Faced with dimming
prospects for approval, the Canadian company behind the proposed Keystone XL
pipeline chose to plead with the U.S. government for a delay on its fate,
signaling that prolonged uncertainty is preferable to rejection of the $8
billion project.
Monday's
appeal by Calgary-based TransCanada Corp has been widely interpreted as an
attempt to avert an impending "no" from President Barack Obama to the
nearly 1,200-mile (2,000-km) cross-border pipeline. Keystone XL would carry
heavy crude oil from Alberta to Nebraska and on to Gulf Coast refineries, and
has become the symbolic heart of a struggle between environmentalists opposed
to oil sands development and defenders of fossil fuels.
The
U.S. State Department said it had received a letter from TransCanada asking for
the delay but a spokesperson said the review would continue for now.
TransCanada
spokesman Mark Cooper said the company would not speculate on what the decision
may be or when it may come.
But
the Obama administration has become more vocal and active on climate change
issues as it closes in on its final year in office, and the president has
repeatedly expressed doubts about the merits of the pipeline.
TransCanada's
request for a delay came amid a darkening political outlook for the project on
both sides of the border.
In
Nebraska, the company remains embroiled in time-consuming disputes with
landowners over the proposed pipeline route.
And
in Canada, it lost a powerful advocate in October when Conservative Prime
Minister Stephen Harper, who had openly allied with Republican leaders in his
aggressive lobbying for Keystone, was defeated by Liberal leader Justin
Trudeau.
Although
Trudeau has offered cautious backing for Keystone, he has also warned that both
the pipeline and wider oil sands development must demonstrate improved
environmental sensitivity.
Nor
does Trudeau face any political damage from U.S. rejection of a pipeline so
closely identified with Harper. The incoming prime minister has already made
clear he will not follow his predecessor in allowing the politics of Keystone
to disproportionately define relations between the two countries.
In
Washington, U.S. lobbyists close to the case said TransCanada was finally
facing political reality, recognizing that a delay would better protect
shareholder value than allowing Obama to reject the project.
The
request for a delay came on the eve of TransCanada issuing an earnings report,
and shortly after the White House said it still expected Obama to make a
decision on whether to grant the permit before he leaves office in January
2017.
OIL
SANDS EXTRACTION
Should
Obama agree to suspend the review, Keystone's fate would almost certainly fall
to the next president. Republicans have been universally supportive of building
Keystone, though Donald Trump did qualify that in October, saying he would seek
a "better deal" from TransCanada.
Democratic
Party front-runner Hillary Clinton is opposed to the pipeline.
On
one level, the request to suspend the review offers Obama an escape from having
to make a final call on a decision he has avoided for years. TransCanada began
the licensing process in 2008 but the decision was continually pushed back by
various court cases, technical delays and the president's apparent reluctance
to choose.
Yet
TransCanada's gambit may not have completely removed the pressure on the
president. Environmental groups responded to TransCanada's announcement with a
blizzard of demands on Obama to ignore TransCanada's move and kill the pipeline
anyway.
"TransCanada
acknowledged the writing on the wall by requesting to suspend the review of its
permit application," said a statement issued by Tom Steyer, the
billionaire green activist who heads NextGen Climate. "Today, tomorrow or
next year, the answer will be the same: Keystone XL is a bad deal for America,
our climate, and our economy."
It's
uncertain what effect killing Keystone XL would have on oil sands extraction.
Last week, the Washington, D.C.-based environmental advocacy group Oil Change
International released a report claiming that oil sands development would peak
in 2017 without additional pipeline capacity.
And
when Shell announced it would not proceed with the 80,000 barrels a day Carmon
Creek project in the oil sands, the company cited among other things:
"current uncertainties, including the lack of infrastructure to move
Canadian crude oil to global commodity markets.”
But
much of the attention in Canada has switched to the proposed Energy East
pipeline that would move Alberta crude across Canada to Atlantic refineries.
And while there is opposition to that pipeline as well, its politics remain
contained within Canada's borders.
(Reporting
by Bruce Wallace in Los Angeles; Additional reporting by; Nia Williams in
Calgary and Euan Rocha in Toronto; Editing by
Lisa Shumaker and Ed Davies)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/03/us-transcanada-keystone-idUSKCN0SR2J320151103?feedType=RSS&feed Name=businessNews#DdzoKbJOTRbPiugU.97
Comments
The
pipeline should never have been delayed by Obama. If it had been allowed, then
negotiations with US landowners would be done and the pipeline would have been
started. We are not losing anything by not having it right now, but it factors
in to building Liquefied Natural Gas tanks in our harbors. If this happens, we will
be able to wipe out our balance of trade deficit. We’ve already lost 10 years
on this deal. Obviously, Obama is sabotaging our chance to become energy
independent. Obama is delaying our economic recovery to grind us down. Ideally,
we would have this infrastructure built by the time oil and gas prices rise
again.
Norb
Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment