Published: Tuesday, March 26 2013 4:15 p.m. MDT
It would appear that this leak was larger than first told to the public. With
instrumentation and also methods to know how much spilled oil was recovered and
the coverage area of the oil sheen, the company could have been more precise.
They just want to minimize the impact of "another" broken line. If the
line is over 50-60 years old, they should have realized the potential for
breaks, leaks and bad valves, etc. that could cause an issue. This should have
been more scrutinized, especially in the fragile area of the bird reservation at
the Great Salt Lake's fresher water area.This is sort of 3
strikes against Chevron in Utah where the pristine desert environment that
can't take many actions such as this.
JWB is correct.Our water is too precious, and this continuing
pollution from a 60-year-old pipeline is one day going to kill people.....as
well as our wildlife.Why don't Utahns care?
My first impression of the article, just from the title, suggested rodentia with
GI problems. Just goes to show you can't judge an article by it's
I remember a federal court case where San Diego had to pay back Utah for using
our water. The water in the Great Salt Lake probably wouldn't be permitted
in California, with or without beavers even if the state could pay for it, as
they do for the electricity produced by coal in our state. The carbon foot
print isn't in California and the air blows toward Salt Lake City and
Denver, not California.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments