|
Op-Ed: Proposed rail merger is bad for
Chicagoans and American energy
By Michael Patrick Flanagan
A pipeline provides a clear solution to meet America’s energy
transportation needs that is safer, less disruptive and avoids many of
the other concerns surrounding this rail merger.
|
|
 Gas in some parts of Chicago has recently been
spotted at $7.29 per gallon – a crippling price for many drivers. Unfortunately,
such sky-high energy prices are all part of the Biden Administration’s policy
goals; a piece of the “incredible transition,” as the President put it, away
from fossil fuels.
In fact, one of the first things Joe Biden did as President was cancel the
Keystone XL pipeline, citing special interest-driven environmental and safety
concerns that were previously dismissed by federal regulators when approving the
pipeline. Biden also bowed to the environmentalists who maintained that the
Canadian oil the pipeline would carry was too dirty. This caused the U.S. to
lose its energy independent status and constricted the market (along with
Russian sanctions and federal restrictions on new drilling on and offshore),
ultimately driving prices up.
In response to these high prices (and perhaps while thinking about November),
the Biden Administration is now looking to our northern neighbors to provide us
with the once-rejected energy we need to keep our economy moving. However, the
Biden Administration still can’t bring itself to use pipelines such as Keystone
XL, that are the most safe and effective way to move the gas and oil south.
Instead, we will have to increasingly rely on freight rail to transport the
newly-acceptable Canadian oil and gas. The new rail network that would be
created by the proposed Canadian Pacific-Kansas City Southern (CP-KCS) railway
merger, a controversial project currently under review by federal regulators,
would likely play a major role.
Given this renewed interest in Canadian oil and gas, it is curious that the
administration has been quiet about this hefty $31 billion merger while all the
while claiming to be concerned about the “environmental risks” of transporting
oil. Maybe their animosity towards pipelines is so strong that they are
unwilling to consider the facts. Some have even speculated that they are looking
to rail mergers as cover to kill more pipeline projects.
While rail is an important tool to fill gaps in energy transportation networks,
pipelines are universally preferred, as they have historically proven to be the
safest way to transport oil. In fact, a study from the Frasier Institute found
that rail is 4.5 times more likely to experience an accident transporting fuel
than pipelines. Canadian Pacific itself, for example, has had a history of
accidents and derailments.
[to top of second column] |
Chicago is the national rail hub and congestion has been managed – barely – for
decades. But this merger may pose unforeseen problems for the Windy City. The
specter of a large increase in the number and size of trains may be more than
Chicago can bear. The old rule of thumb about transcontinental trains was “three
days to Chicago from one coast, three days from Chicago to the opposite coast
and three days trying to get across Chicago.” The new saying might quote more
than three days through Chicago as massive and numerous oil trains heading to
refineries on the Gulf Coast from Canada may trap goods at this key juncture and
exacerbate the already critical supply-chain issues our nation is facing.
This merger would also disrupt the Metra system, which has seen more residents
turn to it as automotive gas prices keep climbing. Metra shares track with
Canadian Pacific on two of its routes. However, Metra contends the track they
own “cannot accommodate” the additional trains the merger would bring. Further
complicating things, Canadian Pacific and Amtrak have also made a tentative deal
to expand Amtrak routes in the area if the CP-KCS merger is approved and could
further worsen congestion. For railroad communities outside of Chicago,
meanwhile, the merger itself could boost train traffic up to 50 percent more and
mean longer trains. This is a safety concern for critical surface road traffic.
An ambulance or police car stuck at a blocked, at-grade railroad crossing could
cost someone’s life.
All of these concerns have driven the commuter rail operators to openly come out
against the merger, emphasizing that it will bring delays, prevent expansion of
services, raise safety issues and increase infrastructure costs. Metra contends
the operating plan cited by CP-KCS is riddled with errors and is unworkable.
Their own projections, which considered the modeling usually performed for such
merger transactions, conversely found that increased traffic from the merger
will “break the rail system.” At the very least, CP-KCS must provide more
forthright data addressing these discrepancies before this merger can move
forward.
A pipeline provides a clear solution to meet America’s energy transportation
needs that is safer, less disruptive and avoids many of the other concerns
surrounding this rail merger. The politics that may push this merger through
without proper consideration, as the Surface Transportation Board may be set to
do, will work to the detriment of Chicagoans and the American people. It
deserves a closer look.
Michael Patrick Flanagan previously represented Illinois 5th
District, which included large parts of Chicago, in U.S. Congress
|
