iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Keystone XL Pipeline: TransCanada Submits New Route

First Posted: 04/18/2012 6:07 pm Updated: 04/19/2012 8:15 am

WASHINGTON (AP) — The company planning the disputed Keystone XL oil pipeline has proposed a new route through Nebraska that avoids the state's environmentally sensitive Sandhills region.

Calgary-based TransCanada submitted a series of proposed routes — including a preferred alternative — late Wednesday to Nebraska environmental officials.

The state has become a focus of concern for the 1,700-mile pipeline, which would carry oil from Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast. President Barack Obama blocked the pipeline earlier this year, citing uncertainty over the Nebraska route, which would travel above an aquifer that provides water to eight states.

Details of the preferred route were not immediately available. A spokesman for the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality said officials hope to post the full proposal on the Internet as soon as Thursday.

A spokeswoman for the State Department said U.S. officials had not received notification of a new route. State Department approval is needed because the $7 billion pipeline would cross a U.S. border.

In blocking the pipeline in January, Obama said there was not enough time for a fair review before a looming deadline forced on him by congressional Republicans. The action did not kill the project but put off a tough choice on the pipeline project, which has become a flashpoint in a bitter partisan fight over jobs and the environment.

Pipeline supporters — including GOP lawmakers and many business and labor leaders— call the pipeline an important job creator. Opponents — including Democrats and environmental groups — say it would transport "dirty oil" from tar sands in Alberta, Canada, that requires huge amounts of energy to extract. They also worry about a possible spill.

Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman signed a bill earlier this week that allows the state to proceed with its review of the proposed pipeline through his state, regardless of what happens at the federal level.

Obama said last month he will direct federal agencies to fast-track a segment of the pipeline from Oklahoma to Texas. The 485-mile line from Cushing, Okla., to refineries on Texas' Gulf coast would remove a critical bottleneck in the country's oil transportation system, as rising oil production has outgrown pipelines' capacity to deliver oil to refineries.

___

Follow Matthew Daly's energy coverage on Twitter: http://twitter.com/MatthewDalyWDC

Earlier on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

WASHINGTON (AP) — The company planning the disputed Keystone XL oil pipeline has proposed a new route through Nebraska that avoids the state's environmentally sensitive Sandhills region. ...
WASHINGTON (AP) — The company planning the disputed Keystone XL oil pipeline has proposed a new route through Nebraska that avoids the state's environmentally sensitive Sandhills region. ...
Filed by Joanna Zelman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 757
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (8 total)
05:23 PM on 04/22/2012
It's perfectly safe (not) until the next spill. What part of they are routing it through America to ship it overseas do people not understand. They are doing it for profits not to reduce prices in America. Why don't they build a pipeline across Canada to the Atlantic instead and ship it from there? Oh, that's right, It might leak and cause environmental damage to Canada's echo-system.
photo
Moxo
Our enemies are in the GOP.
04:08 PM on 04/20/2012
a new route through Nebraska that avoids the state's environmentally sensitive Sandhills region.
----------------
Are they crazy? The GOP WANTS the pipe to break and spill and thus to poison the aquifer! Think of all the water companies who have donated to the GOP!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
08:47 AM on 04/20/2012
Speaking of the Ogallala Aquifer, how about the millions of gallons of water pumped out of the Ogallala Aquifer each year to pump pulverized coal from New Mexico (in green-colored above ground pipelines) to Arizona and Nevada to be burned to produce clean green electricity for Southern California? This has been going on for 50 years.
Speaking of the material they want to pump through the Keystone Pipeline, there are hundreds of thousands of miles of roads made of this same stuff. WE pour millions of gallons of oil, diesel, gasoline and antifreeze on these roads every year. This sludge is safely washed into the environment. Think of how slick our roads are in a light rain. That sludge floats on top of our roads. If we didn't have rain (or water trucks and sweepers) our roads would be too slick to drive on.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Seven Teenatheart
Tolerance, peace, and sanity. Be your own person.
10:06 AM on 04/20/2012
You can't call it "the same stuff" until you compare chemical composition.
The tar sands are especially toxic, and are diluted with additional carcinogens before being piped.

http://www.desmogblog.com/top-10-facts-canada-alberta-oil-sands-information
"Top 10 Facts About the Alberta Oil Sands"
1. Oil sands mining is licensed to use twice the amount of fresh water that the entire city of Calgary uses in a year. The water requirements for oil sands projects range from 2.5 to 4.0 barrels of water for each barrel of oil produced.

2. At least 90% of the fresh water used in the oil sands ends up in tailing lakes so toxic that propane cannons and floating scarecrows are used to keep ducks from landing in them.

3. A 2003 report concluded that "an accident related to the failure of one of the oil sands tailings ponds could have catastrophic impact in the aquatic ecosystem of the Mackenzie River Basin due to the size of these lakes and their proximity to the Athabasca River."

4. In April, 2008 a flock of migrating ducks landed on a tar sands toxic lake and died.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Seven Teenatheart
Tolerance, peace, and sanity. Be your own person.
10:06 AM on 04/20/2012
Previous post continued:
5. Processing the oil sands uses enough natural gas in a day to heat 3 million homes in Canada. Natural gas requirements for the oil sands industry are projected to increase substantially during the projected period from 17 million cubic metres (0.6 billion cubic feet) per day in 2003 to a range of 40 to 45 million cubic metres (1.4 to 1.6 billion cubic) feet per day in 2015.

6. The toxic tailing lakes are considered one of the largest human-made structures in the world. The toxic lakes in Northern Alberta span 50 square kilometers and can be seen from space.

7. Producing a barrel of oil from the oil sands produces three times more greenhouse gas emissions than a barrel of conventional oil. In 2004, oil sands production surpassed 160 000 cubic metres (one million barrels) per day; by 2015, oil sands production is expected to more than double to about 340 000 cubic metres (2.2 million barrels) per day.

8. The oil sands operations are the fastest growing source of heat-trapping greenhouse gas in Canada. By 2020 the oil sands will release twice the amount produced currently by all the cars and trucks in Canada.

9. The Alberta Oil Sands Operation are the largest single point source of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada.

10. By 2015, the Alberta Oil Sands are expected to emit more greenhouse gases than the nation of Denmark (pop. 5.4 million).
photo
view from the veranda
jus' trying to make sense of it all...
04:02 AM on 04/20/2012
the FACT remains that the pipeline WILL leak.  It Will POLLUTE ALL THE LANDS ITS CROSSES. Your land will be useless and deemed polluted. There are no fail safes.  There is no oversight.  There are no proper and cost effective safety measures to monitor a pipeline that crosses the entire country. Tar Sand is dirty business .

photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
08:56 AM on 04/20/2012
New Mexico use to strip mine their tar sands, pour it on the ground, add some gravel, run it over with steamrollers and called them State Highways. Why not put these pipelines next to major Freeways and the leakage would automatically seal the potholes?
In the 70s, NM researched putting the asphaltenes from tar sands into fermentation vats to produce pumpable oil. Darn greedy microbes ate all of the asphaltenes. It was a good idea anyway. But think if the microbes had escaped these fermentation vats and infected our national highway system.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Seven Teenatheart
Tolerance, peace, and sanity. Be your own person.
10:15 AM on 04/20/2012
That's gotta be humor - as if you'd have millions of gallons of toxic pollutants seeking out potholes (areas that generally require a small patch of targetted material).

Hilarious!
You should write for SNL.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Vegasyankee
Making Energy for a Strong America!
08:39 PM on 04/19/2012
Where does the White House really stand?

"President Barack Obama "welcomes" the news that the Canadian pipeline company is moving ahead with its plans.  As the President made clear in January, we support the company's interest in proceeding with this project, which will help address the bottleneck of oil in Cushing that has resulted in large part from increased domestic oil production, currently at an eight year high. Moving oil from the Midwest to the world-class, state-of-the-art refineries on the Gulf Coast will modernize our infrastructure, create jobs, and encourage American energy production."

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney

Keystone XL is and has been a done deal quite some time ago.
07:46 PM on 04/19/2012
I would think they could forestall a state department review and beat this game by first running a pipeline from Northeastern Montana down to Texas. Don't worry about the ten or so feet crossing the border until the very last. Then apply for approval of that tiny section that crosses the border. Presto. Who could fight a ten foot pipeline? Until the border ten feet is approved, they would truck Canadian oil across the border and drain into the U.S. segment.
RSGmusic
Instrumental music is great
07:58 PM on 04/19/2012
Yea, but the oil isnot going to stay in the US

Repub we need the oil for the good of the nation
Dems ok we will apporv the bill but add we quaranty it stays in the US.
Repubs Vote it down by a whide margin???? WHY ?
photo
intolleft
ObamaTAX...getting you shovel ready
09:03 AM on 04/20/2012
So what? Any increase in world supply puts downward pressure on oil prices since oil is priced on the world market.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
09:06 AM on 04/20/2012
It is not oil. It is asphaltenes. There are thousands of oil pipelines running all over the US. If it was oil, they would just use these oil pipelines instead of building an expensive bulked up pipeline. They have been pumping coal for 50 years. If there is a spill, coal is a solid and it is cleaned up. Tar is a semisolid. It can be cleaned up the same way. When I was a kid, we made tar balls from the surface of our playground (like making snowmen), constructed soldiers and gave them twig rifles.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
moonglowsun
Humanitarian
06:49 PM on 04/19/2012
My fears have yet to be allayed with this news. We have suffered enough environmental destruction from Oil spills. We are finding new devastating data in the headlines today from BP's disaster. We have yet to see it will present in humans, but it will it always does. Pollutants are ruining our water and soil...that's our life line. People are succumbing to more cancers and birth defects. At some point we need to find a better way or pay dearly in human, animal and habitat cost. I'm not ready to promise this bleak future to my family, should anyone else just for a quick buck in the pockets of Koch Bros, Haliburton and ilk? They don't care about you and me. Greed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
09:15 AM on 04/20/2012
Anyone that still owns a gasoline-powered vehicle after 40 years of warning that they are bad for the environment doesn't care. If we didn't waste 25-40% of the petroleum products we purchase and became energy efficient, there would be no need to produce our oil in the GOM. But then We The People would lose billions of dollars a year. In 2008, We made $27 biillion selling our oil in the GOM. In 2009, We only made $9 billion. In 2010, We contracted with BP to produce our oil. Oops. That was a bad idea. Didn't we look at BP's past before we hired them? Oil spills; refinery fires. They were already a three time loser when we enabled them to continue that habit. And they spilled that oil we planned on polluting our local environment with.
06:09 PM on 04/19/2012
Why not just pipeline it acrsos Canada to either Bristish Columbia or the great lakes. The temporary jobs to build it won't help the economy as much as 1 spill. Maybe the Canadian government has already said no to this.
kayatz3
No matter where you go, there you are..
03:21 AM on 04/20/2012
Oh yes, they have indeed put a big NO on this plan. Trans Canada admitted they won't be allowed to destroy the eco systems, wildlife and waters on their country. They also admitted there would be 1600 temporary jobs. And it is absolutely for asian consumption. So why even think about killing off what few precious resources we still have, I don't care what the arguments are, the cost of our lives is not worth it!
cosmicdart
paragon of paradigms
05:59 AM on 04/20/2012
That's cuz AGW will make Canada the new moderate climate farm belt of the Western Hemisphere. The last thing that we want to do is pollute our agricultural future to the North after the West has been wasted and covered with dry bleached bones.
05:43 PM on 04/19/2012
Earlier today, I posted a comment urging people to say NO to the pipeline crossing their property, I own property that a pipeline runs through, and it has been trampled and dug up multiple times. Of course, I got some replies that basically said I shouldn't have been dumb enough to buy a farm with a pipeline running through it. THANKS to those who have made my point for me. I didn't know what I was getting in to. You should. So, unless you want to never ever sell your land (or you know for sure that your children or grandchildren will ever want to sell it) don't allow access in the first place. The danger, loss of property value and the disruption and destruction just aren't worth it.
kayatz3
No matter where you go, there you are..
03:26 AM on 04/20/2012
Oh they won't have a chance to sell, the good ole' eminate domain process is taking away land as we speak. See the folks in texas if you don't believe it. Others states are already geared up for it....do you think losing all you have worked for or your family legacy is worth this pipeline? Because there can't be enough money involved to lose our clean water. Think - do you want to pay $5.00 a gallon of gas, OR $25.00 a gallon of WATER?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
09:33 AM on 04/20/2012
They shouldn't have trampled or dug up those pipelines. Don't maintain them. It is cheaper. Wait until they leak and then fix them.
That's the way we do ourselves. Forget about a healthy lifestyle and washing our hands after we poop. We have healthcare insurance to save our lives. Forget about car maintenance. We have auto insurance.
charles77
Just the Facts Please
04:30 PM on 04/19/2012
Obama knows the vast majority want Keystone built, so look for final approval about two weeks before the election.
06:59 PM on 04/19/2012
a very good point.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
bbrecht
"pray for the dead, fight like hell for the liv
10:34 PM on 04/19/2012
Vast majority? Not hardly.
06:04 PM on 04/22/2012
That is the vast majority of the minority in power want it built. Forget about the majority of people in the United States. Apparently we don't count.
photo
Gestas
Mountain Man
04:04 PM on 04/19/2012
Face it...The Koch Bros are going to get this Pipeline, one way or the other...and don't forget you would be Super Rich if you had what these guys spill in a day.
photo
donnellyddo
Just another pain in ur
04:27 PM on 04/19/2012
Gee I hope we all do get this.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rightatya
NEVER give a liberal an even break
05:28 PM on 04/19/2012
So what? Does that ruin you life, how much they have? Hundreds of thousands of Americans are employed by their various business holdings. You have many things you use everyday that came from some business associated with them.
Why is it you dems/libs hate capitalism and wealth? Do you really prefer big bro holds your hand throughout life, make your critical decisions for you, and decide for you, your place in society? Take away society's desire to succed, it leaves a society that has no desire to accell.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Seven Teenatheart
Tolerance, peace, and sanity. Be your own person.
06:47 PM on 04/19/2012
Keystone XL would actually COST us jobs.

It's been studied, the facts are here:
http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_012312_FIN.pdf

That isn't success.

Now, please stop trying to rudely insult others and think before you post.
kayatz3
No matter where you go, there you are..
03:28 AM on 04/20/2012
Why is it you conservatives put capitalism and wealth ahead of HEALTH???? Do you think you can store enough water to get you through the drought you are bringing?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MyNinja
N.W.A. Ninjas With Aptitude
03:32 PM on 04/19/2012
Is it possible to make an engine that runs on bullsh!t? Our governmet has stockpiles of it just laying around...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jsgaetano
"Conservative" is not a political party, genius.
03:20 PM on 04/19/2012
Don't worry, Republifundies: China will eventually get all that Canadian oil. Nothing for you to worry about!
photo
Gestas
Mountain Man
04:06 PM on 04/19/2012
China gets the Oil and the Koch Bros get the money...and you and I get to clean up what they spill.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jsgaetano
"Conservative" is not a political party, genius.
05:05 PM on 04/19/2012
Exactly. They get the money, and we get the "tinkle down".

Even better is how the Conservative Culture of Corruption has been buying up all the water they can get their hands on... and the Keystone pipeline runs right over major water sources which they couldn't buy.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rightatya
NEVER give a liberal an even break
05:29 PM on 04/19/2012
Well, at least you'll have a JOB!
photo
donnellyddo
Just another pain in ur
04:27 PM on 04/19/2012
And how is that good?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jsgaetano
"Conservative" is not a political party, genius.
05:04 PM on 04/19/2012
It's not. But nothing conservatives ever want or do is good. Not for America, anyway.
03:06 PM on 04/19/2012
obama will find out another reason to not approve it. He doesn't want to help America in any way.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jsgaetano
"Conservative" is not a political party, genius.
03:22 PM on 04/19/2012
How will America be helped in any way from this? Temporary jobs to build a pipeline for a Canadian company, helping us import their pollution into Texas (and mostly spew it into Mexico), so they can then ship the oil to China. Don't worry your pretty little heads, Republifundies: China's oil supply will be safe even if you guys don't get to pollute America.
06:48 PM on 04/19/2012
Temporary jobs are better than none at all which obama is offering.
07:12 PM on 04/19/2012
800,000 barrels a day of new oil to fuel our economy will definate lower the price of gas. That 4% increase in daily supply alone creates over a hundred thousand jobs, as the economy can afford to treat itself to manufacturing goods, instead of shipping our ca$h overseas.
03:39 PM on 04/19/2012
I'm a reg. Rep. pbgardenpet and my concern is how a foreign Co. is taking Americans land by eminent domain, let alone yes the enviromental possibilities.
06:41 PM on 04/19/2012
They can afford too because they don't pay the high corp. taxes like American companies.
03:06 PM on 04/19/2012
Canada has plans to build the pipeline to their West British Columbia coast, but they don't really want to do that because of the environmental impacts. They think is better if the impacts occur in the U.S.
charles77
Just the Facts Please
04:22 PM on 04/19/2012
They will build both. Keystone for US oil consumption, while the West British Columbia coast route is for exports to china.
04:48 PM on 04/19/2012
If keystone oil is for US consumption then please explain why the pipeline ends at the docks in Texas and not the refineries ?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Seven Teenatheart
Tolerance, peace, and sanity. Be your own person.
06:48 PM on 04/19/2012
If that were the case, then they wouldn't be running it to a port....