Transcanada's alternative to Keystone XL: "oil route around Obama"

[pampango]

Here's What Big Oil Has in the Pipes if Keystone Fails
New documents reveal Transcanada is planning an "oil route around Obama."

TransCanada Corp., the company seeking to build the Keystone XL pipeline, has teamed up with the world's largest public relations firm to promote a proposed alternative pipeline that's entirely in Canada.

Greenpeace Canada obtained documents that the US public relations firm Edelman drafted for TransCanada that outline a campaign to promote Energy East, the company's proposed 2,858-mile pipeline that would transport crude oil from the Alberta tar sands to the east coast of Canada. The company filed an application to build the Energy East pipeline last month—a project that has been described as an "oil route around Obama" amid political wrangling over Keystone XL in the United States.

Greenpeace says the documents show a company increasingly concerned about the fate of Keystone XL, which would connect the tar sands with Gulf Coast refineries. TransCanada's Energy East also faces increasing opposition, as does a proposed pipeline to the west, Enbridge's Northern Gateway. Enbridge got approval from the Canadian government to build Northern Gateway, but work has been delayed, in large part because of opposition from First Nation communities along the pipeline route.

"TransCanada has been saying, 'If you don't let us build Keystone, we will build to the east,'" said Keith Stewart, the climate and energy campaign coordinator for Greenpeace Canada. "These documents show that they're clearly worried about the Energy East pipeline as well. It's going to face just as rough a ride as Keystone or Northern Gateway."

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/11/heres-what-big-oil-has-pipes-if-keystone-fails

Thanks for the boost to Obama's reputation, Transcanada. An "oil route around Obama indeed."

I suspect the company will find plenty of opposition within Canada to its domestic pipeline proposal.

[RiverLover]

1. Keep in Canada! The way it should be. ~nt

[2naSalit]

2. Everyone

to keep this tarsands crap in the ground and unmined, we need to stop using oil, period. I know that many of us are too poor to replace our oil burning tools and transportation but we need to try and encourage those who provide these items and services to convert to non-petroleum products and services.

Our (and everyone else's) lives depend on it. Time is running out for all life forms who depend on air and water and soil to grow food. Since the political class isn't interested in doing this, we need to do it for our own survival.

[proverbialwisdom]

3. VIDEO AND TRANSCRIPT: Naomi Klein on DemocracyNow! on Nov 17.

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/11/17/naomi_klein_reject_keystone_xl_pipeline

[invrabbit]

4. Soumds Familiar

Let me get this straight-a Repub controlled House and Senate is going to pass a piece of legislation that they believe is going to help the US, but can't believe the Democrats are against it! OK,lets talk ACA!!!

[Clint0n]

5. and then?

So instead of spilling oil out on the ground in the midwest, they're going to endanger the whole east coast and the gulf by tankering (and presumably spilling) it in the ocean a few miles off the coast. These guys are fuckin geniuses...

You can almost hear the exec's before congress now, "we never thought a hurricane could sink a tanker that big"... sure buddy

[LibertyLover]

6. They are a Canadian company,

the oil any pipeline would be carrying is from Canadian tar sands, so I'm all for them building their own damned pipeline in their own damned country. Let Canada have the expense, danger, and pollution involved with oil spills, not the US, especially when we wouldn't benefit from any oil carried by the pipeline. Oh wait, I forgot about the 50 jobs the thing was going to create here. Those are, I'm sure, a good reason to build the pipeline through the US.

[karynnj]

7. As the fight against each possible pipeline continues, the real long term key to stopping

extraction of the tar sands is that if "cheap" transportation of that oil is prevented the entire tar sands development becomes uneconomic.

In this Washington post article, probably the most important point made is that without the Keystone XL pipeline, the current $75 price means that their oil is too expensive to be sold at a price that is profitable. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/11/17/the-keystone-xl-pipeline-isnt-about-lowering-your-gas-prices/

Remember the State Department report that came out in early 2013 -- a very key assumption was that they did not have to consider any environmental affects of extracting the oil or using it - because that would happen anyway. At this point, that completely outrageous assumption even when made is patently false. As the pipeline now COULD make the difference between staying in the ground or not -- it has to be added. This would make the result beyond obvious that even on just climate change, the reason Obama said he would reject it, this fails.

That before you even consider the potential cost of ecological damage from potential spills.

As Keystone will return in January, it would be great if the Democrats who supported Landrieu could be targeted by information from their constituents to get enough to again sustain a veto.

The other thing that I hope ends are various Democrats in media - whose issues exclude the environment - would stop their counterproductive calls for Obama to give this up for "something". The fact is the Republicans will not really give us anything and this is important.

[Spazito]

8. Canadians are protesting this proposal, Energy East...

as well as Enbridge's attempt to build a pipeline from Alberta to the B.C. coast.

TransCanada’s open house on Energy East project draws protesters

http://www.kenoradailyminerandnews.com/2014/08/12/transcanadas-open-house-on-energy-east-project-draws-protesters


Students in Montreal stage protest over pipeline projects

http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/students-in-montreal-stage-protest-over-pipeline-projects

Northern Gateway pipeline protest outside CBC Vancouver

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/northern-gateway-pipeline-protest-outside-cbc-vancouver-1.2679098

TransCanada and Enbridge are appalling companies, more multi-national than strictly Canadian. It boggles my mind that TransCanada can claim eminent domain against American landowners in Texas and South Dakota and a Texas judge agreed re Texas landholders.

[TygrBright]

9. If they're so effing desperate to get this crap to a refinery...

...how about they build one of their own in their own backyards? And connect it with their own shipping ports?

In the long run it's going be cheaper than fighting this fight. That I pledge. I will NEVER stop making it expensive for them to drag their crap through our front yards.

NEVER.

determinedly,
Bright

[Thespian2]

11. I think

you may find Canadians don't like the pipelines nor the tar sands. The Council of Canadians who oppose these environmental disasters is being attacked by Big Oil who is getting ready to ramp up their attacks. The GREEDY BASTARDS have a game plan and look forward to spending millions to get one of their pipelines built. Our Prime Minister has staked the countries economic future on oil. Elections are next year; maybe Harper will go the way of the dinosaur. To extinction.

[rtracey]

10. My only question

My only question on this pipeline is this..... When completed and Canada begins shipping tar sand, does USA get to collect a fee or rent, or lease of the land the pipeline is using?, or do USA get a fee per barrel shipped? ANYONE?

[nilesobek]

12. I can just imagine the devastation of an oil spill in the ST. Lawrence seaway.

[GeorgeGist]

13. Scraping the bottom of the barrel ...

is HARD.