lights going out because we found and produced enough Natural Gas to replace those BTUs, an even cleaner burning fuel to produce the electricity so vital to our economy and people, without relying on the fickle nature of heavily "renewables", in spite of the severely tilted regulatory playing field. Ever moving the goalposts, that list has increased.

For those who lost money in the failed carbon credit scheme, including a spokesperson for that movement (Al Gore), the only hope of bring a premier energy producing nation to its knees is to stop that energy from being utilized.

The use of more risky transport methods creates the problems to rail against, of transportation accidents, a problem that need not exist if the pipelines were utilized.

There is the source of the attack. And while we are engaged in this asymmetrical warfare with an enemy who often goes unacknowledged, in a conflict that is but a small part of a broad based assault on this nation and its economic core, we need to realize that while this just a softer, gentler war, losing will have serious and ugly consequences for our future.