SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Trucks carry loads of oil-laden sand. A judge has stopped the transport of giant oilfield equipment across scenic roads in Montana, in a victory for campaigners against Alberta's tar sands. (Photograph: Jeff Mcintosh/AP)
Montana Judge Rules Against Transport of Giant Oilfield Equipment
Victory for campaigners as decision delivers a new setback to the efforts of Alberta tar sands
Jul 20, 2011
A judge has stopped the transport of giant oilfield equipment across scenic roads in Montana, in a victory for campaigners against Alberta's tar sands.
The injunction granted by a district judge in Missoula bars Imperial Oil, a Canadian subsidiary of ExxonMobil, from going ahead with their plans to transport the over-sized mining equipment across the state.
Tuesday's decision delivers a new setback to the efforts of Alberta tar sands producers to expand their production and exports to the US.
The oil companies had originally planned to transport 207 pieces of the equipment, which is made in South Korea, from a port in Washington state across Idaho and Montana to the Alberta tar sands.
But a district court judge on Tuesday agreed with the National Wildlife Federation and other conservation groups that the oil companies and the Department of Transportation had not obtained the necessary environmental clearances to move the over-sized equipment along the scenic routes.
In his decision, Dayton also criticised state authorities for failing to conduct their own independent oversight of the transports but delegating the job to a contractor paid by the oil companies.
Dayton did not rescind permits already granted, and he dismissed the concerns from local landowners about the noise and dust generated by the shipments.
But he warned the oil companies could not go ahead without further environmental review.
The Obama administration is in the final stages of signing off on a new 1,600-mile pipeline project to transport oil from the tar sands across the American heartland to Texas oil refineries.
Oil producers have been fighting against demands for additional environmental oversight of the project.
But that position has grown increasingly precarious in the face of growing grassroots opposition and an unrelated pipeline accident over the Yellowstone river earlier this month.
A spokeswoman for Exxon admitted this week that tar sands oil - thicker and more corrosive than crude - was in the same pipeline. But she said it was not in an area affected by the leak.
Why Your Ongoing Support Is Essential
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A judge has stopped the transport of giant oilfield equipment across scenic roads in Montana, in a victory for campaigners against Alberta's tar sands.
The injunction granted by a district judge in Missoula bars Imperial Oil, a Canadian subsidiary of ExxonMobil, from going ahead with their plans to transport the over-sized mining equipment across the state.
Tuesday's decision delivers a new setback to the efforts of Alberta tar sands producers to expand their production and exports to the US.
The oil companies had originally planned to transport 207 pieces of the equipment, which is made in South Korea, from a port in Washington state across Idaho and Montana to the Alberta tar sands.
But a district court judge on Tuesday agreed with the National Wildlife Federation and other conservation groups that the oil companies and the Department of Transportation had not obtained the necessary environmental clearances to move the over-sized equipment along the scenic routes.
In his decision, Dayton also criticised state authorities for failing to conduct their own independent oversight of the transports but delegating the job to a contractor paid by the oil companies.
Dayton did not rescind permits already granted, and he dismissed the concerns from local landowners about the noise and dust generated by the shipments.
But he warned the oil companies could not go ahead without further environmental review.
The Obama administration is in the final stages of signing off on a new 1,600-mile pipeline project to transport oil from the tar sands across the American heartland to Texas oil refineries.
Oil producers have been fighting against demands for additional environmental oversight of the project.
But that position has grown increasingly precarious in the face of growing grassroots opposition and an unrelated pipeline accident over the Yellowstone river earlier this month.
A spokeswoman for Exxon admitted this week that tar sands oil - thicker and more corrosive than crude - was in the same pipeline. But she said it was not in an area affected by the leak.
A judge has stopped the transport of giant oilfield equipment across scenic roads in Montana, in a victory for campaigners against Alberta's tar sands.
The injunction granted by a district judge in Missoula bars Imperial Oil, a Canadian subsidiary of ExxonMobil, from going ahead with their plans to transport the over-sized mining equipment across the state.
Tuesday's decision delivers a new setback to the efforts of Alberta tar sands producers to expand their production and exports to the US.
The oil companies had originally planned to transport 207 pieces of the equipment, which is made in South Korea, from a port in Washington state across Idaho and Montana to the Alberta tar sands.
But a district court judge on Tuesday agreed with the National Wildlife Federation and other conservation groups that the oil companies and the Department of Transportation had not obtained the necessary environmental clearances to move the over-sized equipment along the scenic routes.
In his decision, Dayton also criticised state authorities for failing to conduct their own independent oversight of the transports but delegating the job to a contractor paid by the oil companies.
Dayton did not rescind permits already granted, and he dismissed the concerns from local landowners about the noise and dust generated by the shipments.
But he warned the oil companies could not go ahead without further environmental review.
The Obama administration is in the final stages of signing off on a new 1,600-mile pipeline project to transport oil from the tar sands across the American heartland to Texas oil refineries.
Oil producers have been fighting against demands for additional environmental oversight of the project.
But that position has grown increasingly precarious in the face of growing grassroots opposition and an unrelated pipeline accident over the Yellowstone river earlier this month.
A spokeswoman for Exxon admitted this week that tar sands oil - thicker and more corrosive than crude - was in the same pipeline. But she said it was not in an area affected by the leak.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.