Keystone Pipeline: TransCanada To Move Project Away From Sandhills And Aquifer

Keystone Xl Pipeline

First Posted: 11/14/11 05:57 PM ET Updated: 11/15/11 04:50 AM ET

CALGARY - TransCanada Corp. said Monday it has reached an agreement with the Nebraska government to change the route of its proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline in order to avoid the ecologically sensitive Sandhills region.

The Calgary-based pipeline giant (TSX:TRP) said it supports legislation Nebraska has introduced to ensure the pipeline doesn't cross the expanse of grass-strewn, loose-soil hills, and part of the Ogallala aquifer, which supplies water to Nebraska and seven other states.

The 2,700-kilometre pipeline, if built, will carry crude from Alberta's oilsands to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast, traversing six states along the way.

Some of the most heated environmental opposition to the pipeline has come from Nebraska, where many residents were concerned a spill from the pipeline could pollute water they rely on for farming and ranching.

On Thursday, the U.S. State Department heeded those concerns, announcing it would delay its decision on Keystone XL until early 2013 so that the company could come up with a new route. The U.S. State Department has final say on Keystone XL because it would cross an international border.

Alex Pourbaix, TransCanada's president of energy and oil pipelines, said he expects the extra review will add six to nine months to the Keystone XL schedule.

"As long as we're able to stay on the shorter time-frame, that keeps costs down very significantly," he said in an interview with the Canadian Press from Lincoln, Neb.

But a State Department spokesman said late Monday that any new route would require a supplemental environmental impact statement that likely would take more than a year to complete.

"Based on the total mileage of potential alternative routes that would need to be reviewed, we anticipate the evaluation could conclude as early as first quarter of 2013," Mark Toner said in a written statement.

Pourbaix said he visited Nebraska earlier this fall at the invitation of Mike Flood, speaker of the state's legislature. At the time, possible changes to the route weren't up for debate, since the State Department had already determined the best one — through the Sand Hills — in its final environmental impact assessment.

"The discussions were always about other things TransCanada could do that would make Nebraskans feel better about the route," Pourbaix said in an interview with The Canadian Press from Lincoln, Neb.

Last month, Governor Dave Heineman called a special session to discuss legislation that would give the state the power to change the route, which "short circuited" those talks somewhat.

Following Thursday's State Department announcement that it would re-open the routing debate, TransCanada had the opportunity to discuss alternate routes with Nebraska legislators.

"We availed ourselves of that over the weekend, and we talked about what was doable, what wasn't doable, and Speaker Flood gave us a very good understanding of the concerns of Nebraskans."

Though an exact route hasn't been determined, Pourbaix told a news conference earlier Monday it would likely require about 48 to 64 kilometres of additional pipe and an additional pumping station. What that adds to the project's US$7-billion price tag is unclear at this point.

"The smaller the number of miles that comprise the reroute, the quicker the environmental work can get done and the simpler the process," he said in the interview.

Flood said the state will conduct an environmental assessment of its own at its own expense to determine a new route. The Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality will oversee the process, with collaboration from the U.S. State Department, he said.

A State Department decision had been expected by the end of the year and some have asked whether President Barack Obama pushed it back in order to avoid a backlash from two factions of his political base — unions concerned about jobs on one side and environmentalists on the other — ahead of the 2012 presidential election.

Noah Greenwald, a spokesman for the Center of Biological Diversity, said his group remains opposed to the pipeline and still believes it poses an environmental threat. The centre is one of three environmental groups that have sued the U.S. State Department, seeking a judge's order to block the project.

"Even with the reroute, we still feel like we can push forward," he said. "We're going to keep up the public pressure on the administration as this moves forward."

For many environmental lobbyists fighting Keystone, Nebraska wasn't the only issue. They also took aim at what would be inside the pipeline, oilsands crude they consider to be dirtier than crude from other sources.

Pourbaix said there are opponents who won't be satisfied unless Keystone XL is never built. But he said Monday's announcement should allay the key State Department concerns, which centred on the Sandhills region.

Keystone XL backers have warned that prolonged delays might compel customers to look for other ways to get their crude to market, such as West Coast shipments to Asia or adding capacity to existing U.S. pipelines.

Currently, Canada exports 2.1 million barrels of oil a day, almost all of it to the United States. A number of pipelines — including the first phase of TransCanada's Keystone system — already ship Canadian crude to refineries in the Midwest.

Asian exports aren't an easy option to fall back on. Enbridge Inc. (TSX:ENB) if facing stiff opposition to its proposed Northern Gateway pipeline between Alberta and the West Coast and to the tanker traffic along the northern B.C. coast that would result. An expansion to Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain line to Vancouver and Washington State is in its early stages.

TransCanada says Keystone XL will create thousands of jobs for the ailing U.S. economy and help the United States reduce oil imports from unfriendly regimes like Venezuela.

TransCanada is Canada's largest natural gas shipper and the biggest gas distributor in the country. It is also growing its other energy businesses, including power generation and oil transportation, with Keystone XL one of the biggest projects in the company's history.

RELATED VIDEO:
FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA BUSINESS

CALGARY - TransCanada Corp. said Monday it has reached an agreement with the Nebraska government to change the route of its proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline in order to avoid the ecologically sensiti...
CALGARY - TransCanada Corp. said Monday it has reached an agreement with the Nebraska government to change the route of its proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline in order to avoid the ecologically sensiti...
Filed by Christian Cotroneo  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 39
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gravescanada
06:27 AM on 11/15/2011
So, if we create new refineries that can process the heavy crude from the Oil Sands, we would refine it here in Canada. Building refineries would create jobs, as well as jobs created to run the new refineries. Then their is the net profit to Canadians as we will produce our own Gasoline here in Canada and can sell to it our population for a fraction of what it costs today. Surplus can be sold to whatever country is offering the best money. If they can pay 25 cents a gallon in Saudi Arabia, so should we. This would be a huge undertaking, and would need to be a crown corporation. We have all these soldiers returning from war, move some over to the Canadian Military Engineer's. Just as they created the Panama Canal with the US Army corp of engineers, so to can we use our Corp to build and develop the new refineries. Much better way of spending our money than creating new prisons.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tooldude
11:12 PM on 11/14/2011
That Obama character needs this postponed for a year so he can use it as his ace in the hole and approve it when he is way behind in his upcoming election. he will try to look like the hero for bringing in the 20,000 jobs just before the US goes to the polls. By then there will already be deals in place with China. You snooze, you lose.
yer
Stop the Alberta Taliban
10:17 PM on 11/14/2011
"The Calgary-based pipeline giant (TSX:TRP) said it supports legislation Nebraska has introduced to ensure the pipeline doesn't cross the expanse of grass-strewn, loose-soil hills..."

supports huh? ...I guess that's short for grudgingly accepts kicking and screaming while protesters across the USA won over a corporation?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lulex
Made in Canada
09:57 PM on 11/14/2011
In my view it doesn't matter where the pipe goes. They shouldn't build it. There is no long term study to say how long a pipe transferring Diluted bitumen will last. This product contains abrasive quartz sand. It's risky no matter where the pipe goes. The former keystone pipe inspector warned the work done on the first section was flawed due to shortcuts taken as noted in this article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/28/keystone-pipeline-construction-leaks_n_984662.html
Then we have the emission issue. Current US policy prohibits the purchase of oil that results in more green house gases than conventional oil in section 526 of the Energy Procurement Act as signed by George Bush. The Department of Defense in the US said on July 5, 2011 that that it was in the U.S. national security interest to move away from our overdependence on non-renewable fuels but if the keystone is approved, it will essentially bind us to use it for decades and it's a massive target for potential acts of terrorism. It's not a good idea!
We only have five years to make meaningful climate change reductions. For the sake of our kids, their air quality, water supplies and health we have got to get off the oil.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
maurage
11:25 PM on 11/14/2011
We urgently need to put those solar panels on the upper side of those 777 wings, those wind turbines securely bolted to the roof of our Prius, a wood burning stove in each housing unit north of the Mason-Dixon line etc. Get rid of our dependence on foreign oil and foreign power sources and why send $billions upon $billions to foreign countries that do not like us, like Venezuela, Quebec etc.Cut those useless trees between Texarcana AR and Waycross GA, you have to feed those wood burning stoves. If really we were serious about making meaningful climate changes reductions, we should slap a $1.50 tax over 3 years on each gallon of gas/diesel over 3 years: 1-we would get smart at conserving the stuff quickly/2-we would have the resources to fix those highways and more/3-we would repair greatly our balance of payment.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
12:59 AM on 11/15/2011
Missed the last 30 years of oil being piped from the oil sands, huh?
09:55 PM on 11/14/2011
Kabuki.

Political leaders pretending they call the shots where oil is concerned.

It is to laugh.
09:39 PM on 11/14/2011
The US needs the oil but don't want it. So we should sell it to China.
yer
Stop the Alberta Taliban
10:19 PM on 11/14/2011
why not sell it in Canada and end our imports? I don't get this need to insist that a Communist government is more important than the very country its from.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
maurage
10:53 PM on 11/14/2011
There is so much of it, we would not what to do with the stuff.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CanadaStan
Cogito ergo spud, I think, therefore I yam
01:01 AM on 11/15/2011
Canada is a net exporter of oil.
We could use more of our own oil though, and quit importing oil for eastern Canada.
09:31 PM on 11/14/2011
xxx
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Good to know
08:58 PM on 11/14/2011
Bravo to the good people of Nebraska for saving their drinking water!!! One step forward...
09:21 PM on 11/14/2011
There are already 100s of pipelines that cross the Ogallala aquifer.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lulex
Made in Canada
09:45 PM on 11/14/2011
They don't transfer Diluted Bituman laced with quartz sand. There is no long term data to say what the lifespan of the pipe transferring this stuff can be. It scrapes the pipe.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Good to know
10:41 PM on 11/14/2011
oh. can't keep up - just too many horrible things happening in the world. I've been distracted, fighting for the arts, for too many years. what's your counsel? just give up, or is there still hope?
07:55 AM on 11/15/2011
Think again - they're depleting it so fast it will be dry in 20 years

http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Oc-Po/Ogallala-Aquifer.html#ixzz1ZeMtXr2c
photo
Murman
I read the news today, oh boy.
08:06 PM on 11/14/2011
So. I wonder where the old pipeline will go now.
Perhaps Canada will strike a deal with China because the US stalled?
Obama was too busy laughing at everything Harper said (or so the pics showed).
Would then the US come and 'liberate' the Canadian citizens?
Hmmmmm. There's a lot of rednecks up here, eh.
Only difference is that these rednecks can survive in Winter.
"We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France" (or Quebec),
"we shall fight on the seas and oceans," (or Lake Superior),
"we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be,
we shall fight on the beaches,
we shall fight on the landing grounds,
we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
we shall fight in the hills;" W. Churchill.
This is getting good.
08:56 PM on 11/14/2011
Thanks.
Now I have a Supertramp earworm going.
08:02 PM on 11/14/2011
TransCanada can put all their oil all where they think !
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:29 PM on 11/14/2011
Have you got an English translation for that, mon frere?
schrodster
veni vidi I'm outta here
08:59 PM on 11/14/2011
Yahoo return of the train
05:44 PM on 11/15/2011
Yes
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wendy Stewart
07:55 PM on 11/14/2011
They want our oil but they don't want it moved through the USA. Are you Americans kidding me. Then get your oil somewhere else.
08:02 PM on 11/14/2011
They can save money and give a better life for Canadians.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:28 PM on 11/14/2011
They want our "clean" oil . . . they don't like the "dirty" oil.

And what's dirty about our dirty oil? Ummmm . . . it has dirt in it?
09:03 PM on 11/14/2011
>>>>it has dirt in it?
Yes.
Lots and lots of dirt.
Plus :
They burn $30 bucks of fuel per barrel of oil produced.
They have massive holding ponds.
And the worst part ?
There is massive amounts of the stuff just waiting for shortsighted people to exploit for personal gain. Like, massive massive eh ?