Keystone XL Pipeline

[Gaspar]

For today's friday document dump, the State Department issued their assessment of the Keystone XL pipeline, ruling it environmentally sound.
http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/documents/organization/205719.pdf

Now, what do you want to bet, the administration scrambles to find another way to block it by next week?

[Conan71]

For today's friday document dump, the State Department issued their assessment of the Keystone XL pipeline, ruling it environmentally sound.
http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/documents/organization/205719.pdf

Now, what do you want to bet, the administration scrambles to find another way to block it by next week?

Is it just me or is the White House having a hard time controlling the message the last few weeks?

[Townsend]

For today's friday document dump, the State Department issued their assessment of the Keystone XL pipeline, ruling it environmentally sound.
http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/documents/organization/205719.pdf

Now, what do you want to bet, the administration scrambles to find another way to block it by next week?

Here you go.  

State Department issues draft review of Keystone XL pipeline

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/01/us-keystone-idUSBRE9200W620130301

(Reuters) - The State Department issued on Friday a long-awaited draft environmental assessment of the Keystone XL pipeline project that would link Canada's oil sands to refineries in Texas.

The pipeline is strongly backed by the energy industry and adamantly opposed by environmentalists. The review looked at greenhouse gas emissions related to the project and its shipping alternatives, including trucks and trains. It did not conclude which transport route was cleanest.

Issuing an assessment that ran more than 2,000 pages, the Obama administration completed a step it had to take before a period of public comment. A final decision on TransCanada Corp's project is not expected until July or August.

Starting next Friday the review will be open to public comment for 45 days. After the State Department finalizes the review, it will determine with input from government agencies whether the pipeline is in the national interest, which could take another 90 days.

A decision on the Keystone pipeline, would carry more than 800,000 barrels of oil, has been pending for more than four and a half years.

Many environmentalists oppose the project because oil sands are more carbon-intensive to produce than average crudes used in the United States.

Supporters of Keystone say it would provide thousands of jobs, drain a glut of domestic crude oil from the North Dakota oil boom and strengthen North American energy security.

Keystone XL pipeline will not have huge impact on climate, draft analysis says

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/keystone-xl-pipeline-will-not-have-huge-impact-on-climate-draft-analysis-says/2013/03/01/715491b0-82a5-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_story.html

The State Department released a draft environmental impact assessment of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline Friday afternoon, suggesting that blocking the project would not have a significant impact on either the future development of Canada’s oil sands region or U.S. oil consumption.

The analysis, which will inform the decision President Obama must make later this year on whether to grant TransCanada the permit to construct the pipeline connecting Alberta’s oil sands to Gulf Coast refineries, does not give environmentalists the answer they had hoped for in the debate over the project’s climate impact. Opponents say a presidential veto of the project would send a powerful message to the world about the importance of moving away from fossil fuels and make it more difficult for Canada to export its energy-intensive oil.

But the detailed environmental report — which runs close to 2,000 pages long — also questions one of the strongest arguments for the pipeline, by suggesting America can meet its energy needs over the next decade without it. The growth in rail transport of oil from western Canada and the Bakken Formation on the Great Plains and other pipelines, the analysis says, could meet the country’s energy needs for the next decade, even if Keystone XL never gets built.

The president is not likely to make a final decision on TransCanada’s permit application until mid-summer at the earliest. The analysis will be subject to at least 45 days of public comment once it is published next Friday in the Federal Register, and the State Department will have to respond to hundreds of thousands of comments before finalizing its environmental impact statement. The State Department will also have to conduct a separate analysis of whether the project is in the national interest, a question on which eight other agencies will offer input over 90 days.

Jim Murphy, senior counsel for the National Wildlife Federation, said there is no way for Obama to reconcile his commitment to addressing climate change with approval of the pipeline.

“As a practical matter, without access to major U.S. ports from KXL and other routes, tar sands production will be substantially slowed,” Murphy said. “With each major artery to a market that is clogged, the chances of stifling tar sands production greatly increases and investors will only stand behind this fuel for so long and withstand so much market uncertainty and pressure to keep this resource in the ground.”

Supporters of the project say it will ensure a secure supply of oil from Canada, one of the nation’s closest allies, and will generate high-paying U.S. jobs over the project’s two-year construction.

“This is one step closer to unleashing thousands of jobs that will benefit labor workers who have some of the highest unemployment in the country,” said Sabrina Fang, a spokeswoman for the American Petroleum Institute. ”This project is also going to help reduce our dependence on oil from less stable parts of the world.”

The Keystone XL has sparked widespread opposition along the pipeline route, where it crossed rivers, ranches and farms, and across the country, where critics said it would facilitate the exploitation of Canada’s oil sands, or tar sands. Because the extraction of bitumen from those sands is an energy-intensive process, it emits more greenhouse gases than the extraction of oil from conventional reservoirs.

The Calgary-based pipeline company TransCanada first applied for a permit in September 2008. In February 2012, Obama postponed a ruling after Congress tried to force him to approve it by setting a deadline in legislation that extended the payroll tax cut. The president cited the pipeline’s path through more than 90 miles of the ecologically sensitive Sand Hills region of Nebraska and said he would consider a revised application.

TransCanada filed a new application in May, pushing the route further east in Nebraska, so that it ran through only about 10 miles of sensitive areas.

Obama also embraced the southern leg of the pipeline, which would extend from Cushing, Okla., to a point just north of Port Arthur, Tex. By late summer, the Army Corps of Engineers had issued permits, and TransCanada chief executive Russ Girling recently said 45 percent of the construction of that leg was complete. Pipeline foes turned to civil disobedience, camping out on platforms hoisted into trees in the pipeline’s path.

TransCanada is waiting for approval of the northern leg of the pipeline, which would run from Hardisty, Alberta, to Steele City in southern Nebraska. An existing pipeline would connect the two legs.

[TheArtist]

I don't know on what planet some of you get your info but the administration does not, not want this pipeline to go through.  They need it to go through, over all politically, and economically.  BUT, they will indeed have to consider the environmentalists.  The administration will likely make a lot of noise on behalf of the environmentalists concerns in order to appease them somewhat, and will also throw them a bone or two "tighter regulations and higher energy efficiency standards here, more spending on renewables, perhaps a new protected area/national park there (likely in the oceans or a coastal area), etc."

[heironymouspasparagus]

I don't know on what planet some of you get your info but the administration does not, not want this pipeline to go through.  They need it to go through, over all politically, and economically.  BUT, they will indeed have to consider the environmentalists.  The administration will likely make a lot of noise on behalf of the environmentalists concerns in order to appease them somewhat, and will also throw them a bone or two "tighter regulations and higher energy efficiency standards here, more spending on renewables, perhaps a new protected area/national park there (likely in the oceans or a coastal area), etc."

Reality is a very difficult concept for some around here.  I think it is a lowered level of fiber in the diet.  Backs 'em up!  Great Harvest Bread Company is open again in The Farm.  Perhaps we could recommend they try it...??

[Teatownclown]

Arkansas residents evacuate as Exxon-Mobil tar sands pipeline ruptures

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/30/arkansas-residents-evacuate-as-exxon-mobil-tar-sands-pipeline-ruptures/

great video....

The only beneficiaries of the Keystone XL are manufacturers, temporary laborers, Canadian tar sand companies, Houston refiners, and Obama haters.

It's a bad deal....it's being called the fuse to environmental collapse.

It should be stopped.

[Jammie]

Since everyone has now had the chance to read about the incident in Arkansas, I figured it was time to throw my two cents worth in here.

We've heard a lot of different reports on the pipeline, too. The largest problems was supposedly the SandHills in Nebraska. The Aquifer covers many states and needed to be protected. There are other things to consider and one article, in particular has stayed with me. Here are a few highlights of it~

1. Only a fraction of the jobs they claim it will create will actually materialize. Each time a similar project was done, the numbers were extremely inflated.

2. Every year, there are little "spills", several injuries, and deaths. It's something we rarely hear about in the news, but there are miles and miles of pipeline across this country and all does not go well. I had dpne a search and learned there are several incidents yearly.

3. Have you ever wondered why the Canadians don't run it to their own port? The Canadian citizens refuse to allow it to be built across their own country. That should tell us something.

4. The few jobs it will create to be laid are a spit in the bucket to what it can do to our environment. That also goes for the few jobs it will add in the refineries.

5. That "oil" is nothing but a thick sludge and doesn't flow freely through anything and will need to be forced through.

6. It was never meant for us. There are northern refineries that are much closer to Canada then Cushing, OK or Tx. The reason the Canadians want it way down there is because of the Texas ports that it will be shipped from. The goal is to ship it overseas and will have little to do with lowering the cost of our oil. Common sense would tell us that more oil on the market will lower it globally, but it will actually increase the price of gas in the Midwest. It's high enough here without another increase in order to make bucks for another country.

That being said, Happy Easter to everyone!

[Jammie]

There it is. I couldn't find it previously, but I posted it on page 2.

[Red Arrow]

2. Every year, there are little "spills", several injuries, and deaths. It's something we rarely hear about in the news, but there are miles and miles of pipeline across this country and all does not go well. I had dpne a search and learned there are several incidents yearly.

Leave aside for the moment the merits or not of the Keystone Pipeline.  There are a lot of other pipelines.  Can you think of a safer way to transport all that stuff?

[heironymouspasparagus]

Leave aside for the moment the merits or not of the Keystone Pipeline.  There are a lot of other pipelines.  Can you think of a safer way to transport all that stuff?

Burlington Northern!!

[Teatownclown]

Leave aside for the moment the merits or not of the Keystone Pipeline.  There are a lot of other pipelines.  Can you think of a safer way to transport all that stuff?

It's not all the same "stuff." This is not crude oil. It is much worse. It is "tar sands oil". It is a volatile, exotic hydrocarbon slurry containing benzene and arsenic. It is nothing like crude oil. It is heavier than water, so it goes straight down into the groundwater. Nobody knows how to clean it up.

[Conan71]

It's not all the same "stuff." This is not crude oil. It is much worse. It is "tar sands oil". It is a volatile, exotic hydrocarbon slurry containing benzene and arsenic. It is nothing like crude oil. It is heavier than water, so it goes straight down into the groundwater. Nobody knows how to clean it up.

Amazing the things you can learn from MoveOn and Daily Koz!

[Red Arrow]

It's not all the same "stuff." This is not crude oil. It is much worse. It is "tar sands oil". It is a volatile, exotic hydrocarbon slurry containing benzene and arsenic. It is nothing like crude oil. It is heavier than water, so it goes straight down into the groundwater. Nobody knows how to clean it up.

So what do you think would be a safer way to transport the stuff?  Trucks?  Keep in mind the volumes transported.

[dbacks fan]

It's not all the same "stuff." This is not crude oil. It is much worse. It is "tar sands oil". It is a volatile, exotic hydrocarbon slurry containing benzene and arsenic. It is nothing like crude oil. It is heavier than water, so it goes straight down into the groundwater. Nobody knows how to clean it up.

Oh yes, it's sooo much worse than whats going through Oklahoma right now.......

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9JFm0v52Do[/youtube]

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2009/August/09-enrd-807.html

If you look at this list, a large number of these were caused by man/construction crews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pipeline_accidents_in_the_United_States_1975_to_1999

[Hoss]

While it's terrible, I think the problem I heard with this specific line is that it was over 40 years old and doesn't have some of the monitoring that newer lines will have.