No project better embodies the nation’s wild swings in climate and energy policy than the Keystone XL pipeline.
The conduit, proposed in 2008 to carry Canadian oil to the U.S. Gulf Coast, was destroyed by President Barack Obama and then reinstated during President Donald Trump’s first term, only to be snuffed out again by Joe Biden when he entered the White House.
Now, the zombie pipeline may be coming back from the dead again with a different name and form.
Federal and state officials in Montana are seeking public comment on a proposed 647-mile, 36-inch-wide crude oil line that would run from the Canadian border (the same area Keystone XL would cross) through Montana and into Wyoming. Bridger Pipeline, the company behind the proposal, said it expects the project to transport 550,000 barrels per day based on “current operating assumptions,” but that it would be able to transport 1.13 million barrels per day to its terminus in Guernsey, Wyoming.
Environmentalists say the proposed project makes little sense and that plans to connect with other pipelines to the original Keystone XL pipeline’s destinations in the Midwest or the Gulf Coast are more likely. The route would give oil companies access to major refineries on the Gulf Coast and allow them to export Canadian oil outside the United States.
Multiple news outlets reported that President Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney discussed reviving the Keystone XL pipeline during a meeting last year.
Southbow, a Canadian company that was spun off from the developer of the Keystone XL pipeline and owns part of the Canadian-built project, announced an “open season” in March for buyer commitments to transport oil from Alberta to multiple locations in the United States, including the Gulf Coast.
How to comment on pipeline proposals
The Bureau of Land Management is accepting public comments until May 1 on a proposed pipeline that would run from the Canadian border through Montana and Wyoming. It also plans to hold two meetings in Montana, one in Wyoming, and one virtually in mid-April. Information on how to submit comments and where to participate can be found on this site.
Bridger Pipeline also held an open season with another pipeline company connecting Guernsey to Cushing, Oklahoma, a major oil hub along the old route of the Keystone XL line.
“This is just a kind of bait-and-switch,” said Jane Cleave, founder and executive director of Bold Alliance, an advocacy group founded in 2010 to fight Keystone XL.
Mr. Cleve helped organize a broad coalition of farmers, ranchers, indigenous leaders, and environmentalists from across the Plains and Gulf Coast who pressed Mr. Obama to reject the pipeline. Since then, companies have begun breaking up projects to avoid as much opposition as possible, she said.
“When pipeline companies do this, when they basically don’t put all their cards on the table, they don’t inspire a lot of the community,” Cleave said.
Bridger Pipelines spokesman Bill Salvin said he could not comment on what the pipeline would connect to beyond Canada or Wyoming, but said the open season connection to Oklahoma is unrelated to the new proposal, called the Bridger Pipeline Expansion. He added that the company expects the Canada-U.S. pipeline to reach capacity within a few years.
“We believe there is a market for Canadian oil to come to the United States,” Salvin said, and that’s what this proposal aims to do.
Southbow spokeswoman Solomija Ryskovska said in an email that the company is “considering expansions that could leverage existing infrastructure and permitted corridors in Canada and connect to downstream pipelines in the United States.”
Bridger’s expansion would require permission from multiple state and federal agencies, including a “presidential permit” to cross the border with Canada.
The company’s application to Montana does not specify what type of oil the pipeline will carry, but most of Canada’s oil comes from tar sands, also known as oil sands, huge deposits of heavy hydrocarbons called bitumen that can be diluted or refined into synthetic crude oil. The process is expensive, energy-intensive, and causes more climate pollution than traditional oil production. Additionally, much of the mining from vast open-pit mines accumulates toxic waste, which is also harmful to the environment and sometimes leaches into waterways.
“The company does everything it can to avoid saying those words, but this is a tar sands pipeline,” said Derf Johnson, deputy director of the advocacy group Montana Environmental Information Center.
Johnson said his group is concerned about the environmental impact of every step of oil production, transportation and refining. Asphalt spills can be more difficult to clean up than traditional crude oil spills.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management is the lead agency handling the pipeline review and is accepting written comments by May 1 before issuing an environmental impact report. The agency plans to hold a series of virtual public meetings next week in Montana and Wyoming.
About this story
As you may have noticed, this article, like all news we publish, is free to read. That’s because Inside Climate News is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. We don’t charge subscription fees, keep our news behind paywalls, or fill our website with ads. We provide climate and environmental news free to you and anyone who wants it.
That’s not all. We also share our news for free with dozens of other news organizations across the country. Many of them cannot afford to do their own environmental journalism. We’ve established bureaus across the country to report on local news, partner with local newsrooms and co-publish stories to ensure this important work is shared as widely as possible.
The two of us started ICN in 2007. Six years later, we won the Pulitzer Prize for national reporting and now run the nation’s oldest and largest dedicated climate newsroom. We tell the story in its entirety. We hold polluters accountable. We expose environmental injustice. We debunk misinformation. We explore solutions and inspire action.
Donations from readers like you fund all aspects of our work. If you haven’t already, will you support our ongoing work, our coverage of the biggest crises facing our planet, and help us reach more readers in more places?
Please make a tax-deductible donation. Each one makes a difference.
thank you,
Nicholas Kusnets
new york state reporter
Nicholas Kusnets is a reporter for Inside Climate News. Prior to joining ICN, he worked at the Center for Public Integrity and ProPublica. His work has earned him numerous awards and citations from the Society of Professional Journalists, the Society of Environmental Journalists, the Overseas Press Club, and the Business Editors and Writers of America, among others. His articles have appeared in more than a dozen publications, including Wired, The Washington Post, Businessweek, The Nation, and The New York Times. Nicholas can be reached on Signal at nkusnetz.15.
Source link
