This may be a “build a pipeline and make Canada pay for it” moment.
The additional CO2 emissions coming from the oilsands is extremely low.
Debates over oil pipelines seem to be never-ending. The quintessential example being that of the Keystone XL pipeline, which has languished in regulatory limbo for more than 2,500 days.
Oil and gas pipelines are a critical piece of Canada’s energy infrastructure. In 2013, this mode of transportation moved more than 2.4 billion barrels of oil and gas. But accidents do happen as seen with the recent oil spill in Alberta where a Nexen oilsands pipeline recently ruptured.
It’s been a difficult couple of weeks for Kinder Morgan’s proposed expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline. The Santa Barbara oil spill has irritated already-sensitive public concern about oil pipelines.
On May 1, 2015, an interesting thing happened. The United States and Canada came to agreement about transporting oil and other flammable liquids.
Four recent oil-train derailments—two in the United States and two in Canada accompanied by yet another drive-by rhetorical smear of the Keystone XL pipeline by U.S. President Barack Obama—have re-invigorated the debate over how Canadians and Americans transport oil.
The Simushir, a Russian-flagged cargo vessel is the newest cause celebre of anti-tanker activists out in British Columbia.
In the wake of the Lac-Mégantic oil-by-rail disaster, when a train carrying crude oil from North Dakota’s Bakken field exploded in Quebec, some people began to characterize Bakken crude oil as “uniquely flammable,” with an implication that new rail car standards might be required to move the material.
The Obama administration has been punting a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline for five years now, and theres no sign the presidents kicking leg is getting tired.