In the pipeline

Two affiliated Dallas companies announced Monday they've signed a memorandum of understanding with Sinclair Transportation Co. to build a second pipeline to carry gasoline, diesel and jet fuel to Las Vegas.

If the Bureau of Land Management OKs the route by next spring, as expected, the proposed 12-inch pipe would break the virtual California monopoly on supplying gasoline and diesel fuel -- eventually, perhaps even aviation fuel -- to Southern Nevada and to Cedar City, Utah.

The proposed 400-mile, $300 million line would run southwest from Salt Lake City, eventually carrying up to 120,000 barrels of fuel per day -- nearly doubling local supplies.

Could such a new pipeline really mean gasoline prices would drop, locally? With an optimistic targeted completion date in 2008 at best, and given today's inflationary monetary policies, "holding the line" might be a more realistic hope.

Certainly such a "second straw" could reduce the likelihood of price fluctuations in the event of service interruptions to the two Kinder Morgan pipelines that currently supply most of Southern Nevada's needs -- 157,000 barrels per day of gasoline, diesel and jet fuel combined -- from a terminal near San Bernardino, Calif. That -- and the fact this is a free-market proposal by private entrepreneurs willing to risk their capital in hope of future profits, presumably without taxpayer subsidies -- means this proposal deserves encouragement.

Just as important is the fact that Holly Corp.'s Salt Lake City refinery has recently been adapted to process so-called "sour" crude oil -- oil higher in sulfur content than more expensive "sweet" crude. That means Nevada could begin to draw on oil drilled in the Rocky Mountain regions of both the United States and Canada, reducing our dependence on imported oil.

Predictably, one voice was raised in dissent. Construction of such a pipeline through the deserts of southern Utah and southeastern "You are going to disrupt habitat," warned Kathryn Landreth, Nevada state director of the Nature Conservancy, "that may damage some of our species."

Experience teaches us is this is the precursor to a new obstructive lawsuit, slowing this needed project.

Too bad Ms. Landreth and her outfit weren't here 90 years ago. If they had been, there's little chance anyone would see a need for such a new pipeline, today. Because there's little chance we'd have any paved roads.