Getting beyond an oil bottleneck

  • Article by: DAVID SHAFFER , Star Tribune
  • Updated: November 7, 2012 - 11:59 PM

A 618-mile pipeline would carry oil from western North Dakota across Minnesota to a terminal in Superior, Wis.

  • 12
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
EleanoreNov. 8, 12 7:11 AM

If it helps keep america's oil within our borders for domestic use, I'm for it.

10
2
allotropeNov. 8, 12 7:13 AM

Why not refine North Dakota oil in North Dakota? We could refine Canadian/Keystone oil there too instead of sending it all to Texas where it's just going to be exported.

9
4
cavellNov. 8, 12 7:15 AM

who is is the $1B being paid too for the pipeline construction? is it a US firm? materials and labor?

6
2
EleanoreNov. 8, 12 8:10 AM

One of the problems with the Keystone pipeline was that they were planning on using inferior Indian steel which has a history of corrosion problems. We don't want that on a pipeline in US territory.

7
3
tribal5575Nov. 8, 12 8:51 AM

@ allotrope They tried/want to build a refinery in ND but our glorious re-elected leader repeatedly denied it.

10
5
west336Nov. 8, 12 9:08 AM

allotrope: ND can refine the oil but how is it going to ship it to other parts of the U.S. (cheaply)? Water is the most cost-efficient way of transporting G&S, and is why almost every major city on the planet is located on a major water source (like Lake Superior). My question is why Superior and not Duluth, since Superior is in WI and MN would be missing out on some serious potential tax revenues from this?

9
2
EleanoreNov. 8, 12 9:57 AM

There is an existing, and expanding facility in superior. There isn't even a good location for one in Duluth, even if you could pass the regualtory standard. WI is the right location, the key will be keeping the oil in the US if it's coming from the US and I know neither political party has any intention of doing that, it makes too much sense.

6
0
EleanoreNov. 8, 1210:00 AM

We could always tax the pipeline as it crosses our state. Think of it as a toll booth. if it's property here, moreover it's a commercial undertaking going on in our state, the revenue those who are profitting from it and what it's carrying are subject to our taxing authority.

2
1
EleanoreNov. 8, 1211:36 AM

Actually if someone is making money moving anything across our state, it's our responsibility to make sure we do take a cut of that, it would be impossible without us. What could this revenue fund in MN, transportation maintenance, improved public safety, any number of government responsibilities. If someone is profitting from the security we offer them here, they need to be paying for that.

3
1
g5thistimeNov. 8, 12 5:35 PM

Somehow Minnesota will end up paying for someone to build a pipeline across the state for their oil to be shipped to another state. This state lacks leadership at the top levels.

0
3

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT