Into the Heart of Darkness

Into the Heart of Darkness

In 1887, the Nez Perce people's lives and liberty were in danger from the U.S Calvary. Now, some 140 years later, greed has raised it's ugly head again. Only this time big business is the villain. Also, other people (Native and non-Native alike) will be harmed.

When 750 Nez Perce, or Neemoopoo people, accom-panied by 1,000 horses fled the Cavalry on a 1,200 mile route through the mountains, valleys and rivers of Oregon, Idaho and Montana in l877, their route was treacherous and their commitment to their survival as a people deep. It is some l40 years later, and a new industrial road seeks to follow a similar route, pushing to the heart of Indian country into the darkest chapter of American oil expansion. Dubbed the Heavy Haul, some 200 trucks, many of them literally the size of the statue of liberty on its side, are proposed to traverse some of the most perilous parts of the territory of the Neemoopoo, the Blackfeet and other Native peoples. Destined for the Athabascan tar sands, gigantic specialized trucks will carry monstrous mining equipment imported from Korea, to the largest and most destructive industrial project in history as part of the first phase of a 50 year expansion. The supply route begins in Oregon and includes the Columbia River, Highway l2, and up through Lolo Pass into Montana and then north into Alberta, the heart of darkness, or “Mordor” as the tar sands are commonly called. An analogy from the last century would be the ovens made for the gas chambers in the Nazi Prison camps. If the ovens had to be shipped across Allied territory, perhaps a few Inglorious Bastards would try and stop the trains. In this case, sixty years later, the ecological equivalent of the gas chambers is scheduled to pass right in front of millions of people and through Native territories.

Exxon Mobile, through it's subsidiary Imperial oil and an array of other oil companies have been courting state and transportation authorities with promises of an economic boom in the form of job development and road expansion along the lines of the Tar Sands project. In order to keep the project from public scrutiny, hearings have been fast tracked. Some of the dangers of the project include unsafe load weights for the trucks, not to mention the environmental impact.

As of 2009, there had been only four trucks of almost comparable size on American highways. Those trucks averaged l30,000 pounds and traveled a total of around 78 miles. The Heavy Haul loads are each twice that big, and will travel almost 1,000 miles. Each load is up to l50 tons or more. Highways, most of which are two lanes on the proposed route, are not engineered to sustain these loads. The maximum loads discussed in most state Department of Transportation regulations are 15 tons. The Federal Department of Transportation provides for loads up to 80,000 pounds on the interstate highway system (although a newly proposed bill called the Safe and Efficient Transportation Act of 2010 would raise that limit, heartily benefiting a project like this). The loads, however, exceed even the “safe and efficient act proposals” at almost four times present regulations, weighing in at 300,000 pounds. Likewise, the Exxon Mobil project continues to draw criticism from not only state citizens, but from tribal communities that lie in the path of this transportation brigade. In fact, early this summer, the Nez Perce tribe passed a resolution opposing the heavy haul stating, “The project would establish a dangerous and unacceptable precedent in one of the most beautiful and pristine federally protected corridors in the US.” The Nez Perce also noted that the tar sands project utilized “an environmentally destructive method that will have proposed negative impacts on the First Nations of Alberta.” In effect, this is a haul into hell, as the roads are the pathway to the most destructive project on the planet. The Athabascan tar sands require an immense investment of resources including energy, money and infrastructure. In their wake, they lay to waste hundreds of thousands of acres of pristine boreal forest, kill a multitude of species and are contaminating one of the largest watersheds in North America- the Athabascan river system. In the midst of Dene, Mikisew Cree and other Indigenous communities in the north, new forms of cancer and diseases are becoming more prevalent. . As we watch the devastation to the south in the Gulf of Mexico, we look to the north and find the same level of destruction, it is just out of the eye of the media. Consider this: the US is the largest oil market in the world, and that addiction means the US as a country, will do almost anything to feed that addiction. An area the size of Lake Superior is slated for strip mining for tar sands. At present, the Province of Alberta and Canada (considered to be a “Climate Criminal” because of this project) has leased over 65,000 square kilometers of land for tar sands development. Environmental regulations in Alberta are very lax, to say the least. Tar sands production is licensed to use more water than Alberta’s two major cities – Calgary and Edmonton – combined. That water is turned into poison, laced with chemical sludge, and is polluting the entire Athabascan River system. Geese, ducks and other wild life land on the sludge ponds perish. Alberta grizzly bears are now listed as threatened (numbers dropping by over 100 animals during the past decade) largely because of the loss of and contamination of their habitat as a result of the massive industrialization of the north. The forest and all that live there, not unlike the storyline of Avatar, are about to be destroyed.

The project has been recognized to be grossly inefficient. It's ironic that natural gas, considered to be a relatively clean fuel, is being used to produce very high carbon fuel. The carbon emissions for the project are more than 97 nations in the world combined. Communities along the proposed route are fighting the project due to the potential for disaster.

At every link in the tar sands, communities are working to oppose the project. The oil from tar sands is being sent through pipelines to American consumers and the pipelines are meeting with deep opposition, spurred in part by safety issues raised by the recent oil disasters in Michigan and the Gulf of Mexico. What is the real potential of a disaster ? Well, real enough that Governor Otter of Idaho has mandated that both Exxon Mobil and ConocoPhillips post $10 million in bonds prior to transportation in the event that either company has a ‘mishap.’ Meanwhile, Idaho residents fight the project and cross their fingers in hope that the $10 million bonds are unnecessary. Others affected by the tar sands, however, have already had their unfair share of oil mishaps. Take for instance the people in Michigan who live on the Kalamazoo river where tar sands company, Enbridge (one of the largest pipeline contractors) recently spilled over 1 million gallons of oil causing families to evacuate homes and contaminating water over 30 miles away in a matter of days. This spill made Enbridge’s all-time worst spill in the history of the company. Overall, Enbridge’s mishaps include twenty-three spills in Michigan and Minnesota since 1999, several of which have not been remediated. In late August, the first set of Inglorious Bastards appeared - a set of lawyers representing resort owners, a travel agent and various individuals who live along Highway l2. In a suit against the Idaho Department of Transportation which had authorized an initial test shipment through the state, Idaho Judge Bradbury issued a temporary restraining order on the first set of shipments. As would be expected the oil companies (here represented by Conoco Phillips) have filed an appeal. The case will be heard in October in Idaho. Whether it be pipeline spills, the hauling of mammoth machinery or the squeezing of mud-like bitumen to get oil, the tar sands project is a dangerous ecological and moral set of steps for even an oil addicted economy. Some states are already well hooked up – Minnesota, for instance gets some 85% of its oil from the tar sands, and as policy makers push for a non-foreign oil economy, they seem to miss, that Canada is a different country, and the environmental and human rights impact of the tar sands, is also borne at our pumps.

The hearings were set for last month. I don't know the outcome of it. I hope that it didn't go through. Yes, the project has the potential to provide more oil for the U.S. and lessen our dependence on foreign oil but sometimes, the price for it is too high. Is the environmental damage worth it?

is it worth it?

HELL NO!

what can you do to stop it?
Well, you can complain to help spread the word, that's one way.
You can also start to open everyone's eyes about using oil/gas operable machinery, and how, it is economically and environmentally costly and inefficient.

The only way to stop things like this from happening, is to stop people from ever wanting to use oil/gasoline again. You'd think the Gulf Oil Spill would have been enough (wink wink). I mean, at this point, nothing suprises me as to how low oil companies will stoop to make a profit.

You've got to beat them at the core of their argument: Gas/Oil is the best universal energy substance.

How do you do that?
Start bringing up Patents, Inventors, and gas/oil-free machines.

reply to post by Skid Mark


Thanks for taking the time to share this. I am disappointed to not see at least 50 flags. Your Thread deserves at least that. Especially considering the "I am from Mars Alien prediction" Threads as of late on ATS that receive more
flags than they ever should. This fact alone represents a cross section of the level of intelligence here lately.

At any rate, my humble S&F to you.

P.S. It has become rather apparent that in order to,at the least, try to change things, we have to go through the
whole process of educating people first. I find that principle rather disrespectful when one considers that a great
majority of the information is available to the fingertips of the many, yet they choose to be too lazy to educate
themselves and make a difference. Maybe I should just go watch "American Idol" and Commercials too.
Ignorance is truly bliss........

reply to post by Skid Mark


Damn good thread..

I hope this threads get really big..

everyone need s to know about this..


150,000 pound trucks on two lane roads for a 1,000 miles...good grief..

S&F for you..

Thanks for the replies and the stars and flags. I thought the thread was going to die. When I read that story, I was shocked. I can't imagine how much damage this project would do. One thing that they didn't mention is the amount of fuel those trucks would burn, not to mention the emissions from them. The whole things sounds so environmentally unfriendly.

I wonder if they could show us that the cost of gas or oil would lower by say, $ 1.00/gallon all across America as a result of this project, then what say you then?

When do the benefits outweigh the environmental trade offs for you? What if it was lowered by 2.00/gallon and we were paying only about 1.00/gallon again because of this project?

I mean clearly that will never happen- but it does pose an interesting question to all of us about just where exactly our own line in the sand is drawn. At what point does your own personal financial interest supersede your desire to protect the environment?

They say everyone has their price. But if you ask the earth that question, mother nature might just respond with a big earthquake right down the middle of LA. I wouldn't ask the Old Lady, if I were you.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Yeah, an earthquake or some sink holes. Maybe a tsunami or two.