Arkansas: Exxon’s latest spill and spin zone
“bizarre charge…that ExxonMobil is relying on a law that exempts diluted bitumen from taxes that support the Oil Liability Trust Fund and thereby will avoid paying for the cleanup.”
“Let me start by saying ExxonMobil will pay for the cleanup. Period. Full-stop.”
“The second inaccuracy here is that oil spilled in Mayflower is diluted bitumen from the Canadian oil sands. The crude that spilled is Wabasca heavy oil and it’s from Alberta near the area where there is oil sands production.”
“So, as a result of the fact that the crude that spilled in Mayflower is conventionally produced heavy oil, it is considered taxable under the Oil Liability Trust Fund.”
“So to sum up – We’re paying for the cleanup. The oil is conventionally produced heavy crude. And it’s considered taxable.”
- I’ll believe they’re paying for the cleanup when I see it. But folks in Valdez, Maryland, and Yellowstone may not be so kind.
- Wabasca heavy crude is tar sands by a different name. If tar sands isn’t so bad, why the name game to avoid calling it what it really is?
- If ExxonMobil is paying taxes on Wabasca heavy crude (aka tar sands), show us the proof.