Did TransCanada Lie?

A judge has halted construction of the Keystone XL pipeline in Texas in result of the newest lawsuit that had come out of the Keystone XL debacle. A Texas resident is claiming that TransCanada, the company behind the pipe, lied to Texans when it said it would be using the Keystone XL pipeline to transport crude oil.

The pipeline will be designed to carry tar sands oil from Canada to the Gulf Coast through Texas. Although the pipe requires permission from Obama to cross country lines - which is denied last year, inter-country has begun.

As we reported earlier this month, an appeals court ruled that TransCanada could use eminent- domain law to seize land in Texas to build the Keystone XL pipeline. This left many Texans asking, "What is eminent domain?" They soon realized, however, that it meant the the state could physically take their property and hand it over to TransCanada.

One such resident, Michael Bishop, who had has land taken for the construction of the pipeline, wanted to check the validity of the taking. A Texas judge examined the plea, and ordered TransCanada to temporarily discontinue working on the private property where it has been building part of an oil pipeline for a two-week injunction.

The previous court case ruled that tar sands oil are a form of crude oil, which is a common carrier that pipelines are allowed to use eminent domain to carry. However, tar sands oil does not meet the definition as outlined in Texas and federal statutory codes which define crude oil as “liquid hydrocarbons extracted from the earth at atmospheric temperatures. When tar sands are extracted in Alberta, Canada, the material is almost a solid, and can only be in liquid form when heated and melted down.

TransCanada had not mentioned that the tar sands would be refined. This not only violates the orginal definition, but now environmentalists are concerned that if the pipeline leaks or spill occurs, the heavy tar sands will contaminate water and land - as tar sands are more difficult to clean than is regular crude oil. In addition, refining the product will further air pollution in the Gulf Coast.

Since the onset of the pipeline design, several landowners across the country - not just in Texas - have brought lawsuits to the courts to fight the company’s land condemnations. In the majority of the cases, construction has been allowed to resume despite injunctions held prior. In such cases, the landowner is awarded compensation for their land. Several times, such as for Bishop, the landowners can not afford to hire a comdemnation attorney and are forced to settle.

Energy company spars with landowners over pipeline in Michigan

Condemnation lawyer offices are hard at work in southern Michigan as Enbridge Energy plans to replace one of its pipelines that runs through the area. 

The pipeline that is being replaced is the same one that caused a major oil spill in Marshall about two years ago. Enbridge Energy representatives say the new pipeline will double the oil transportation capacities to refineries in Detroit, Toledo and Sarnia, Ontario.

In order to build the pipeline, the company says it needs additional easement next to the current 60 foot easement that runs through many people’s backyards. Enbridge says many people who own land along the pipeline route have signed contracts with the company.  But Enbridge is taking people who refuse to sign contracts to court Michigan Radio reports.

A county judge heard arguments against more than a dozen landowners.  Many locals gathered to fight against the energy giant and are saying the company is unfairly using eminent domain and condemnation laws, which were originally designed to help state governments build public projects. 

"Enbridge has taken us to condemnation. Eminent domain is another word for it.  And because we wouldn’t sign their contract as it was, they brought us to court to take the land."

More than four months have passed since Enbridge repaired sections of the current pipeline running through a resident’s backyard. But locals say Enbridge workers brought in lights and worked in their yard with heavy equipment day and night, causing inconvenient disturbances and loud noises for the in the family occupied neighborhood.

Some families say the work caused cracks in their foundation and caused other damage they say they have not been compensated for. Condemnation attorney experts have said many remain unsatisfied with the offers Enbridge made for their land for the new pipeline. 

How the Coffee Industry Affected the Costa Rican Economy

When coffee was exported from Costa Rica in the 1800’s it soon became the most important crop to the Costa Rican economy, pulling the small developing nation out of poverty and into the ‘Golden Era’ of relative prosperity. However, despite the overall increase in the quality of life, Costa Rica’s dependence on coffee ended up crippling the country when coffee prices plunged during the Great Depression.

Additionally, the nation’s coffee dependence has led to its exploitation by the major coffee importers, such as Europe and the United States, and is something in today’s world will be presented to any eminent domain lawyer.

In the 1990s, despite the high price of a cup of coffee in the US, only 16% of money spent in the US on coffee made it back to the producing countries. Most recently, the fall in coffee prices from 2000 to 2004 is a flagrant example of inequality of coffee profits; while the fall resulted in poverty and a devastating economic downturn in many producing countries such as Costa Rica, the only negative effect experienced by importers such as the U.S. was a cheaper cup of coffee of lesser quality. Again in this case of inequality among Costa Ricans will not make in to court with a condemnation attorney or anything of that sort, instead capitalism alone was expected to balance out and promote economic advancement.

To continue reading about this topic ready my other posts on this blog.