Keystone XL Isn’t the Only Key

[Joe Shlabotnik]

Canadian oil producers seeking to expand existing pipelines to get tar sands oil to the US market

There is no shortage of new pipeline and pipeline expansion projects in development. The projects are in various stages – from initial concept phase to application process to those close to approval. Combined, the proposed projects would, if completed, dwarf Keystone XL in terms of how much petroleum they would move.

Summary:
Trans Mountain pipeline: 890,000 barrels per day
Northern Gateway pipeline: 600,000 barrels per day
Line 67 Alberta Clipper pipeline: 800,000 barrels per day
Line 9 pipeline: 300,000 barrels per day
Proposed Energy East pipeline: 850,000 barrels per day
Proposed Arctic Ocean batshit crazy pipeline: ?

All signs point toward continued efforts to expand tar sands extraction in Alberta. Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Tory government is doing everything it can to lobby US officials to approve new cross-border crude oil shipments. And the provincial government in Alberta continues to provide massive subsidies for further tar sands development. With an estimated 173 billion barrels of recoverable bitumen at stake, the economic incentives for continued growth are immense. According to the International Energy Agency, North American daily oil production is forecast to grow by 3.9 million barrels between 2012 and 2018. "North American oil production will be as transformative to the market over the next five years as was the rise of Chinese demand over the last 15," the IEA says.

Environmentalists say that would be a disaster. According to Greenpeace, "Greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from tar sands production are three to four times higher than those caused by the production of conventional oil, which makes the tar sands the largest contributor to the growth in Canada's GHG emissions and one of the world's largest sources of GHGs."

As both tar sand proponents and opponents know, that oil will stay in the ground unless there’s a way to get it to market. Until now, most attention has focused on Keystone XL. No matter the ultimate fate of Keystone, it will be just one small battle in a war that is opening up along multiple fronts from coast to coast to coast.

http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/keystone_xl_isnt_the_only_key/

[NickB79]

1. They're running the Alberta Clipper through my home state

Minnesota.

The refinery 10 miles up the road from me and a second one 30 miles away in St. Paul are both upgrading their capacity by hundreds of thousands of barrels to take advantage of this.

Fuck.

[FogerRox]

5. Alberta Clipper will put a lot of barges on the Great lakes

Increasing the potential for more oil spills.

[Buzz Clik]

2. +1

Going all in on Keystone XL was a fool's game.

It's almost as if the proponents have taken advantage of the obsessive, single-minded nature of US environmentalists to get more than they wanted from XL while the enviros were consumed with stopping XL.

As both tar sand proponents and opponents know, that oil will stay in the ground unless there’s a way to get it to market. Until now, most attention has focused on Keystone XL. No matter the ultimate fate of Keystone, it will be just one small battle in a war that is opening up along multiple fronts from coast to coast to coast.

Even if all pipelines could be stopped -- and they cannot -- the oil will not be staying in the ground.

[FogerRox]

3. The decsion to focus on KXL was a political one.

And for years KXL was the largest proposed tar sands pipeline. The fact of the matter is that in an issue oriented campaign you need a focal point, to suggest otherwise in the face of success by environmentalists in galvanizing millions of people to action in the US & Canada is ignoring what was accomplished.

Since the tar sands is landlocked, without pipelines, for the most part it will be staying in the ground. They plan on producing up to 8 million barrels a day. Dont even suggest that rail cars can move 4 million bpd, let alone 8 mbpd.

[FogerRox]

4. Northern Gateway to Kitimat is DOA.

The costs associated with dredging, and other projects necessary for supertanker traffic have pretty much killed that pipeline. Kitimat is just too small a port.

The Original Trans MT is 60 years old, so a third of the capacity listed will be lost. And the doubling of Trans MT has yet to be finished. And don't forget Trailbreaker, Alberta to Portland Maine:




Thats how Line 9 fits into the big picture. KnR.