A reality based independent journal of observation & analysis, serving the Flathead Valley & Montana since 2006. © James Conner.
President Obama killed the Keystone XL pipeline yesterday, and it will stay dead until a pipeline friendly President replaces him in the White House. That President won’t be named Clinton, O’Malley, or Sanders.
Not all Democrats are happy. Sen. John Tester issued a statement titled “President Threatens Energy Security:”
“I’m disappointed with the President’s decision. After dragging his feet for years on the Keystone pipeline, the President missed an opportunity to strengthen America’s energy security. This decision prevents more good-paying Montana jobs and ensures that we continue to do business with hostile countries in the Middle East. “
Tester has been calling on President Obama to approve the Keystone XL pipeline since 2010.
Tester’s clearly peeved, but that’s no excuse for accusing the President of weakening the energy security of the United States. He could, and should, have issued a bland and unremarkable statement of disagreement.
Al Ekband, Executive Secretary of the Montana AFL-CIO also took issue with Obama’s decision, but in a much more politically responsible manner:
We’re incredibly disappointed by President Obama’s decision to deny approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline. This project was supported by most Montanans because it could have created good paying Montana jobs and positively impacted Montana’s tax-base. Furthermore, the Keystone XL pipeline could have reduced greenhouse gas emissions when compared with oil transportation by rail.
Possibly, reports the Seattle Times. Officials of Washington state fear Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline could increase the number of oil laden tankers sailing west through the Strait of Juan de Fuca:
The oil piped from Alberta would be targeted for maritime export, dramatically increasing the number of oil tankers traversing the Strait of Juan de Fuca and raising environmental concerns among Washington state Department of Ecology (DOE) officials.
Currently, about five tankers per month depart the Westridge Marine Terminal in Burnaby, east of Vancouver. By expanding the pipeline, tanker trips could jump to 34 per month as producers seek the higher prices Canadian oil could fetch in Asia or elsewhere in the world.
Oil travels from Alberta, CA, to Burnaby through the Trans Mountain Pipeline, built in 1953. Trans Mountain proposes expanding the pipeline’s capacity from 300,000 to 890,000 barrels a day.
Another possible beneficiary of Obama’s Keystone XL decision is the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline, which would run from near Edmondton, AB, to Kitimat, BC, a deep water port built in the 1950s as part of a hydroelectric and aluminum smelting project (Rio Tinto Alcan).
The westbound 36” diameter pipeline will carry up to 525,000 barrels of oil per day. The eastbound 20” diameter pipeline will carry 193,000 barrels of condensate per day, which is a product used to thin oil for pipeline transport.
The National Geographic covered Kitimat, which sits at the head of a deep fjord that exits into Queen Charlotte Sound approximately 400 miles northwest of Vancouver. It’s geography condusive to an Exxon Valdez accident.
The immediate effect of Obama’s decision, other than invigorating environmental groups and national Democratic campaigns, probably will be an increase in the amount of oil shipped by rail, a much more environmentally risky method of transport than a pipeline. In his new book, Power Up, former Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer writes:
Thousands of rail cars are loaded each day to cross the border into the US for delivery throughout the country. Rail traffic across America is carrying oil sand crude through cities large and small. Do you think rail traffic is safer than pipeline transport? It’s not.
Entire trainloads of crude oil are rolling across America. Crude oil production has increased in Alberta, North Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, Oklahoma and Texas, replacing imported oil from the Middle East and South America. This increase in production critically needs a system to deliver the crude oil to market. We can either choose to deliver through pipelines or deliver by rail. Remember, 160,000 miles of hydrocarbon pipelines already crisscross our country. Some of our pipelines were designed and built decades ago before many of the new safety mechanisms were invented. These older pipelines are not as safe as new pipelines, but most of them are safer than rail.
Scheitzer is right about that.
Killing the Keystone XL does not stop the oil trains from the Bakken from running west through Montana, along the Middle Fork Flathead River, to Anacortes, WA. If crude oil must travel from the Bakken to Puget Sound, it would be much safer were it to travel in a pipeline than in railroad tankers. I shudder when I contemplate the consequences of rail tankers of Bakken oil spilling their cargo into the Middle Fork south of Glacier National Park. So should everyone.