Call it the Cascades XL: A pipeline running across the state of Washington transporting crude oil from the Midwest drilling sites to refineries in Puget Sound or potential export facilities in Southwest Washington.

Sen. Michael Baumgartner, R-Spokane, and other members of his caucus say the state should study the notion, and he introduced legislation Wednesday that would devote $250,000 of state spending to do just that.

The pipeline aims to supplant the growing number of rail cars bearing crude oil from the Bakken oil fields in the upper Midwest, as well as transporting tar sands oil from Alberta. With the drop off in oil production from Alaska, the Midwest has seen dramatic uptick in production over the last several years.

That’s led to a spike in the number of crude-by-rail cars rolling through Eastern Washington on a path for the Puget Sound, which originates out by the Spokane area, and heads southwest through the Columbia River Gorge.

It’s also been a subject of intense scrutiny and growing opposition among environmental groups in Washington state concerned about the environmental damage a derailment and spill could cause.

The Washington Environmental Council has made oil train safety one of its two lobbying priorities this session, backing a bill from Rep. Jessyn Farrell, D-Seattle, and Gov. Jay Inslee to create emergency response programs in the case of a spill, putting in advanced notice requirements on the transport of oil to the Department of Ecology, and requiring the rail companies moving crude oil by rail to provide financial assurance to the state that they’d pay for clean-up. Sen. Doug Ericksen, R-Ferndale, has also sponsored legislation on crude-by-rail, and said last week he’s pushing for the Legislature to act on the issue this session.

Sen. Michael Baumgartner, R-Spokane

“It’s time to look at a trans-Washington oil pipeline,” Baumgartner said in a statement Wednesday. “This new oil boom in the Midwest is the best news we have heard in a long time for our economy and for our energy independence.”

Environmentalists panned the proposal as not serious. Eric de Place, policy director for the Seattle-based Sightline Institute, which has been in opposition to the growing traffic from oil trains, said, “It will go nowhere. It’s a political stunt that may have some theatrical merits, but no substantive ones.”

Baumgartner’s point is that it’s safer to transport crude oil by pipeline instead of rail car, a means of fostering economic growth in a less risky fashion than relying on the rail cars. A recent study highlighted in the Washington Post found that crude-by-rail has had 10 to 20 times the rate of accidents that pipelines have, but pipelines have spilled more oil on a per-capita basis when accidents do happen.

The bill tracks with some other attention-grabbing legislation from Baumgartner this session, including a proposal to torpedo the Bertha tunneling project in downtown Seattle. That bill didn’t go anywhere in the legislative process.

While it was introduced already fairly late in the process – the cutoff for policy bills was last week – Baumgartner spokesman Erik Smith said as a financial request it could still see plenty of opportunities at surviving.

“There are 10 million ways a bill introduced this late in the session can get consideration,” Smith said.

The bill would instruct the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council to do the study, looking at the safest and most realistic route for a pipeline running from the eastern side of the state to the west. It would also compare and contrast the advantages and drawbacks to a crude oil pipeline as opposed to using other means of transport such as crude-by-rail.

Sens. Doug Ericksen, R-Ferndale, Don Benton, R-Vancouver, Brian Dansel, R-Republic, and John Braun, R-Centrailia, have signed on as co-sponsors.

According to a news release from Baumgartner, the state examined the notion of building a pipeline for crude oil transport in the 1980s and 1990s, which would have sent crude from Alaska to refineries in the Midwest on a west-to-east route. That would have required building pipeline underneath Puget Sound, and the ideas were scuttled, according to the news release.

“I’ve worked across the Middle East and in Russia and in Venezuela,” said Baumgartner, a former officer with the U.S. State Department. “I would much rather have a growing energy market here in the United States.”

Your support matters.

Public service journalism is important today as ever. If you get something from our coverage, please consider making a donation to support our work. Thanks for reading our stuff.