CO2 output would equal 6 million cars: EPA
TransCanada says U.S. agency’s assessment of pipeline project is unfair, inaccurate
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has concluded the Keystone XL pipeline will significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions because it will lead to the expansion of Alberta’s carbon-intensive oilsands.
The EPA’s assessment could give added ammunition to U.S. President Barack Obama to reject the pipeline project. He has stated that the pipeline’s potential impact on climate change will play an important role in his final decision on whether to allow the pipeline to cross the border from Canada into the United States.
The EPA made the statement in its reply to the State Department’s Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on TransCanada’s 1,900-kilometre Keystone XL pipeline project.
“Until ongoing efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production of oilsands are more successful and widespread, the Final SEIS makes clear that, compared to reference crudes, development of oilsands crude represents a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions,” the EPA states in a letter made public Tuesday.
The pipeline would bring oilsands bitumen from Alberta down through the U.S. Midwest to refineries in the Gulf Coast. The southern portion of the pipeline from Cushing, Okla., to Port Arthur, Texas, was completed in January 2014 and is operating.
The EPA claims that the extraction, transport, refining and use of the oilsands crude that would be transported daily through the pipeline would result in “an additional 1.3 to 27.4 million (tonnes) of carbon dioxide equivalent per year” compared with lighter crudes.
This would be equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions from 5.7 million passenger vehicles or 7.8 coal-fired power plants, the EPA says.
“Over the 50-year lifetime of the pipeline, this could translate into releasing as much as 1.37 billion more (tonnes) of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere,” it adds.
TransCanada spokesperson Shawn Howard criticized the EPA’s climate change impact statements as unfair and inaccurate.
He said that, with more than 100 different blends or grades of crude oil, each with its own carbon content, the EPA should not use an “average crude oil” as a standard of comparison.
He said the only fair comparison would be with the heavy crudes that the oilsands shipments would replace. These would include heavy oil from Venezuela, Mexico and other international sources. These oils, he claimed, produce similar or higher greenhouse gas emissions than the “American and Canadian oils.”
He also noted that the EPA failed to point out that the Keystone XL pipeline would also transport “a substantial amount of light crude oil” from the Bakken formation in North Dakota and Montana.
TransCanada estimates about 20 per cent of the pipeline’s 830,000-barrel-per-day capacity will come from these U.S. sources.
The EPA also suggested that the State Department revisit its conclusion that the Keystone XL would not impact climate change because, in the absence of Keystone, oilsands producers would use rail to get their oil to market.
The EPA noted that the recent collapse of oil prices could make rail too expensive for producers. This could in turn cause a slowdown in oilsands production.
The EPA commended TransCanada and the State Department for implementing provisions to reduce the risk of oil spills, noting that TransCanada has agreed to be responsible for the cleanup and restoration of groundwater in the event of a spill.
Luisa Abbott Galvao of Friends of the Earth said the EPA statement confirmed that the “Keystone XL pipeline fails President Obama’s climate test.”
She added that the EPA rejects the State Department’s conclusion that the oilsands would
“Development of oilsands crude represents a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
inevitability be developed with or without the pipeline.
“These comments further support the rejection of this senseless project by President Obama,” she said.
Keith Stewart of Greenpeace Canada said the EPA statement shows that building Keystone XL would “lock North America into a high-carbon future.”
He said it “highlights the need for Canada to seriously consider the climate impacts during the reviews of the Energy East and Kinder Morgan tarsands pipelines.”