Steven Chu Talks Keystone XL Pipeline, Suggest U.S. Support

WASHINGTON — Canada's status as a close U.S. ally should boost a plan to pipe oil from western Canada to the Gulf of Mexico, U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said in comments that signaled support for the massive $7 billion pipeline.

"It's certainly true that having Canada as a supplier for our oil is much more comforting than to have other countries supply our oil," Chu said in a TV interview this week that will be aired later this month.

Technology used to extract oil from tar sands such as those in Alberta, Canada are improving dramatically, Chu said, making such projects less risky to the environment.

The proposed Keystone XL pipeline "is not perfect, but it's a trade-off," Chu said. U.S. officials will have to weigh the benefit of a reliable supply of oil from a friendly country against environmental concerns raised by a possible spill, he said.

Chu's comments are the latest sign that the Obama administration appears likely to back the 1,700-mile pipeline, which would carry crude oil extracted from tar sands in Alberta, Canada, and bring it to refineries in Texas.

The pipeline would travel through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma.

The State Department said in a report last week that the project is unlikely to cause significant environmental problems during construction or operation.

Calgary-based TransCanada, which would operate the pipeline, says it would be built to strict environmental standards, including 57 conditions above those required by law.

The company and project supporters on both sides of the border say it would create tens of thousands of jobs and significantly reduce U.S. dependence on Middle Eastern oil.

Despite those reassurances, the project has become a flashpoint for environmental groups, who say the pipeline would bring "dirty oil" that requires huge amounts of energy to extract and could cause an ecological disaster in case of a spill. Opponents have urged President Barack Obama to block the project as a sign he is serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.

Environmental activists, including actress Daryl Hannah and NASA scientist James Hansen, have been arrested in ongoing protests outside the White House the past two weeks.

Chu's interview with the "energyNOW!" TV show is set to air in mid-September on Bloomberg Television.

Comments

[Genders]

04:57 PM on 09/04/2011

The Chinese bought the soil sands, Doesn't that change the argument?

Spend the money on waste bio char bio oils. Clean, safe, carbon negative, forever, land negative. cheaper.

[floridacracker4perry]

05:17 PM on 10/03/2011

welcome to mars genders. how do you get to work?

[CouponSal]

10:02 PM on 09/03/2011

Secretary Chu, please leave the diplomacy to the diplomats. Secretary Clinton, please leave the environmental studies to the environmentalists. Secretary Jackson, do not be intimidated by the president’s terrible ozone decision. You spoke up for the citizens of New Jersey, especially in environmental justice communities, and have been doing well/good in the District; we taxpayers appreciate it, and will stand with you as you continue to speak up for our neighbors who will be endangered perhaps even condemned) by this pipeline.
When did we start musical-chair department-secretary commenting?
Would everyone please give the president and the taxpayers the benefit of their knowledge in the area of expertise for which they were appointed, and keep quite about personal opinions in other areas?
Thank you.

[batguano]

06:23 PM on 09/03/2011

And they cannot build a new refinery in canada exactly why? There seems some alternative and devious MO when a 1700 mile pipeline frought with numerous environmental dangers going to Texas refineries with storm and flooding dangers is preferable (to industry and government shills) to a new on-site Canadian refinery.

[Whistlejackett]

08:42 PM on 09/03/2011

The reason you are looking for is that the Koch brothers are going to do the refining. Koch brothers, you know, those greedy Americans. That's why.

[CouponSal]

09:42 PM on 09/03/2011

And then they will sell the oil to the highest bidder, regardless of nationality. This is not a question of providing energy in North America, it is a question of greed and exploitation just “because it’s there” (even if it is under pristine forest and needs to be boiled to extract the oil).

[JHKH]

05:41 PM on 09/03/2011

Just because Canada is our "friend," doesn't make pumping tar sands across the country through a pipeline that will burst sometime in the future (not an "if", just a "when"). The environmental cost of extracting this petroleum, compounded with the risks of transporting, multiplied by actually burning the fossil fuel, makes this plan foolhardy at every step. We need to fund alternatives, not score the next figurative dose of heroin to feed our addiction.

[CouponSal]

09:42 PM on 09/03/2011

Bravo!

[rsxsims]

02:24 PM on 09/03/2011

If the environmentalist are so concerned about America, how about spending less time complaining/whining about energy and come up with ways to save/create American jobs to replace the jobs that the environmentalists have helped destroy. Keystone pipeline would create thousand of jobs. Oh, i know, they want windmills, and future technology to power our world, but what do we do about now??, just turn of the lights, park the cars and live in caves?? They are quick to condemn energy companies, but they also use that same power(from those evil energy companies) to light their very own homes.

[CouponSal]

09:44 PM on 09/03/2011

Why not put those who would build the pipeline to work building windmills? Their products would not cause massive oil spills when they break, they would simply fall down and need to be repaired/replaced. Way fewer environmental problems, lots of good jobs.

[RONALD MCKENZIE]

11:41 AM on 09/03/2011

When coroprate personhood is ended enviornmenalist might have a political chance , till then coporations rule in there distructive ways.

[ILoveFiction]

09:31 AM on 09/03/2011

Good thing you have experience stopping oil leaks.

You're gonna need it.

[artleads]

12:54 AM on 09/03/2011

The situation is bleak. Talk about green energy and green jobs sound hollow in the context of permitting the XL pipeline (which I happen to believe will drive Earth over essential tipping points for warming). Obama needs to trust progressiv­es to rally as never before to protect his prospects from unpreceden­ted attack if he vetoes the project. OK, so he doesn't need our support? Fine then. Since his acquiescen­ce on XL will only mean that we go over the precipice more slowly than a Perry would take us, we will be justified in withdrawin­g our support for him in 2012. XL, for me, is where the line is drawn.”

[tector]

11:57 AM on 09/02/2011

have chu and the other decision makers come to marshall michigan and see what a tar sands oil spill looks like and how it affects the communities and people and animals in the the path of the spill.

a year ago last july an underground pipeline burst and leaked over 800,000 gallons of oil into talmadge creek and the kalamazoo river and ruined the lives and property of hundreds of folks not only in marshall but in other downstream cities and towns.

to this day the clean up goes on and according to today's paper the clean up is still incomplete and no date certain when the clean up will be completed. the pipeline owned by another canadian oil company, enbridge,and the clean up was supposed to be done by aug. 31. who knows when it will be finished?

if you have never experienced an oil spill and it's consequences count yourself lucky.

[FreeHat]

07:24 PM on 09/02/2011

How ironic. You somehow feel you are Norwegian according to your image there. Start with Norway first. You prolly have money in the bank because of oil.

[tector]

05:38 AM on 09/03/2011

first congrats to the fact that you recognize the norwegian flag unlike others that drop dopey comments here.

not that i have to explain myself but i am not norwegian but lived there years before oil was discovered and have still strong ties to the country and added that flag as a tribute to the people who were murdered in july as well as to the courage of the living for the way they are coping.

my comments were due to the fact that i live near the area of the oil spill and know folks who lived close to the river and have suffered as i suspect we all will over time. also if you knew anything about the norwegian oil situation, you would know that the way they handle oil companies is poles apart from the way corporate america and canada get their way with our government.

finally whatever money i may have in the bank was not derived from norwegian oil. your sense of irony sucks and completely wrong.

[snowmanjny]

11:36 AM on 09/02/2011

If you told me it was being done in the Northern States, creating new jobs, new business then I would consider supporting it. The moment you mention crossing the ENTIRE country to get to TEXAS. A state that wants to leave the union, remember. That is when I say NO WAY. This is asking for disaster and opening the door to 1,000 problems. This is a bad idea. The White House should put a stop to this.

[Paul Is Right]

10:37 AM on 09/02/2011

Solyndra, the California solar-panel manufacturer once touted by President Obama as a beneficiary of his administration's economic policies -- as well as a half-billion-dollar federal loan -- is laying off 1,100 workers and filing for bankruptcy.

Hard times have hit the nation's solar industry. Solyndra is the third solar company to seek bankruptcy protection this month. Officials said Wednesday that the global economy as well as unfavorable conditions in the solar industry combined to force the company to suspend its manufacturing operations.

The price for solar panels has tanked in part because of heavy competition from Chinese companies, dropping by about 42 percent this year.

When Obama, who is seeking to address Congress to unveil a new jobs plan, toured the company's facilities, he said the investment was important because more clean energy would benefit the environment, the economy and national security.

"The future is here," Obama said during his visit. "We're poised to transform the ways we power our homes and our cars and our businesses. ... And we are poised to generate countless new jobs, good-paying, middle-class jobs, right here in the United States of America."

Green jobs are a great idea but they are not a replacement (yet) for our petrochemical industries.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/01/solar-company-that-obama-once-touted-shuts-down/

[Aleks Hunter]

09:50 AM on 09/02/2011

A pileline from the tar sands in Canada to the gulf would be a pipeline form one place with oil to another place with oil. This seems to be unprecedented. Isn't the purpose of an oil pipeline to transport oil from where it is plentiful to where it is needed?

[Paul Is Right]

10:33 AM on 09/02/2011

It is being brought here to be refined.

[Aleks Hunter]

11:10 AM on 09/02/2011

Inadequate refinery capacity is one of the contributors to the energy "crisis" Why not build a new refinery where they're mining the tar sands, and the environment is already devastated, cut out much of the transportation costs over the years?t

[idyl]

11:16 AM on 09/02/2011

US demand for oil and gas has been decreasing through recession, and domestic production has increased with new technological advances and deepwater drilling. This oil from Keystone has already been promised for export, the refiners you talk about are in a Foreign Trade Zone in Port Arthur (exempt from customs and duties). If this pipeline is built, we will be subsidizing oil for export, and it will do nothing to decrease our dependence on foreign oil or lower the price of oil to US consumers.

http://priceofoil.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/OCIKeystoneXLExport-Fin.pdf

[jerrypl]

09:45 AM on 09/02/2011

Stephen Chu is really saying how much he and the administration are being squeezed by the Koch Brothers, who will be the ones to develop the processing plants once this pipeline is built and finds its end in a Koch Brothers refinery plant.

Now who runs this country? The Koch Brothers.

[Pushing70]

06:32 AM on 09/02/2011

Move your home adjacent to pipeline good Dr Chu if it is such a great idea.

[snowballinhell]

02:49 AM on 09/02/2011

So the administration is getting all its ducks in a row: Secretary of State, of Energy. Who is next? Anyone venture a guess? Besides the President himself, of course.