From: gl4317@yahoo.com   
      
   In article ,   
    Sancho Panza  wrote:   
      
   > Better than either of those would be a modern well-equipped pipeline.   
      
      
   Except that:   
      
   1. Mixtures of these volatile chemicals are not allowed in pipelines.   
   They have to be separated out.  Some can be in their own pipeline, but   
   butane, propane, etc. are always handled in tanks or bottles.   
      
   2. The Keystone XL pipeline that is the only controversial one that I   
   know of right now would primarily be for Alberta tar sands oil, not the   
   North Dakota Bakken formation stuff that seems to be prone to blowing up.   
      
   3. None of the trains that have blown up so far have been on routes that   
   are anywhere near the routes where the Keystone XL pipeline would go.   
   So, all of that material would have been on a train anyway, no matter   
   what happens with Keystone XL.  Casselton, ND?  That train was headed   
   for the west coast as best as I can tell.  The Virginia train was   
   nowhere near the route of the Keystone XL pipeline.  Aliceville,   
   Alabama?  Two states away from Keystone XL at the closest point.  None   
   of the others are even close.   
      
   --   
   Please note this e-mail address is a pit of spam due to e-mail address   
   harvesters on Usenet. Response time to e-mail sent here is slow.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)