Skip to content

Keystone Pipeline XL

With the controversy over the Keystone XL pipeline extension surfacing yet again — opponents will hold a rally Wednesday night in San Francisco’s Pacific Heights neighborhood, outside a fundraiser President Obama is headlining–we thought we’d clarify a few points about the contentious project. (For more details, read Steven Mufson’s new e-book, “Keystone XL: Down the Line.”)

What is the Keystone XL pipeline?

The Keystone XL pipeline extension is the original name for a 1,664-mile project that would transport 830,000 barrels of crude oil a day, most of it from Canada’s oil sands torefineries in Port Arthur, Tex. It is the extension of TransCanada’s existing Keystone pipeline, which was completed last year. At this point the project has two segments: the 1,179-mile northern leg between Hardisty, Alberta and Steele City, Okla., which still requires a presidential permit, and the 485-mile southern leg known as the Gulf Coast Project between Steele City and Port Arthur, Tex., which is two-thirds built and has all the necessary federal permits.

Who favors Keystone XL, and who opposes it?

The Canadian government, oil companies and some unions back the project on the grounds that it will generate construction jobs and ease the flow of oil from a friendly neighbor to the United States. Gulf Coast refineries are particularly interested in getting heavy crude from Canada, because they’ve already upgraded their facilities to process the oil. Many politicians and residents in North Dakota and Montana also support the pipeline, because it will allow them to ship shale oil being extracted from the Bakken Formation in their states to Texas refineries.

Environmentalists, as well as some ranchers and other landowners along the proposed route oppose the project. They argue it will make it harder for the U.S. to shift away from fossil fuels, and will expand production in Canada’s oil sands.

Americans, on the whole, support the pipeline. A Pew Research Center poll released Tuesday found 66 percent of Americans back the project, as opposed to 23 percent who oppose it.

A Washington Post poll in June found similar results, with 59 percent in favor and 18 percent against. Just 34 percent said the pipeline would do significant harm to the environment, while 83 percent believed it would create a significant amount of jobs

How many jobs will it create?

Proponents say it would create anywhere from 20,000 to 100,000 jobs, while critics say it would only create a couple dozen. Both numbers are inaccurate: TransCanada suggests it would create 3,500 direct jobs for a two-year period, after which point about 35 workers would operate the pipeline.

Why is it so politically controversial?

There are two reasons Keystone has become a political lightning rod. The most important factor is what development of the oil sands—or tar sands—as they’re called by opponents—means for global warming. Extracting bitumen—a low-grade type of petroleum — from the region is more akin to mining than conventional oil drilling, and the process of extracting crude or bitumen from oil sands emits roughly 15 percent more greenhouse gas emissions than the production of the average barrel of crude oil used in the United States. NASA climate scientist James E. Hansen, who just retired from his federal job so he could become a full-time climate activist, said if all the oil was extracted from the oil sands it would be “game over” when it came to the effort to stabilize the climate.

The pipeline also crosses a half dozen states, and people living along the route are concerned that spills from the pipeline could damage ecologically-sensitive habitat. While the project’s sponsor TransCanada says this new pipeline will boast the newest technology—the current Keystone pipeline has 16,000 data points that are refreshed every five seconds—recent spills like last week’s breach of the Exxon pipeline in Mayflower, Ark. has many people worried.

Who makes the decision about whether Keystone gets built, and why is it taking so long?

The State Department has jurisdiction over project because it crosses an international border, and it must conduct a lengthy review—which consists of both a detailed environmental analysis and a national interest assessment—before it signs off on a permit. TransCanada first applied for a permit nearly four years ago, and State had completed its environmental analysis when Congress tried to force President Obama’s hand by setting a deadline for a final decision by February 2012. Obama responded by rejecting the permit, on the grounds that his officials did not have enough time to conduct a proper review.

In response TransCanada changed the route of the project’s northern leg so it would avoid much of Nebraska’s ecologically-sensitive Sand Hills region, and reapplied for  a presidential permit. The State Department is in the midst of taking comments on its latest draft environmental impact assessment, and will have to finalize that and conduct a national interest assessment before making a final decision.

That announcement is likely to come either in late summer or early fall, and President Obama is expected to personally weigh in on the final decision.

Congress has no formal say in the matter, though on March 22 the Senate approved a non-binding resolution in favor of building the project by a vote of 62 to 37, with 17 Democrats voting aye.

Could Canada’s oil be shipped another way if the president blocks the pipeline?

Yes. Right now the amount of rail shipments of Canada’s oil sands are on track to quadruple this year, so it could make it to the Gulf Coast that way instead. Canadians have threatened to sell their crude oil to China, either by shipping it to their east or west coast and sending it by ship, but there are legal and logistical hurdles to undertaking such a plan anytime soon.

Will the oil shipped via the pipeline stay in the United States?

Once the refineries get the oil, there’s no guarantee the final product will remain in the United States. In the fourth quarter of 2012, for example, Valero refineries exported nearly 9 percent of their gasoline products overseas.

What’s the connection to the congressional fundraisers President Obama is headlining in San Francisco Wednesday night?

Wednesday’s fundraisers are aimed at raising money for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and are therefore not directly linked to Keystone. But the host of the first fundraiser Obama will attend, billionaire Tom Steyer, is a vocal critic of the pipeline. In addition activists from several groups—including CREDO Mobile, 350,org and the Sierra Club—plan to hold a protest outside the home of Ann and Gordon Getty, the second fundraiser the president will attend.

When is the next public event connected to Keystone?

The State Department will hold a public hearing on its draft environmental assessment on April 18 in Grand Island, Neb. Many activists on both sides of the issue plan to attend the hearing and there will be plenty of theatrics, including a prayer circle and BBQ organized by Nebraskans seeking to block the pipeline.



1. What is the Keystone XL pipeline?


2.  Why is this pipeline so controversial?


3.  Why is the oil from the keystone pipeline different?


4.  If you  were president Obama what would you do?


Print Friendly
No comments yet

Leave a Reply

You may use basic HTML in your comments. Your email address will not be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Improve Your Life, Go The myEASY Way™