The Biggest Pipeline to Hit North America

Elisa Morales
The Signal
A 1,179-mile pipeline project to transport barrels of Canadian crude oil to refineries in the U.S. is pending Presidential Permit approval amid controversy stemming from environmental concerns, which could affect the Texas Gulf Coast.

TransCanada applied for the permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline Project May 2012. If approved by President Obama, the permit would allow TransCanada to begin construction of the northern Keystone XL Pipeline leg that extends 875 miles from Alberta, Canada, into the existing pipeline facilities near Steele City, Neb.

The Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, released by the State Department on March 1, indicated that the pipeline would contribute minimal impact to the environment.

The Gulf Coast portion of the project is already underway. A 435-mile-long pipeline would transport U.S. crude oil to the refineries between Cushing, Okla., and Nederland, Texas. An additional 47-mile-long pipeline, the Houston Lateral Project, is also under development and will transport oil to the refineries in Houston and Port Arthur.

With the proposed project, TransCanada estimates that Keystone would have the potential to transport approximately 830,000 barrels of Canadian oil a day to the refineries in the Gulf Coast and ultimately 1.3 million barrels per day. Pending the approval, Keystone XL project operations would begin in late 2014 or early 2015.

While opponents believe that by stopping the Keystone Project the oil will stay in the ground, the State Department concluded that would never be the case because Canada doesn’t need the U.S. to transport oil. The denial of the Presidential Permit would drive Canada to look elsewhere to sell the oil.

David Dodson, spokesperson for TransCanada Gulf Coast Project, says the construction of the southern pipeline would continue regardless, for it would need to support the contracts it currently has to deliver domestic crude oil to the Texas Gulf Coast refineries.

“There is insufficient refinery capacity in the nation’s heartland to handle all the domestic crude oil available for refining,” Dodson said. “[The] Gulf Coast Project alleviates that backlog.”

“I think at the end of the day, common sense is going to trump politics,” said Bob Mitchell, president of the Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership (BAHEP).  “And I think that this president is going to understand that he is holding back America’s energy independence and he is holding back creating a lot of high paying jobs. Let’s hope that he will see the light of day and let this move forward.”

Environmental organizations and community groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club, generally oppose the Keystone XL Pipeline. The main concerns stemming from the northern extension of the pipeline includes the following examples of environmental impact: climate change, ground water contamination and oil spills.

Communities along the pipeline route have raised concerns about the potential affects the construction would have on the land and its agriculture, especially the ability to respond to potential crude oil leaks.

“Tar sands requires a destructive, energy intensive process to extract,” said Anthony Swift, an attorney in the international program for the NRDC. “It’s not like Texas crude – it’s a nearly solid substance that must either be strip mined or melted out of gravelly rock. Producing tar sands generates up to 4.5 times as many climate emissions as conventional crude. Replacing 830,000 bpd of conventional crude in Houston with 830,000 bpd creates the same amount of emissions as adding over 6 million cars on the road for as long as the pipeline operates.”

Supporters of the Keystone Pipeline state the project would not only benefit the economy, but also it would cause a significant increase in long-term jobs that include the manufacturing, construction, and maintenance of the pipeline.

“It is not only going to impact the economy in our area greatly, it will impact the economy all the way from here to Canada,” Mitchell said. “We need to be energy independent and this is another way of becoming energy independent. It also creates high-paying jobs, long-term, high-paying jobs, and hopefully it will drive down the cost of gas.”

“The standard here is whether it’s in the interest of the American people and this pipeline doesn’t meet that standard. Tar sands doesn’t meet that standard,” said Eddie Scher, spokesperson for the Sierra Club. “We’re going to fight it to the nail, to the end. We’re not giving up on this pipeline. We’re not giving up on the fight against tar sands.”

TransCanada stated that no time limit was set to obtain a decision for the Presidential Permit.

To raise comments, questions or concerns about the Keystone XL Project visit: http://www.keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov.