• 4 minutes Is The Three Gorges Dam on the Brink of Collapse?
  • 8 minutes The Coal Industry May Never Recover From The Pandemic
  • 11 minutes China Raids Bank and Investor Accounts
  • 2 hours Sources confirm Trump to sign two new Executive orders.
  • 8 hours Why Wind is pitiful for most regions on earth
  • 3 hours During March, April, May the states with the highest infections/deaths were NY, NJ, Ma. . . . . Today (June) the three have the best numbers. How ? Herd immunity ?
  • 6 hours In a Nutshell...
  • 4 hours A Real Reality Check on "Green Hydrogen"
  • 7 hours Why Oil could hit $100
  • 3 days Joe Biden to black radio host, " If you don't vote for me you ain't black". That's our Democratic Party nominee ?
  • 4 days Happy 4th of July!
  • 4 days Putin Forever: Russians Given Money As Vote That Could Extend Putin's Rule Draws To A Close
  • 4 days Tesla Model 3 police cars pay for themselves faster than expected, says police chief
  • 3 days Putin Paid Militants to Kill US Troops
  • 1 day Coronavirus hype biggest political hoax in history
  • 4 days Apology Accepted!

State Dept Greenlights New Keystone XL Route

An environmental assessment of the Keystone Xl pipeline project by the State Department has concluded it will be safe for Nebraska’s water, land, and wildlife, which could probably be filed under “Obstacles cleared” were it not for a lawsuit against TransCanada in Nebraska that is still pending before the state’s Supreme Court.

Besides the lawsuit brought against the company by environmentalists, indigenous groups, and several landowners, the opponents of the pipeline have been successful in preventing TransCanada from launching work on Keystone XL in Nebraska, so it remains unclear what the impact of the State Department assessment will be with regards to the project’s start.

Keystone XL is one of the most controversial pipeline projects in the United States in recent history. After President Obama vetoed the project on the grounds that it makes no economic sense, one of Donald Trump’s first decisions after taking office was to revive the project that will carry heavy crude from the Albertan oil sands through Montana and South Dakota to Nebraska.

The Nebraskan authorities approved the project last year, but with a different route, pressured by landowners who were unhappy with the original one. Although the landowners at the time considered the changed route a victory, TransCanada said it would not have any significant effect on costs, which are estimated at around US$6.3 billion.

TransCanada said it will provide comments on the State Department report after it reviews the material. The company has yet to make the final investment decision on Keystone XL after it spent four months in open season to see if there is sufficient interest from potential buyers of the crude that the pipeline will transport. At the same time, TransCanada is being pressured by Albertan oil producers to make up its mind about the project, which oil sands operators desperately need amid a worsening pipeline capacity shortage at home.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:



Join the discussion | Back to homepage



Leave a comment
  • Tom on July 31 2018 said:
    I’m all for the Keystone XL Pipeline, except with one condition, that Nebraska really needs to impose on this new pipeline.

    Trans Canada should only be allowed to use the line through Nebraska for 8 ½ months each year. The line needs to be out of service each summer from June 1 through September 15, to match the same calendar that of E-15 is required to follow by our EPA.

    It’s simple, No Waiver Permit for Year-Round E-15 and higher ethanol blends, than no Year-Round Operating Permit for Trans Canada’s Keystone XL Pipeline through Nebraska.

    How ridiculous right?

    Not really.

    What’s it going to take to get the EPA to stop blocking ethanol in the fuel market, to satisfy the oil industry?

Leave a comment

Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News