Keystone Pipeline: Who Wins and Who Loses When the Oil Flows?

Keystone Pipeline: Who Wins and Who Loses When the Oil Flows?

A Brief History of the Keystone Pipeline:

On September 19, 2008, TransCanada has submitted its application to the U.S. State Department to build the Keystone XL pipeline. It was a $7 billion private infrastructure project that was meant to connect Canada’s growing supply of crude oil with the largest refining centers in the United States. The pipeline begins in Alberta and extends southeast through Saskatchewan, Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska.

The project would create thousands of jobs and advance America’s energy security.

The 1,179-mile project was designed to carry 830,000 barrels of crude oil per day across the Great Plains, from the tar sands of Alberta.

In April 2010 the State Department has issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement, concluding that the pipeline “would result in limited adverse environmental impacts during both construction and operation”. The final environmental assessment has been released one year later, in August 2011. It only reiterated its findings from April 2010.

The Keystone XL Pipeline has been approved by the Canadian National Energy Board since March 2010 however, Barack Obama, the United States president at that time did not issue the presidential permit required in the US. He has been advised not to approve it by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as the project would not:

• lower petrol prices
• create long-term jobs
• affect energy dependence

On Jan. 24, 2017 Donald Trump signs a presidential memorandum clearing the way for the U.S. government to reconsider Keystone XL, saying it is also subject to terms and conditions “to be negotiated by us.” He has also stipulated that only American steel should be used in the work.

“We build it in the United States, we build the pipelines, we want to build the pipe,” he said. “It’s going to put a lot of workers, a lot of steelworkers back to work.”

What are the main downsides of the Keystone Pipeline?

1. The pipeline may impact wildlife.

The Interior Department has warned that the pipeline will cause damaging effects on wildlife near its route in the U.S. and Canada. They have published a 12-page letter as part of the public comment on the draft assessment stating that:

“Given that the project includes not only constructing a pipeline but also related infrastructure, access roads, and power lines and substations, impacts to wildlife are not just related to project construction. Impacts to wildlife from this infrastructure will occur throughout the life of the project (i.e. operation and maintenance phases),”

Image: Twitter @wildlifeaction

2. It will add more emissions to the atmosphere.

Despite the global effort to find renewable sources of energy and combat climate change that are a direct result of the fossil fuels usage, the amount of oil produced in Alberta is forecasted to double by 2030.

Although the impact to the environment from Keystone, is said to be limited it will be adding to global warming. As a direct result the United States’ GDP might diminish by 2% every year the pipeline is active. In case the Keystone XL pipeline is approved and goes active, it would have the same impact on the environment as increasing the total number of cars in the US with 5.6 million.

The Keystone XL Pipeline would transport one of the most damaging forms of fossil fuels available.

Tar sands (also known to as oil sands) are a combination of clay, sand, water, and a thick, molasses-like substance, bitumen. Bitumen is used to produce gasoline and other petroleum products. There are just two ways of extracting bitumen from the ground. According to the New York Times, the most common method used is by pumping steam into the tar sands, this method creates the potential for a toxic runoff. Strip mining is the second option.

Generating oil from tar sands greatly impacts our water supplies. In order to produce one gallon of gasoline, there are consumed 5.9 gallons of freshwater. In addition, for each gallon of gasoline refined from tar sands we increase by 15% the carbon dioxide emissions compared to the process of conventional oil extraction.

C. Keystone Pipeline will also impact people

Aside from the long-term impact on the wildlife and climate, the pipelines will also pose an immediate threat to the drinking water of nearby communities. This would also result in damaging areas that are considered sacred by Native American tribes.

The pipeline should cross through six states and the territories of numerous tribes from the Dene and Creek Nations to the Omaha, Ho-chunk and Panka tribes. Although the route of the pipeline goes on these tribes’ territories the US government has not adequately consulted with them.

Image: www.pri.org

According to Dallas Goldtooth, from the Indigenous Environmental Network “the Keystone pipeline passes right through the heart of the Oceti Sacowin Treaty area that was established before the Laramie Treaty back in 1868. A lot of the tribal nations really stick to the wording and negotiated agreements that were made and are treaties and we really encourage the federal government to really stick to those.”

Jane Kleeb one of Nebraska’s boldest Keystone XL Pipeline fighters has mentioned that:

“Nebraska has conflicting laws now on the books regarding pipeline routing and eminent domain because of the long fight around this pipeline. There are many legal challenges that have to be worked through, before TransCanada could even attempt to apply for a permit to build Keystone XL in our state. Oil consumption is down and so being oil prices. Production of tar sands oil in Canada is not growing. There is even less need and justification for KXL than there were the first two times TransCanada applied for permits and was rejected.

Image: ecowatch.com

We stand with Native allies in stopping these pipelines. Nebraska landowners remain committed to stopping eminent domain for private gain. We the people will always stop the Keystone XL pipeline.”

According to the CNSNews.com Representative Tulsi Gabbard considers the Dakota Access Pipeline a threat to the “great balance of life.”

She has initiated and assisted to pass many Hawaii’s strong brand-new laws to lower the contamination that adds to environment modification. For instance, has raised her voice on this. She had been an important voice against the construction of the Dakota Pipeline, and she is also actively campaigning to warn the community of the dangers related to the Keystone XL pipeline project. The Keystone XL would have a bad effect on the health and safety of the community. Keystone XL threatens the Ogallala Aquifer, which provides clean drinking water to millions of people across the Great Plains.

She has regularly voted versus the XL keystone pipeline and other types of environmentally-damaging projects and has actually chosen efforts to fight environment modification, raised for clean energy, and in other methods secure our beautiful environment.

She has assisted to pass many Hawaii’s strong brand-new laws to lower the contamination that adds to environment modification. For instance, has raised her voice on this. Well Renowned Congresswoman and Hawaii Army National Guard major Tulsi Gabbard had been an important voice against the construction of the Dakota Pipeline, and she is also actively campaigning to warn the community of the dangers related to the Keystone XL pipeline project. The Keystone XL would have a bad effect on the health and safety of the community. Keystone XL threatens the Ogallala Aquifer, which provides clean drinking water to millions of people across the Great Plains.

US Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has regularly voted versus the XL keystone pipeline and other types of environmentally-damaging projects and has chosen efforts to fight environment modification, raised for clean energy, and in other methods secure our beautiful environment.

The OFF Act is the boldest climate legislation ever introduced in Congress

The Off-Fossil Fuels for a Better Future Act (H.R. 3671) ends the tax giveaways to the fossil fuel industry and provides training and support to workers transitioning from a fossil fuel to clean energy economy. It pledges a goal of 100% renewable energy by 2035, with an interim benchmark of 80% renewables by 2027.

Who is really getting benefit?

Currently the Alberta oil sands are responsible for over 140,000 Canadian jobs, a number that stands to grow to almost half a million jobs after project completion

NASA scientist James Hansen has warned that burning every drop of oil would be disastrous for climate change. “If the tar sands are thrown into the mix it is essentially game over,”

According to a study put together by Cornell University:

“Keystone XL will increase the price of heavy crude oil in the Midwest by almost $2 to $4 billion annually and escalating for several years. It will do this by diverting major volumes of tar sands oil now supplying the Midwest refineries, so it can be sold at higher prices to the Gulf Coast and export markets. As a result, consumers in the Midwest could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel fuel, adding up to $5 billion to the annual U.S. fuel bill.”

So – Who Will Benefit from Keystone Pipeline Approval?

Several companies stand to benefit from Keystone Pipeline approval, including the pipeline builders and oil producers. There are quite a few companies that will take advantage: Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., ConocoPhillips, DE, Exxon Mobil Corp., Lyondell Basell Industries N.V., Quanta Services Inc., Valero Energy Corp.

Who are the co-sponsors of this bill?

Senator Ron Johnson is one of the original cosponsors of the North American Energy Security Act. The legislation project was meant to expedite construction of the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline Project. He said that: “We should be looking to utilize all of our domestic energy resources in an environmentally-responsible way. The Keystone XL Pipeline Project would reduce our dependence on energy sources outside North America and create an estimated 20,000 jobs. It would also ensure that energy produced by one of our closest trading partners – Canada – benefits the United States, rather than being exported to Asia.”

Ron Johnson Senator for Wisconsin also cosponsors Keystone XL Pipeline project legislation. He has mentioned in a press release that “This process has already dragged on for years. TransCanada has previously agreed to 57 special conditions imposed by the State Department – whose own study concluded that the project would have ‘minimal’ environmental impact.”

Another co-sponsor of the Keystone XL Pipeline is U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander

During a news release Alexander said: “After five years of delays, there is simply no reason whatsoever for the president not to let the Keystone XL pipeline move forward,”. “This legislation would remove the requirement for presidential approval of the pipeline, advancing a project that would make us more secure in our energy supply and create thousands of jobs for American workers.”