With a major oil pipeline canceled under pressure from
environmentalists, and even electricity transmission lines from wind
farms the subject of protests, a power-hungry society faces a
As plans for the Keystone XL pipeline faltered over the last six months, its route through a pristine aquifer in Nebraska proved to be its fatal political flaw. Environmental groups had raised numerous other serious objections: Building the pipeline would lead to a rise in climate-changing gases; its environmental review was tainted by conflicts of interest; extracting oil from Canadian oil sands was destroying precious ecosystems and boreal forest.
But, in the popular mind, none of those concerns stuck like the vision of a big metal pipe full of thick crude coursing under America's pristine heartland. When President Barack Obama himself finally denied the Keystone XL its permit last month, he focused on the 1,000-mile, or 1,600-kilometer, pipeline's passage through the delicate Sand Hills and the Ogallala Aquifer, suggesting he might accept an alternative route.
Officials of TransCanada, the Canadian pipeline builder, seemed perplexed by the traction this particular argument gained, as they toured the United States late last year trying to salvage their ailing $7 billion project. Displaying a map showing the intricate web of pipelines that already crisscrosses the United States, they noted that the country has 2.5 million miles of pipeline. TransCanada's prior oil pipeline into the United States -- smaller than Keystone XL, but not small by any stretch of the imagination -- had elicited barely a murmur of protest.
As energy people, the TransCanada executives were perhaps being overly rational about a reality that Americans seem determined to forget: Large-scale energy is typically produced in remote places and inevitably needs to be transported to the populated areas where it is used. That is a fact, whether the energy comes in the form of "dirty" traditional fuels like coal or oil, or in the form of cleaner natural gas. It is true even if it comes in the guise of green electricity, generated by the sun or wind.
There are pipelines, trains, trucks and high-voltage transmission lines. None of them are pretty, and all have environmental drawbacks. But if Americans want to drive their cars, heat their homes and watch TV, they will have to choose among those unpalatable options. Practically speaking, there is no energy equivalent of wireless.
Indeed, some of the most pitched energy battles being fought today involve not oil pipelines but "next generation" energy transportation: the expansion of pipe networks for natural gas and the high-voltage transmission lines that connect large-scale wind and solar farms to population centers. And those systems are expanding rapidly as the United States shifts away from traditional fossil fuels.
"You can't get around this transportation problem, but people don't want to acknowledge that -- it's a really big problem that we'll have to face," said Michael A. Levi, a senior fellow for energy and environment at the Council on Foreign Relations. "The more you move to transmission lines that cross lots of states, the more you'll have the same trouble as you did with Keystone XL."
In Texas, a coalition of environmentalists, conservationists and landowners is fighting against the planned construction of high- voltage power lines to bring electricity from the huge wind farms of in the western part of the state to the urban corridor of Dallas, Austin and San Antonio in the central part.
"This is beautiful country with huge heritage ranches, amazing biodiversity, endangered species and the headwaters of important rivers," said Christy Muse, executive director of the Hill Country Alliance, a group dedicated to preserving the resources and heritage of central Texas. "A lot of people jumped on the renewable bandwagon -- it's a sexy agenda. But this is a special landscape, and does this minimal contribution to the grid outweigh the degradation these lines impose?"
Her group wants power companies to use smaller towers, employ routes that parallel highways rather than cut across pasture and better compensate landowners. Opponents of transmission lines worry about the effect of huge, latticed towers on wide-open vistas, as well as the effects of electromagnetic fields on wildlife and human health.
If there was no reasonable transportation plan, said Jackie Forrest, a senior energy analyst with IHS Cera in Calgary, Alberta, "a valuable commodity like oil would somehow flow to where it was needed (and could be sold) -- perhaps by even less palatable routes. She pointed out that without Keystone XL, more oil would be imported from the Middle East, which would travel farther and produce double the transport-related carbon emissions as ships crossed the ocean.
Likewise, in the Midwest, where new oil discoveries in the Bakken field of North Dakota have exceeded pipeline capacity, producers are sending large quantities of oil this year to the Gulf of Mexico by rail for refining. (Keystone XL, which was to have run through the region, was expected to alleviate the bottleneck.) "That increases costs, increases greenhouse gas emissions and also has the potential for crashes and spills," Ms. Forrest said.
In his recent State of the State address, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York proposed creating an "energy highway system" of high- voltage lines to bring power from wind and hydropower projects in the northern part of the state and in Quebec to New York City. He might recall that a similar transmission system, New York Regional Interconnect, was proposed in 2006, only to be withdrawn after four years of court battles with residents and environmentalists in the Hudson Valley.
But as states are encouraging the construction of wind and solar power plants with incentives and tax breaks, there has got to be a corresponding boom in transmission line planning and construction, said Alex Klein, chief of research at IHS Emerging Energy Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Perhaps the answer is simply that in an increasingly crowded powered-on world, we are all going to have to accept that some kind of energy highway is likely to traverse Americans' backyard.
"There will always be people who don't like these things near them," said Mr. Levi of the Council on Foreign Relations, who lives in New York. "I live on Second Avenue, where they're building a new subway, and it's been really noisy for a long time now. But at some point we have to function as a society rather than as individuals, in order to get the things we need built."
Most Popular Stories
- Apple CEO: Offshore Units Not a 'Tax Gimmick'
- Social Media Initiatives Should Follow Customers' Lead
- Marketo Makes a Mint in IPO: Stock Shoots Up More than 50 Percent
- Bieber Booed at Billboard Awards
- US Senate Accuses Apple of Large-scale Tax Avoidance
- Ford's Supplier Diversity Program Turns 35
- Georgia GOP Preaches Minority Outreach
- Apple Said to Duck Billions in Taxes
- Soderbergh: Why He Quit Movies
- AT&T Seeks to Fill 120 Jobs in South Carolina