With all the misinformation out there about the proposed, Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline, stories like this one need to be widely reported. In short, the article explains why Mike Klink, "a civil engineer and an inspector for TransCanada during the construction of the first Keystone pipeline," does not believe that the first Keystone pipeline is safe, and that there's no reason to think the second one would be any better. According to Klink:
Despite its boosters' advertising, this project is not about jobs or energy security. It is about money. And whenever my former employer Bechtel, working on behalf of TransCanada, had to choose between safety and saving money, they chose to save money.
What did I see? Cheap foreign steel that cracked when workers tried to weld it, foundations for pump stations that you would never consider using in your own home, fudged safety tests, Bechtel staffers explaining away leaks during pressure tests as "not too bad," shortcuts on the steel and rebar that are essential for safe pipeline operation and siting of facilities on completely inappropriate spots like wetlands.
Klink adds that the first Keystone pipeline is a "lemon," and that it "would be far worse to double down on a proven loser with Keystone XL." In sum, according to someone who knows what he's talking about, the proposed Keystone XL pipeline is not safe and should not be built. Policymakers should listen to Mike Klink.