Jump to content

Keystone Pipeline

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 199.216.107.229 (talk) at 16:23, 5 June 2013. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Keystone Pipeline
Keystone Pipeline Route (all phases, operational and proposed)
Keystone Pipeline Route (all phases, operational and proposed)
Location
CountryCanada
United States
FromHardisty, Alberta
Passes throughRegina, Saskatchewan
Steele City, Nebraska
ToWood River, Illinois
Patoka, Illinois (end)
General information
TypeCrude oil
OwnerTransCanada
Construction started2008
ExpectedProjected in-service date of 2015
CommissionedJune 2010
Technical information
Length3,456 km (2,147 mi)
Maximum discharge0.59 million barrels per day (~2.9×10^7 t/a)
Diameter36 in (914 mm)
No. of pumping stations39
Cushing Extension
(Finished Phase 2)[1]
Location
CountryUnited States
FromSteele City, Nebraska
ToCushing, Oklahoma
General information
TypeCrude oil
CommissionedFebruary 2011
Technical information
Length480 km (300 mi)
Diameter30 in (762 mm)
No. of pumping stations4
Gulf Coast Pipeline Project
(Proposed Phase 3a)[1]
Location
CountryUnited States
FromCushing, Oklahoma
Passes throughLiberty County, Texas
ToNederland, Texas
General information
TypeCrude oil
ExpectedJune 2012 - Mid-late 2013[1]
Technical information
Length780 km (480 mi)
Diameter36 in (914 mm)
Houston Lateral Project
(Proposed Phase 3b)[1]
Location
CountryUnited States
FromLiberty County, Texas
ToHouston, Texas
General information
TypeCrude oil
ExpectedUnknown
Technical information
Length76 km (47 mi)
Steele City Expansion
(Proposed Phase 4)[1]
Location
CountryCanada
United States
FromHardisty, Alberta
Passes throughBaker, Montana
ToSteele City, Nebraska
General information
TypeCrude oil
ExpectedUnknown
Technical information
Length1,897 km (1,179 mi)
Diameter36 in (914 mm)

The Keystone Pipeline System is a pipeline system to transport oil sands bitumen from Canada and the northern United States "primarily to refineries in the Gulf Coast" of Texas.[notes 1] (USSD SEIS March 1, 2013 p.ES-2)[2] The products to be shipped include synthetic crude oil (syncrude) and dilbit (diluted bitumen) from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin in Alberta, Canada, and Bakken synthetic crude oil and light crude oil produced from the Williston Basin (Bakken) region in Montana and North Dakota.[2] Two phases of the project are in operation, a third, from Oklahoma to the Texas Gulf coast, is under construction and the fourth is awaiting U.S. government approval as of mid-March 2013. Upon completion, the Keystone Pipeline System would consist of the completed 2,151-mile (3,462 km) Keystone Pipeline (Phases I and II) and the proposed 1,661-mile (2,673 km) Keystone Gulf Coast Expansion Project (Phases III and IV) . The controversial fourth phase, the Keystone XL Pipeline Project, would begin at the oil distribution hub in Hardisty, Alberta and extend 1,179 miles (1,897 km), to Steele City, Nebraska.[3]

The operational Keystone Pipeline system currently has the capacity to deliver up to 590,000 barrels per day (94,000 m3/d) of Canadian crude oil into the Mid-West refining markets.[4] In the summer of 2010 Phase 1 of the Keystone Pipeline was completed, delivering crude oil from Hardisty, Alberta to Steele City, Nebraska, and then east through Missouri to Wood River refineries and Patoka, Illinois. Phase 2 the Keystone-Cushing extension was completed in February 2011 with the pipeline from Steele City, Nebraska to storage and distribution facilities at Cushing, Oklahoma, a major crude oil marketing/refining and pipeline hub.[4]

The Keystone XL proposal, which would comprise phases 3 and 4, faced lawsuits from oil refineries[citation needed] and criticism from environmentalists and some members of the United States Congress. In January 2012, President Barack Obama rejected the application amid protests about the pipeline's impact on Nebraska's environmentally sensitive Sand Hills region.[5] TransCanada changed the original proposed route of Keystone XL to minimize "disturbance of land, water resources and special areas" and the new route was approved by Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman in January 2013.[3] On March 22, 2012, Obama endorsed the building of its southern half that begins in Cushing, Okla. The President said in Cushing OK on March 22, “Today, I’m directing my administration to cut through the red tape, break through the bureaucratic hurdles, and make this project a priority, to go ahead and get it done.”[6]

In its Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) released for public scrutiny in March 2013, the United States Department of State Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, described a number of changes to the original proposals including the shortening of the pipeline to 875 miles (1,408 km); its avoidance of "crossing the NDEQ-identified Sand Hills Region" and "reduction of the length of pipeline crossing the Northern High Plains Aquifer system, which includes the Ogallala formation (USSD SEIS March 1, 2013 ES-22)"; and stated "there would be no significant impacts to most resources along the proposed Project route."[2] In response to the Department of State's report which recommended neither acceptance nor rejection, the editor of the New York Times recommended that President Obama, who acknowledges climate change as one of humanity's "most challenging issues", should reject the project which "even by the State Department’s most cautious calculations — can only add to the problem (The Editor. March 10, 2013. New York Times)."[7] [notes 2]

Description

The Keystone Pipeline system consists of the operational Phase 1 and Phase II and two separate proposed pipeline expansion segments Phases III, the Gulf Coast Pipeline Project, and Phase IV, Keystone XL. Construction of Phase III, from Cushing, Oklahoma to Nederland, Texas in the Gulf Coast area, began in August 2012 as an independent economic utility.[notes 3][8] The Keystone XL Pipeline Project (Phase IV) revised proposal in 2012 consists of a new 36-inch pipeline from Hardisty, Alberta, through Montana and South Dakota to Steele City, Nebraska, to "transport of up to 830,000 barrels per day (132,000 m3/d) of crude oil from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin in Alberta, Canada, and from the Williston Basin (Bakken) region in Montana and North Dakota, primarily to refineries in the Gulf Coast area."[2] After the Keystone XL pipeline segments are completed, American crude oil would enter the XL pipelines at Baker, Montana on their way to the storage and distribution facilities at Cushing, Oklahoma, Cushing is a major crude oil marketing/refining and pipeline hub.[1][9]

Operating since 2010, the original Keystone Pipeline System is an 3,461-kilometre (2,151 mi) pipeline delivering Canadian crude oil to U.S. Midwest markets and Cushing, Oklahoma. In Canada, the first phase of Keystone involved the conversion of approximately 864 kilometres (537 mi) of existing 36-inch (910 mm) natural gas pipeline in Saskatchewan and Manitoba to crude oil pipeline service. It also included approximately 373 kilometres (232 mi) of new 30-inch (760 mm) diameter pipeline, 16 pump stations and the Keystone Hardisty Terminal.[10]

The U.S. portion of the Keystone Pipeline included 1,744 kilometres (1,084 mi) of new, 30-inch (760 mm) diameter pipeline in North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri and Illinois.[10] The pipeline has a minimum ground cover of 4 feet (1.2 m).[11] It also involved construction of 23 pump stations and delivery facilities at Wood River and Patoka, Illinois. In 2011, the second phase of Keystone included a 480-kilometre (298 mi) extension from Steele City, Nebraska to Cushing, Oklahoma and 11 new pump stations to increase the capacity of the pipeline from 435,000 to 591,000 barrels per day (69,200 to 94,000 m3/d).[10]

Additional phases (three and four) have been in construction or discussion since 2011. If completed, the Keystone XL would add 510,000 barrels per day (81,000 m3/d) increasing the total capacity up to 1.1 million barrels per day (170×10^3 m3/d).[12]

The original Keystone Pipeline cost US$5.2 billion with the Keystone XL expansion slated to cost approximately US$7 billion. The Keystone XL was expected to be completed by 2012–2013, however construction has been overcome by events.[12]

Ownership

While the project was originally developed as a partnership between TransCanada and ConocoPhillips, TransCanada is now the sole owner of the Keystone Pipeline System, as TransCanada received regulatory approval on August 12, 2009 to purchase ConocoPhillips' interest.[13]

Certain parties who have agreed to make volume commitments to the Keystone expansion have an option to acquire up to a combined 15% equity ownership.[12] One of such companies is Valero Energy Corporation.[14]

History

Keystone Pipeline

TransCanada Corporation proposed the project on February 9, 2005. In October 2007, the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada asked the Canadian federal government to block regulatory approvals for the pipeline, with union president Dave Coles stating that 'the Keystone pipeline will exclusively serve US markets, create permanent employment for very few Canadians, reduce our energy security, and hinder investment and job creation in the Canadian energy sector'.[15]

The National Energy Board of Canada approved the construction of the Canadian section of the pipeline, including converting a portion of TransCanada's Canadian Mainline gas pipeline to crude oil pipeline, on September 21, 2007.[16] On March 17, 2008, the United States Department of State issued a Presidential Permit authorizing the construction, maintenance and operation of facilities at the United States and Canada border.[17]

On January 22, 2008, ConocoPhillips acquired a 50% stake in the project.[18] On June 17, 2009, TransCanada agreed that they would buy out ConocoPhillips' share in the project and revert to being the sole owner.[13] It took TransCanada more than two years to acquire all the necessary state and federal permits for the pipeline. Construction took another two years.[19] The pipeline, from Hardisty, Alberta, Canada, to Patoka, Illinois, United States, became operational in June 2010.[20]

Keystone XL

The Keystone XL extension was proposed in 2008.[11] The application was filed in September 2008 and the National Energy Board of Canada started hearings in September 2009.[21] On March 11, 2010 the Canadian National Energy Board approved the project.[9][22][23] The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission granted a permit on February 19, 2010.[24]

On July 21, 2010, the Environmental Protection Agency said the draft environmental impact study for Keystone XL was inadequate and should be revised, indicating that the State Department's original report was "unduly narrow" because it did not fully look at oil spill response plans, safety issues and greenhouse gas concerns.[25][26][27] The final environmental impact report was released on August 26, 2011. It stated that the pipeline would pose "no significant impacts" to most resources if environmental protection measures are followed, but it would present "significant adverse effects to certain cultural resources".[28] In September 2011, Cornell ILR Global Labor Institute released the results of the GLI KeystoneXL Report which evaluated the pipeline's impact on employment, the environment, energy independence, the economy, and other critical areas.[22]

On November 10, 2011, the Department of State postponed a final decision due to necessity "to seek additional information regarding potential alternative routes around the Sand Hills in Nebraska to inform the determination regarding whether issuing a permit for the proposed Keystone XL pipeline is in the national interest."[29] In its response, TransCanada pointed out fourteen different routes for Keystone XL were being studied, eight that impacted Nebraska. They included one potential alternative route in Nebraska that would have avoided the entire Sandhills region and Ogallala Aquifer and six alternatives that would have reduced pipeline mileage crossing the Sandhills or the aquifer.[30][31] On November 22, 2011, the Nebraska legislature passed unanimously two bills with the governor's signature that enacted a compromise agreed upon with the pipeline builder to move the route, and approved up to US$2 million in state funding for an environmental study.[32]

On November 30, 2011, a group of leading Republican senators introduced legislation aimed at forcing the Obama administration to make a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline within 60 days.[33] In December 2011, Congress passed a bill giving the Obama Administration a 60-day deadline to make a decision on the application to build the Keystone XL Pipeline.[29][34] On January 18, 2012, President Obama rejected the application stating that the deadline for the decision had "prevented a full assessment of the pipeline's impact".[29][35] On September 5, 2012, TransCanada submitted an environmental report on the new route in Nebraska, which the company says "based on extensive feedback from Nebraskans, and reflects our shared desire to minimize the disturbance of land and sensitive resources in the state."[36]

May 22, 2013 Republicans in the House of Representatives defended the Northern Route Approval Act which would allow for congressional approval of the pipeline, on the grounds that the pipeline created jobs and energy independence. If enacted the Northern Route Approval Act would waive the requirement for permits for a foreign company and bypass the need for President Obama's approval, and the debate in the Democrat-controlled U.S. Senate, concerned about serious environmental risks, that could result in the rejection of the pipeline. [37]

Original and extended route

Phase 1

The 3,456 kilometres (2,147 mi) long pipeline runs from Hardisty, Alberta to the United States refineries in Wood River, Illinois and Patoka, Illinois.[38] The Canadian section involves approximately 864 kilometres (537 mi) of pipeline converted from the Canadian Mainline natural gas pipeline and 373 kilometres (232 mi) of new pipeline, pump stations and terminal facilities at Hardisty, Alberta.[39]

The United States section is 2,219 kilometres (1,379 mi) long.[39] It runs through Buchanan, Clinton and Caldwell counties in Missouri, and Nemaha, Brown and Doniphan counties in Kansas.[20] Phase 1 went online in June 2010.

Phase 2

From Steele City, Nebraska, the 291 miles (468 km) Keystone-Cushing pipeline was routed through Kansas to the oil hub and tank farm in Cushing, Oklahoma in 2010 and went online in February 2011.[1]

Phase 3

This phase, known as Cushing MarketLink, is part of the Keystone XL pipeline. This proposed phase would start from Cushing, Oklahoma where American-produced oil would be added to the pipeline, then it would expand 435 miles (700 km) to a delivery point near terminals in Nederland, Texas to serve the Port Arthur, Texas marketplace.[1]

Also proposed is an approximate 47 miles (76 km) previous pipeline to transport crude oil from the pipeline in Liberty County, Texas to the Houston, Texas area.[1][40] Oil producers in the USA are pushing for this phase so the glut of oil can be distributed out of the large oil tank farms and distribution center in Cushing, Oklahoma.

Phase 4

This phase is part of the Keystone XL pipeline and would start from the same area in Alberta, Canada as the main pipeline.[11] The Canadian section would consist of 526 kilometres (327 mi) of new pipeline.[23] It would enter the United States at Morgan, Montana and travel through Baker, Montana where American-produced oil would be added to the pipeline, then it would travel through South Dakota and Nebraska, where it would join the existing Keystone pipelines at Steele City, Nebraska.[1] This phase has generated the greatest controversy because of its routing over the top of the Ogallala Aquifer in Nebraska.[41][42][43]

Truck hauling 36-Inch pipe to build Keystone-Cushing Pipeline (Phase 2) south-east of Peabody, Kansas, 2010

Keystone XL controversies

Environmental issues

Different environmental groups, citizens, and politicians have raised concerns about the potential negative impacts of the Keystone XL project.[44][45][46] The main issues are the risk of oil spills along the pipeline, which would traverse highly sensitive terrain, and 12–17% higher greenhouse gas emissions from the extraction of oil sands compared to extraction of conventional oil.[47][48] A concern is that a pipeline spill would pollute air and critical water supplies and harm migratory birds and other wildlife.[25] Its original route plan crossed the Sandhills, the large wetland ecosystem in Nebraska, and the Ogallala Aquifer, one of the largest reserves of fresh water in the world.[49][42] The Ogallala Aquifer spans eight states, provides drinking water for two million people, and supports $20 billion in agriculture.[50] Critics say that a major leak could ruin drinking water and devastate the mid-western U.S. economy.[43][51] After opposition for laying the pipeline in this area, TransCanada agreed to change the route and skip the Sand Hills.[41]

Portions of the pipeline will also cross an active seismic zone that had a 4.3 magnitude earthquake as recently as 2002.[50] Opponents claim that TransCanada applied to the U.S. government to use thinner steel and pump at higher pressures than normal.[51] In October 2011, The New York Times questioned the impartiality of the environmental analysis of the pipeline done by Cardno Entrix, an environmental contractor based in Houston. The study found that the pipeline would have limited adverse environmental impacts, but was authored by a firm that had "previously worked on projects with TransCanada and describes the pipeline company as a 'major client' in its marketing materials."[52]

According to The New York Times, legal experts questioned whether the US government was "flouting the intent" of the Federal National Environmental Policy Act which "[was] meant to ensure an impartial environmental analysis of major projects."[52] The report prompted 14 senators and congressmen to ask the State Department inspector general on October 26, 2011 "to investigate whether conflicts of interest tainted the process" for reviewing environmental impact.[53]

TransCanada CEO Russ Girling has described the Keystone Pipeline as "routine," noting that TransCanada has been building similar pipelines in North America for half a century and that there are 200,000 miles (320,000 km) of similar oil pipelines in the United States today. He also stated that the Keystone Pipeline will include 57 improvements above standard requirements demanded by U.S. regulators so far, making it "the safest pipeline ever built."[54] Rep. Ed Whitfield, a member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce concurred, saying "this is the most technologically advanced and safest pipeline ever proposed."[55] However, while TransCanada had asserted that a set of 57 conditions will ensure Keystone XL's safe operation, Anthony Swift of the Natural Resources Defense Council asserted that all but a few of these conditions simply restate current minimum standards.[56]

Environmental organizations such as the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) also oppose the project due to its transportation of oil from oil sands.[47] In its March 2010 report, the NRDC stated that "the Keystone XL Pipeline undermines the U.S. commitment to a clean energy economy," instead "delivering dirty fuel at high costs".[57] On June 23, 2010, 50 Democrats in Congress in their letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that "building this pipeline has the potential to undermine America's clean energy future and international leadership on climate change."[58][59]

In reference to the higher input quantity of fossil fuels necessary to take the tar and turn it into a usable fuel product, in comparison to other conventionally derived fossil fuels. NASA climate scientist James Hansen stated in 2013 that "moving to tar sands, one of the dirtiest, most carbon-intensive fuels on the planet" is a step in exactly the wrong direction, "indicating either that governments don't understand the situation or that they just don't give a damn."[59] House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Henry Waxman has also urged the State Department to block Keystone XL for greenhouse gas emission reasons.[60][61]

In December 2010, No Tar Sands Oil campaign, sponsored by action groups including Corporate Ethics International, NRDC, Sierra Club, 350.org, National Wildlife Federation, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, and Rainforest Action Network, was launched.[62]

These arguments were questioned by the National Post columnist Diane Francis who argues that opposition to the pipeline "makes no sense because emissions from the oil sands are a fraction of the emissions from coal and equivalent to California heavy crude oils or ethanol" and questioned why "none of these has been getting the same attention as the oil sands and this pipeline."[63]

In a speech to the Canadian Club in Toronto on September 23, 2011, Joe Oliver, Canada's Minister of Natural Resources, sharply criticized opponents of oil sands development and the pipeline, arguing that:[64]

  • The total area that has been affected by surface mining represents only 0.1% of Canada's boreal forest.
  • The oil sands account for about 0.1% of global greenhouse-gas emissions.
  • Electricity plants powered by coal in the U.S. generate almost 40 times more greenhouse-gas emissions than Canada's oil sands (the coal-fired electricity plants in the State of Wisconsin alone produce the equivalent of the entire GHG emissions of the oil sands).
  • California bitumen is more GHG-intensive than the oil sands.

Conflicts of Interest

On May 4, 2012, the U.S. Department of State selected Environmental Resources Management (ERM) to author a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, after the Environmental Protection Agency had found previous versions of the study, by contractor Cardno Entrix,[65] to be extremely inadequate.[66] Project opponents panned the study on its release, calling it a "deeply flawed analysis".[67] An investigation by Mother Jones magazine revealed that the State Department had redacted the biographies of the study's authors to hide their previous contract work for TransCanada and other oil companies with an economic interest in the project.[68] Based on an analysis of public documents on the State Department website, one critic asserted that "Environmental Resources Management was paid an undisclosed amount under contract to TransCanada to write the statement".[69]

Political issues

In February 2011, environmental journalist David Sassoon of Inside Climate News reported that Koch Industries were poised to be "big winners" from the pipeline.[70] In May 2011, Congressmen Waxman and Rush wrote a letter to the Energy and Commerce Committee which cited the Reuters story, and which urged the Committee to request documents from Koch Industries which relate to the Keystone XL pipeline.[71][72]

Landowners in the path of the pipeline have complained about threats by TransCanada to confiscate private land and lawsuits to allow the "pipeline on their property even though the controversial project has yet to receive federal approval."[73] As of October 17, 2011, TransCanada had "34 eminent domain actions against landowners in Texas" and "22 in South Dakota." Some of those landowners gave testimony for a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing in May 2011.[73]

In January 2012, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) requested a new report on the environmental review process.[74]

Commentator Bill Mann has linked the Keystone postponement to the Michigan Senate's rejection of Canadian funding for the proposed Detroit River International Crossing and to other recent instances of "U.S. government actions (and inactions) that show little concern about Canadian concerns". Mann drew attention to a Maclean's' article sub-titled "we used to be friends"[75] about U.S./Canada relations after President Obama had "insulted Canada (yet again)" over the pipeline.[76]

Geopolitical issues

Proponents for the Keystone XL pipeline argue that it would allow the U.S. to increase its energy security and reduce its dependence on foreign oil.[77][78] TransCanada CEO Russ Girling has argued that "the U.S. needs 10 million barrels a day of imported oil" and the debate over the proposed pipeline "is not a debate of oil versus alternative energy. This is a debate about whether you want to get your oil from Canada or Venezuela or Nigeria."[79] However an independent study conducted by the Cornell ILR Global Labor Institute refers to some studies (e.g. a 2011 study by Danielle Droitsch of Pembina Institute) according to which "a good portion of the oil that will gush down the KXL will probably end up being finally consumed beyond the territorial United States". It also states that the project will increase the heavy crude oil price in the Midwestern United States by diverting oil sands oil from the Midwest refineries to the Gulf Coast and export markets.[22]

TransCanada's Girling has also argued that if Canadian oil doesn't reach the Gulf through an environmentally friendly buried pipeline, that the alternative is oil that will be brought in by tanker, a mode of transportation that produces higher greenhouse-gas emissions and that puts the environment at greater risk.[54] Diane Francis has argued that much of the opposition to the oil sands actually comes from foreign countries such as Nigeria, Venezuela, and Saudi Arabia, all of whom supply oil to the United States and who could be affected if the price of oil drops due to the new availability of oil from the pipeline. She cited as an example an effort by Saudi Arabia to stop pro-oil-sands television commercials.[63] TransCanada had said that development of oil sands will expand regardless of whether the crude oil is exported to the United States or alternatively to Asian markets through Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines or Kinder Morgan's Trans-Mountain line.[80]

Indigenous issues

The existing Keystone Pipeline is located within 50 kilometres (31 mi) of over 150 Indigenous communities in Canada, and TransCanada Corporation has facilities on a dozen First Nation reserves. Over 100 miles (160 km) of the pipeline pass through Native American reservations, and numerous Native American communities are within few miles of TransCanada departments.[81] Many Native Americans and Indigenous Canadians are opposed to the Keystone XL project for various reasons[82], including possible damage to sacred sites, pollution, and water contamination which could lead to health risks among their communities.[83]

On September 19, 2011, a number of leaders from Native American bands in the United States and Canada were arrested for protesting the Keystone XL outside the White House. According to Debra White Plume, a Lakota activist, Indigenous peoples "... have thousands of ancient and historical cultural resources that would be destroyed across [their] treaty lands."[83] TransCanada's Pipeline Permit Application to the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission states project impacts which include potential physical disturbance, demolition or removal of "prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, districts, buildings, structures, objects, and locations with traditional cultural value to Native Americans and other groups."[84]

Indigenous communities are also concerned with health risks posed by the extension of the Keystone pipeline.[85] Locally caught fish and untreated surface water would be at risk for contamination through oil sands extraction, and are central to the diets of many indigenous peoples.[86] Earl Hatley, an environmental activist who has worked with Native American tribes[87] has expressed concern about the environmental and public health impact on Native Americans.

TransCanada has developed an Aboriginal Relations policy in order to confront some of these conflicts. In 2004, TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. made a major donation to the University of Toronto "to promote education and research in the health of the Aboriginal population."[88] Another proposed solution is TransCanada's Aboriginal Human Resource Strategy, which was developed to facilitate aboriginal employment and to provide "opportunities for Aboriginal businesses to participate in both the construction of new facilities and the ongoing maintenance of existing facilities"[89]

Economic issues

In response to negative publicity, president and CEO of TransCanada Russ Girling touted the positive impact of the project by "putting 20,000 US workers to work and spending $7 billion stimulating the US economy."[90] These numbers come from a 2010 report written by The Perryman Group, a financial analysis firm based in Texas that was hired by TransCanada to evaluate Keystone XL.[91][92] The numbers in the Perryman Group report have been disputed by an independent study conducted by the Cornell ILR Global Labor Institute which found that while the Keystone XL would result in 2,500 to 4,650 temporary construction jobs, this impact will be reduced by higher oil prices in the Midwest which will likely reduce national employment.[22] The State Department estimates that the pipeline would create about 5,000 to 6,000 temporary jobs in the United States during the two year construction period.[93][94]

There might be unintended economic consequences to the construction of Keystone XL. As an example, the additional north-south crude oil transport capacity brought by Keystone XL will increase the price the oil sands producers receive for their oil. These higher revenues will have a positive impact on the development of the industry in Alberta. In return, due to the Petrodollar nature of the Canadian currency these same additional revenues will strengthen the Canadian dollar versus the United States dollar. Based on historical trends, this stronger Canadian dollar will result in a reduction of the competitiveness of Canada's manufacturing industry and could lead to the loss of 50,000 to 100,000 jobs in Canada's manufacturing sector.[95][unreliable source?] Many of these jobs, such as the ones in the auto industry, would likely find their way south and have a positive impact on manufacturing employment in the US.[96]

Glen Perry, a petroleum engineer for Adira Energy, has warned that including the Alberta Clipper pipeline owned by TransCanada's competitor Enbridge, there is an extensive overcapacity of oil pipelines from Canada.[97] After completion of the Keystone XL line, oil pipelines to the U.S. may run nearly half-empty. The expected lack of volume combined with extensive construction cost overruns has prompted several petroleum refining companies to sue TransCanada. Suncor Energy hoped to recoup significant construction-related tolls, though the U.S. Energy Regulatory Commission did not rule in their favor. According to The Globe and Mail,

The refiners argue that construction overruns have raised the cost of shipping on the Canadian portion of Keystone by 145 per cent while the U.S. portion has run 92 per cent over budget. They accuse TransCanada of misleading them when they signed shipping contracts in the summer of 2007. TransCanada nearly doubled its construction estimates in October 2007, from $2.8-billion (U.S.) to $5.2-billion.[98]

Due to an exemption the state of Kansas gave TransCanada, the local authorities would lose $50 million public revenue from property taxes for a decade.[27]

In the United States, Democrats are concerned that Keystone XL would not provide petroleum products for domestic use, but simply facilitate getting Alberta oil sands products to American coastal ports on the Gulf of Mexico for export to China and other countries.[37]

Frustrated by delays in getting approval for Keystone XL (via the US Gulf of Mexico), the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines(via Kitimat, BC) and the expansion of the existing TransMountain line to Vancouver, Alberta has intensified exploration of two northern projects "to help the province get its oil to tidewater, making it available for export to overseas markets." [99] Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, spent $9 million by May, 2012 and $16.5 million by May, 2013 to promote Keystone XL.[37] Until Canadian crude oil accesses international prices like LLS or Maya crude oil by "getting to tidewater" (south to the US Gulf ports via Keystone XL for example, west to the BC Pacific coast via the proposed Northern Gateway line to ports at Kitimat, BC or north via the northern hamlet of Tuktoyaktuk, near the Beaufort Sea. [99], the Alberta government (and to some extent, the Canadian government) is losing from $4 - 30 billion in tax and royalty revenues as the primary product of the oil sands, Western Canadian Select (WCS), the bitumen crude oil basket, is discounted so heavily against West Texas Intermediate (WTI) while Maya crude oil, a similar product close to tidewater, is reaching peak prices.[100] Calgary-based Canada West Foundation warned in April 2013, that Alberta is "running up against a [pipeline capacity] wall around 2016, when we will have barrels of oil we can’t move."[99]

Ongoing developments

Protests and postponements

Demonstration against the Keystone XL extension, White House, August 2011.

Starting in spring, 2011, environmental and global warming activist Bill McKibben took the question of the pipeline to NASA scientist James Hansen, who told McKibben the pipeline would be "game over for the planet".[101] McKibben and other activists moved toward a new oppositional approach which coalesced in August with over 1000 nonviolent arrests at the White House. They promised to continue to challenge President Obama to stand by his 2008 call to "be the generation that finally frees America from the tyranny of oil"[102] as he entered the 2012 reelection campaign. A relatively broad coalition came together, including the Republican governor Dave Heineman and senators Ben Nelson (D) and Mike Johanns (R) from Nebraska, and some Democratic funders like Susie Tompkins Buell.[102]

On November 6, 2011, several thousand environmentalist supporters, some shouldering a long black inflatable replica of a pipeline, formed a human chain around the White House to try to convince Barack Obama to block the controversial Keystone XL project. Organiser Bill McKibben said, "this has become not only the biggest environmental flash point in many, many years, but maybe the issue in recent times in the Obama administration when he's been most directly confronted by people in the street. In this case, people willing, hopeful, almost dying for him to be the Barack Obama of 2008."[103]

On October 4, 2012, actress and activist Daryl Hannah and 78-year-old Texas landowner Eleanor Fairchild were arrested for criminal trespassing and other charges after they were accused of standing in front of pipeline construction equipment on Fairchild's farm in Winnsboro, a town about 100 miles (160 km) east of Dallas.[104] Fairchild has owned the land since 1983 and refused to sign any agreements with TransCanada. Her land was seized by eminent domain.

On October 31, 2012, Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein was also arrested in Texas for criminal trespass after trying to deliver food and supplies to the Keystone XL protesters.[105][106]

An estimated crowd of 35,000-50,000 gathers near the Washington Monument on February 17, 2013 to protest the Keystone XL pipeline and support action on climate change.

On February 17, 2013, approximately 35,000 to 50,000 protestors attended a rally in Washington, D.C. organized by The Sierra Club, 350.org, and The Hip Hop Caucus, in what Bill McKibben described as "the biggest climate rally by far, by far, by far, in U.S. history."[107][108] The event featured Lennox Yearwood, Chief Jacqueline Smith[disambiguation needed], Van Jones, Crystal Lameman, Michael Brune, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and others as invited speakers. Simultaneous 'solidarity' protests were also organized in several other cities across the United States, Europe, and Canada.[citation needed] Protesters called on President Obama to reject the planned pipeline extension when deciding the fate of the pipeline after recently-confirmed Secretary of State John Kerry completes a review of the project.[109]

Alternative projects

On November 16, 2011, Enbridge announced it is buying ConocoPhillips' 50% interest in the Seaway pipeline that flowed from the Gulf of Mexico to the Cushing hub. In cooperation with Enterprise Products Partners LP it is reversing the Seaway pipeline so that an oversupply of oil at Cushing can reach the Gulf.[110] This project replaced the earlier proposed alternative Wrangler pipeline project from Cushing to the Gulf Coast.[111] It began reversed operations on May 17, 2012.[112] However, according to industries, the Seaway line alone is not enough for oil transportation to the Gulf Coast.[113]

On January 19, 2012, TransCanada announced it may shorten the initial path to remove the need for federal approval.[114] TransCanada said that work on that section of the pipeline could start in June 2012[115] and be on-line by the middle to late 2013.[116]

In April 2013, it was learned that the government of Alberta was investigating, as an alternative to the pipeline south through the United States, a shorter all-Canadian pipeline north to the Arctic coast, from where the oil would be taken by tanker ships through the Arctic Ocean to markets.[117]

Lawsuits

In September 2009, independent refiner CVR sued TransCanada for Keystone Pipeline tolls seeking $250 million damage compensation or release from transportation agreements. CVR alleged that the final tolls for the Canadian segment of the pipeline were 146% higher than initially presented, while the tolls for the US segment were 92% higher.[118] In April 2010, three smaller refineries sued TransCanada to break Keystone transportation contracts, saying the new pipeline has been beset with cost overruns.[98]

In October 2009, a suit was filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council that challenged the pipeline on the grounds that its permit was based on a deficient environmental impact statement. The suit was thrown out by a federal judge on procedural grounds, ruling that the NRDC lacked the authority to bring it.[119]

In June 2012, Sierra Club, Inc., Clean Energy Future Oklahoma, and the East Texas Sub Regional Planning Commission filed a joint complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma seeking injunctive relief and petitioning for a review of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' action in issuing Nationwide Permit 12 permits for the Cushing, Oklahoma to the Gulf Coast portion of the pipeline. The suit alleges that, contrary to the federal Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 701 et. seq., the Corps’ issuance of the permits was arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion. [120]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ The Gulf Coast area "refers to the region from Houston, Texas, to Lake Charles, Louisiana (USSD SEIS March 1, 2013 p.ES-1)."
  2. ^ The Alberta government placed a $30, 000 ad entitled "Keystone XL: The Choice of Reason" in the New York Times to counter the editorial (CBC March 17, 2013).
  3. ^ It was presented to the United States State Department as a independent economic utility in February 2012, sidestepping the requirement for a Presidential Permit because it does not cross an international border (United States Department of State SEIS March 1, 2013 p.ES1).

References

  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Cite error: The named reference system-doc was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ a b c d United States Department of State Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs (March 1, 2013). Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the KEYSTONE XL PROJECT Applicant for Presidential Permit: TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP (SEIS) (PDF) (Report). United States Department of State. Retrieved March 17, 2013.
  3. ^ a b ":Keystone XL Pipeline: About the project". TransCanada.
  4. ^ a b "Keystone Pipeline". Calgary, Alberta, Canada: TransCanada Corporation. January 2013. Retrieved March 17, 2013.
  5. ^ "TransCanada Wins as Obama Keystone Permit Seen". Bloomberg BusinessWeek. 2012-10-08. Retrieved 2012-11-10.
  6. ^ "Remarks of the President". White House official release. 2012-03-22. Retrieved 2013-03-04.
  7. ^ The Editor (March 10, 2013). "When to Say No". New York Times. {{cite news}}: |author= has generic name (help)
  8. ^ "Gulf Coast Pipeline Project". TransCanada Corporation. Retrieved March 17, 2013.
  9. ^ a b Broder, John M.; Krauss, Clifford (28 February 2012). "Keystone XL Pipeline". New York Times. Cite error: The named reference "NYTKeystoneXL" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  10. ^ a b c "Keystone Pipeline". A Barrel Full. 2012-03-02. Retrieved 2012-07-19.
  11. ^ a b c Hovey, Art (2008-06-12). "TransCanada Proposes Second Oil Pipeline". Lincoln Journal-Star. Downstream Today. Retrieved 2008-07-18.
  12. ^ a b c "TransCanada, ConocoPhillips To Expand Keystone To Gulf Coast". TransCanada. Downstream Today. 2008-07-16. Retrieved 2008-07-18.
  13. ^ a b "Keystone Pipeline System". TransCanada Corporation. Retrieved 8 September 2009.
  14. ^ "Valero: Prospective Keystone Shipper". Valero Energy. Downstream Today. 2008-07-16. Retrieved 2008-07-18.
  15. ^ "Union calls on Ottawa to block Keystone". Upstream Online. NHST Media Group. 2007-10-24. (subscription required). Retrieved 2010-07-22.
  16. ^ "TransCanada: Keystone Construction to Start Early Next Year". TransCanada Corporation. Downstream Today. 2007-09-21. Retrieved 2008-07-18.
  17. ^ "State Dept. Grants Keystone Permit; Work To Start In Q2". TransCanada Corporation. Downstream Today. 2008-03-17. Retrieved 2008-07-18.
  18. ^ "ConocoPhillips Acquires 50% Stake in Keystone". ConocoPhillips. Downstream Today. 2008-01-22. Retrieved 2008-07-18.
  19. ^ O'Connor, Phillip (2010-06-08). "TransCanada's Keystone pipeline ready for flow, but is the market there?". St. Louis Post-Dispatch. MCT. Retrieved 2011-02-23.
  20. ^ a b Newton, Ken (2010-06-09). "Oil Flows Through Keystone". St. Joseph News-Press. Downstream Today. Retrieved 2010-08-01.
  21. ^ "NEB Sets Keystone XL Hearing". National Energy Board. Downstream Today. 2009-05-13. Retrieved 2010-08-01.
  22. ^ a b c d Pipe dreams? Jobs Gained, Jobs Lost by the Construction of Keystone XL (PDF) (Report). ILR School Global Labor Institute. 2011. Retrieved 2011-10-12. {{cite report}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) Cite error: The named reference "ILR Cornell Study" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  23. ^ a b "NEB Okays Keystone XL". National Energy Board. Downstream Today. 2010-03-11. Retrieved 2010-08-01.
  24. ^ "Keystone XL Clears Hurdle In South Dakota". South Dakota Public Utilities Commission. Downstream Today. 2010-02-19. Retrieved 2010-08-01.
  25. ^ a b Sudekum Fisher, Maria (2010-07-21). "EPA: Keystone XL impact statement needs revising". Associated Press. Retrieved 2011-04-27.
  26. ^ Welsch, Edward (2010-07-21). "EPA Calls for Further Study of Keystone XL". Downstream Today. Dow Jones Newswires. Retrieved 2010-08-01.
  27. ^ a b Goldstein, David (2011-02-13). "Oil pipeline from Canada stirring anger in U.S. Great Plains". McClatchy Newspapers. McClatchy Washington Bureau. Retrieved 2011-02-15.
  28. ^ Tracy, Tennille; Welsch, Edward (2011-08-26). "Keystone Poses 'No Significant Impacts' to Most Resources Along Path - US". Downstream Today. Dow Jones Newswires. Retrieved 2011-08-27.
  29. ^ a b c Kemp, John (2012-09-06). "Keystone modifications call Obama's bluff". Reuters. Retrieved 2012-10-06.
  30. ^ "TransCanada to Work with Department of State on New Keystone XL Route Options" (Press release). TransCanada. 2011-11-10. Retrieved 2011-11-26.
  31. ^ "Media Advisory - State of Nebraska to Play Major Role in Defining New Keystone XL Route Away From the Sandhills" (Press release). TransCanada. 2011-11-14. Retrieved 2011-11-26.
  32. ^ Avok, Michael (2011-11-22). "Nebraska governor signs bills to reroute Keystone pipeline". Reuters. Retrieved 2011-11-30.
  33. ^ Daly, Matthew (2011-11-30). "GOP bill would force action on Canada oil pipeline". Deseret News. Associated Press. Retrieved 2012-01-19.
  34. ^ Montopoli, Brian (January 18, 2012). "Obama denies Keystone XL pipeline permit". CBS News. Retrieved January 20, 2012.
  35. ^ Goldenberg, Suzanne (January 18, 2012). "Keystone XL pipeline: Obama rejects controversial project". The Guardian. London. Retrieved January 20, 2012.
  36. ^ "TransCanada proposes new Keystone XL route in Nebraska". Reuters. 2012-09-05. Retrieved 2012-10-06.
  37. ^ a b c Goodman, Lee-Anne (22 May 22 2013). "Republicans aim to take Keystone XL decision out of Obama's hands". The Canadian Press. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  38. ^ "Canada-US link gets green light". Upstream Online. NHST Media Group. 2008-03-14. (subscription required). Retrieved 2008-03-14.
  39. ^ a b "TransCanada: Keystone Construction to Begin in Spring". TransCanada Corporation. Downstream Today. 2007-10-30. Retrieved 2008-07-18.
  40. ^ "TransCanada's quarterly profit rises to $390 million". Canada.com. CanWest MediaWorks Publications Inc. 2008-10-29. Retrieved 2011-11-26.
  41. ^ a b VanderKlippe, Nathan (2011-12-24). "The politics of pipe: Keystone's troubled route". The Globe and Mail. Toronto. Retrieved 2012-12-09.
  42. ^ a b U.S.State Department (November 10, 2011). Media Notes on Keystone XL Pipeline Project Review Process: Decision to Seek Additional Information (Report). Retrieved March 22, 2012. {{cite report}}: Unknown parameter |city= ignored (|location= suggested) (help)
  43. ^ a b Level IV Ecoregions of Kansas and Nebraska (PDF) (Report). 2001. {{cite report}}: Unknown parameter |accessed= ignored (help)
  44. ^ "Tar Sands and Safety Risk". Natural Resource Defense Council. Retrieved 22 November 2011.
  45. ^ "XL Pipeline". Sierra Club Nebraska. Retrieved 22 November 2011.
  46. ^ "Gov. Heineman: Pipeline Re-Routing is Nebraska Common Sense" (Press release). Office of Governor of Nebraska. 15 November 2011. Retrieved 22 November 2011.
  47. ^ a b "Editorial: Tar Sands and the Carbon Numbers". The New York Times. New York Times Company. 2011-08-21. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2012-11-26.
  48. ^ "Draft Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS)". US State Department. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
  49. ^ "World's Largest Aquifer Going Dry". U.S. Water News Online. 2006. Retrieved 2010-12-30. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  50. ^ a b Anderson, Mitchell (2010-07-07). "Ed Stelmach's Clumsy American Romance". The Tyee. Retrieved 2010-07-22.
  51. ^ a b Dembicki, Geoff (2010-06-21). "Gulf Disaster Raises Alarms about Alberta to Texas Pipeline". The Tyee. Retrieved 2010-07-22.
  52. ^ a b News (2011-10-07). "Pipeline Review Is Faced With Question of Conflict". The New York Times. New York Times Company. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2011-10-31. {{cite news}}: |author= has generic name (help)
  53. ^ Tar Sands Pipeline Probe Urged Sen. Bernie Sanders October 26, 2011
  54. ^ a b Cattaneo, Claudia (September 9, 2011). "TransCanada in eye of the storm". Financial Post.
  55. ^ "Keystone XL the 'safest pipeline ever'", Sun News Network, 2 December 2011.
  56. ^ McGowan, Elizabeth (2011-09-19). "Keystone XL Pipeline Safety Standards Not as Rigorous as They Seem". InsideClimate News. Retrieved 2011-12-01.
  57. ^ "Say No to Tar Sands Pipeline" (PDF). NRDC. 2010-03-10. Retrieved 2010-07-22.
  58. ^ Casey-Lefkowitz, Susan (2010-06-23). "House members say tar sands pipeline will undermine clean energy future". NRDC. Retrieved 2010-07-27.
  59. ^ a b Sullivan, Bartholomew (2010-06-24). "Enviro Groups, 50 Congressmen Mobilize Against Keystone XL". The Commercial Appeal. Downstream Today. Retrieved 2010-08-01. Cite error: The named reference "downstream240610" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  60. ^ Rascoe, Ayesha; Haggett, Scott (2010-07-06). "Key US lawmaker opposes Canadian oil sands pipeline". Reuters. Retrieved 2010-07-27.
  61. ^ Dvorak, Phred; Welsch, Edward (2010-07-08). "Oil Sands Push Tests US-Canada Ties". The Wall Street Journal. Downstream Today. Retrieved 2010-08-01.
  62. ^ O'Meara, Dina (2010-12-08). "Pressure in U.S. mounts against oilsands pipeline". The Calgary Herald. Retrieved 2012-01-20.
  63. ^ a b Francis, Diane (2011-09-23). "Foreign interests attack oil sands". Financial Post. Retrieved 2012-11-29.
  64. ^ NOTA Bene, National Post, September 24, 2011.[dead link‍]
  65. ^ http://www.keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/
  66. ^ "Keystone XL: State Department cleared of conflict, not ineptness". LA Times. 2012-02-09. Retrieved 2012-11-27.
  67. ^ Harris, Paul (2 March 2013). "Keystone XL pipeline report slammed by activists and scientists". The Guardian. London: GMG. ISSN 0261-3077. OCLC 60623878. Retrieved 9 March 2013.
  68. ^ Kroll, Andy (21 March 2013). "EXCLUSIVE: State Dept. Hid Contractor's Ties to Keystone XL Pipeline Company". Mother Jones. San Francisco: Mother Jones and the Foundation for National Progress. Retrieved 24 April 2013.
  69. ^ Johnson, Brad (2013 [last update]). "'State Department' Keystone XL Report Actually Written By TransCanada Contractor". grist.org. Retrieved 9 March 2013. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |year= (help)CS1 maint: year (link)
  70. ^ Sassoon, David (2011-02-10). "Koch Brothers Positioned To Be Big Winners If Keystone XL Pipeline Is Approved". Reuters. Retrieved 2011-08-25.
  71. ^ Waxman, Henry A.; Rush, Bobby L. (2011-05-20). "Reps. Waxman and Rush Urge Committee to Request Documents from Koch Industries Regarding Keystone XL Pipeline". Committee on Energy and Commerce Democrats. Retrieved 2011-08-25.
  72. ^ Sheppard, Kate (2011-05-23). "Waxman Targets the Koch Brothers". Mother Jones. Retrieved 2011-08-25.
  73. ^ a b Kaufman, Leslie; Frosch, Dan (2011-10-17). "Eminent Domain Fight Has a Canadian Twist". The New York Times. New York Times Company. Retrieved 2011-10-31.
  74. ^ http://search.proquest.com.kckcc.idm.oclc.org/docview/920768194?accountid=11802
  75. ^ Mann, Bill, "Americans should be thankful for Canada", MarketWatch, November 24, 2011. Retrieved 2011-11-24.
  76. ^ Savage, Luiza Ch., "The U.S. and Canada: we used to be friends", Maclean's, November 21, 2011 8:00 am. Retrieved 2011-11-24.
  77. ^ "U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce: The Keystone XL Pipeline". U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce. Retrieved 2012-01-10.
  78. ^ "Say Yes To Building The Keystone Oil Pipeline". USA Today. 2011-10-26. Retrieved 2012-01-10. {{cite news}}: |first= missing |last= (help)
  79. ^ Hussein, Yadullah (2011-09-23). "Keystone 'exaggerated rhetoric' untrue". Financial Post.
  80. ^ Welsch, Edward (2010-06-30). "TransCanada: Oil Sands Exports Will Go To Asia If Blocked In US". Downstream Today. Dow Jones Newswires. Retrieved 2010-08-01.
  81. ^ "Aboriginal/Native American Relations". Corporate Responsibility 2007. TransCanada. Retrieved 23 April 2012.
  82. ^ "Keystone XL Pipeline and Indigenous Peoples". Indigenous Peoples Issues and Resources. Retrieved 31 May 2013.
  83. ^ a b "First Nations and American Indian Leaders Arrested In Front Of White House To Protest Keystone XL Pipeline". Bioterrorism Week. (Sept. 19, 2011): p11. Academic OneFile. Retrieved 23 April 2012.
  84. ^ "Application to the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission for a Permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline Under the Energy Conversion and Transmission Facility Act" (PDF). puc.sd.gov. Retrieved 23 April 2012.
  85. ^ Anthony Swift, Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, Elizabeth Shope (2011). "Tar Sands Pipeline Safety Risks" (PDF). National Resources Defense Council. Retrieved 23 April 2012. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)[dead link‍]
  86. ^ "Earl Hatley: Portrait of an Oklahoma activist". The Current. www.currentland.com. Retrieved 26 April 2012.
  87. ^ "New Appointments in Aboriginal Health at the University of Toronto". International Journal of Circumpolar Health. eISSN 2242-3982 (print volumes from 1972–2011: ISSN 1239-9736) (Circumpolar Health Supplements): 294. 2004. Retrieved 23 April 2012.
  88. ^ "Community, Aboriginal and Native American Relations". TransCanada.com. Retrieved 23 April 2012. {{cite web}}: |first= missing |last= (help)
  89. ^ TransCanada CEO on Proposed Pipeline. Fox News Channel. 2011-08-31. Retrieved 2011-10-12.
  90. ^ The Impact of Developing the Keystone XL Pipeline Project on Business Activity in the US: An Analysis Including State-by-State Construction Effects and an Assessment of the Potential Benefits of a More Stable Source of Domestic Supply (PDF) (Report). Perryman Group. 2010-06. Retrieved 2012-03-18. {{cite report}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  91. ^ Brainard, Curtis (2012-01-12). "Keystone XL Jobs Bewilder Media. Reporters still fumbling numbers in wake of pipeline's rejection". The Observatory. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved 2012-03-18.
  92. ^ Sherter, Alain (2012-01-19). "Keystone pipeline: How many jobs really at stake?". CBS News. Retrieved 2012-03-18.
  93. ^ Hargreaves, Steve (2011-12-14). "Keystone pipeline: How many jobs it would really create". CNN. Retrieved 2012-12-01.
  94. ^ "On the economic impact of the Keystone pipeline". Retrieved 2013-03-19.
  95. ^ Cato, Jeremy (September 10, 2012). "Canadian Auto Workers union: singing off-key as jobs go south". The Globe and Mail. Toronto. Retrieved 2013-03-19.
  96. ^ Vanderklippe, Nathan (April 23, 2010). "Oil sands awash in excess pipeline capacity". The Globe and Mail. Toronto. Retrieved 2012-02-22.
  97. ^ a b Vanderklippe, Nathan (2010-04-29). "Pipeline fees revolt widens". The Globe and Mail. Toronto. Retrieved 2010-08-01.
  98. ^ a b c Hussain, Yadullah (25 April 2013). "Alberta exploring at least two oil pipeline projects to North". Financial Post.
  99. ^ Vanderklippe, Nathan (22 January 2013). "Oil differential darkens Alberta's budget". Calgary, Alberta: Globe and Mail.
  100. ^ Ross, Sherwood (January 5, 2012). ""Game Over" For Planet If XL Oil Pipeline Is Built". countercurrents.org. Retrieved January 10, 2012.
  101. ^ a b Mayer, Jane (2011-11-28). "Taking It to the Streets". The New Yorker. Retrieved 2011-12-01.
  102. ^ Goodman, Amy (2011-11-09). "Keystone: pipeline to Obama's re-election". The Guardian. London.
  103. ^ "Daryl Hannah freed following arrest in pipeline protest". Chicago Sun-Times. October 6, 2012.
  104. ^ James B. Kelleher (31 October 2012). "Green Party presidential hopeful arrested in pipeline protest". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  105. ^ Mufson, Steven (31 October 2012). "Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein charged with trespassing in Keystone XL protest". Washington Post. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  106. ^ http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/17/keystone-xl-pipeline-protest-dc
  107. ^ http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/thousands-rally-in-washington-to-protest-keystone-pipeline-87745.html#ixzz2LDwj7Myp
  108. ^ Rafferty, Andrew. "Thousands rally in D.C. against Keystone Pipeline". NBC News. Retrieved 21 February 2013.
  109. ^ Lee, Mike; Klump, Edward (2011-11-16). "Enbridge Plans to Reverse Pipe Between Cushing and Houston". Bloomberg. Retrieved 2011-11-26.
  110. ^ Lee, Mike; Olson, Bradley (2012-05-19). "Enterprise, Enbridge Propose Keystone Pipeline Alternative". Bloomberg Businessweek. Bloomberg. Retrieved 2011-11-26z. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  111. ^ Nichols, Bruce (2011-09-29). "Seaway pipeline sends oil to Texas in historic reversal". Reuters. Rueters. Retrieved 2012-07-27.
  112. ^ Lefebvre, Ben (2011-11-18). "More Pipelines Needed to Follow Seaway's Path". The Wall Street Journal. (subscription required). Retrieved 2011-11-26.
  113. ^ "Keystone pipeline: TransCanada to Shorten Route and Bypass Federal Review". Bloomberg. 2012-01-19.
  114. ^ Olson, Bradley; Lee, Mike (2012-03-22). "Obama's Speedy Keystone Review Won't Accelerate Cushing Pipe". Bloomberg.
  115. ^ http://www.transcanada.com/gulf-coast-pipeline-project.html
  116. ^ Jill Burke, Alaska watches Canadians consider shipping tar sands oil across Arctic Ocean, Alaska Dispatch, 30 April 2013.
  117. ^ Shook, Barbara (2009-09-18). "Independent refiner CVR sues TransCanada's Keystone Pipeline". The Oil Daily. AllBusiness.com, Inc. Retrieved 2010-08-01.
  118. ^ "NRDC's Suit to Block Canada-US Oil Pipeline Thrown Out". Associated Press. 2009-10-02. Retrieved 2010-07-22.
  119. ^ "Enviros Sue to Stop Keystone Pipeline Project". Courthouse News Service. Retrieved 2012-07-18.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Keystone Pipeline.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Keystone_Pipeline&oldid=558466432"