Bayou Bridge Pipeline

If you were to peal back the earth in South Louisiana you could walk around just fine on the steel. What’s one more pipeline?

There are studies done, and a lot of jumping through the hoops to make sure the environment isn't impacted.
Now of course leaks happen, but there are a lot of things in play to make sure it doesn't... Scada, line inspections etc. And when it does happen, there's a remediation process to minimize the long term effects.

I seem to recall recently reading about deaths from pipeline fires/explosions in St.Charles and St.James Parishes. I imagine that is poor timing for advocates of how safe pipeline transportation is.

Pipeline may be safer vehicle of transportation than trucks, I have no idea, but trucks will always have to carry end products from the refineries to the filling stations, I suspect.

Do you support the idea that a private for profit company should be allowed to take a landowner's property? Do you think that it is fair to the land owner to allow his property to be interrupted and taken for a permanent servitude, that is for a one-time payment the pipeline company would profit forever or would fair compensation to the landodwner for this loss of land require a periodic reevaluation and adjustment of rents? Some of the pipeline companies in Calcasieu Parish claim eligibility for a public purpose because their products are feedstocks for a joint of plastic pipe. I have no concern with the Bayou Bridge Pipeline project outher than cuiosity. Just askin'.

quote:

---

Sure, two people have responded declaring that an abundance of peremanent jobs would not be created.

---

There will be many new permanent jobs created for the maintenance and operation of this pipeline. ETC already has a strong operational presence in South LA with infrastructure of the pipeline systems they currently own, however they would have to have much more permanent resources to take on this additional pipeline.

Few permanent jobs for the pipeline itself.

Maybe a few jobs for loading up at the pipeline start point.

If anything, this will reduce the number of truck drivers and trains needed to move stuff, so might actually be a net job loss.

But it's "safer" and faster.

quote:

---

Do you support the idea that a private for profit company should be allowed to take a landowner's property?

---

Sure, this is pretty common procedure, done through the courts, to support public infrastructure.

quote:

---

Do you think that it is fair to the land owner to allow his property to be interrupted and taken for a permanent servitude,

---

Most pipeline easements allow the landowner to continue use of the property for farming, livestock or hunting purposes. You just can't improve the property on the easement, for obvious reasons. Now when you start talking about railroads or overhead transmission lines, that's where things get tricky.

quote:

---

that is for a one-time payment the pipeline company would profit forever or would fair compensation to the landowner for this loss of land require a periodic reevaluation and adjustment of rents?

---

In most cases landowners can structure the payment stream at their discretion. An easement can be negotiated on a term basis as well, with periodic options for renewal.

What if that pipeline is transporting gas to a rural utility or to a rural power cooperative's gas fired power plant? What is the difference between a railroad carrying various goods through a region with no direct benefit to the region?

So in your opinion, corporations and partnerships shouldn't be allowed the same access to the natural gas grid as individuals?