The decision to reject TransCanada’s Keystone pipeline raises some interesting policy questions. Opposition to the pipeline (which was planned to bring Alberta oil down to the heart of the U.S. distribution network and refinery infrastructure) was driven by two main factors: Concerns over pipeline safety and construction impacts related to the pipeline crossing major Midcontinent aquifers Concerns about the process of oil-sand development and the greenhouse-gas effects of that development.
In order to truly understand them, each issue needs to be examined individually: Could the pipeline be built safely, perhaps with some degree of rerouting? And, what is the overall impact of delaying or prohibiting an outlet for the oil to the United States?
Navigant Energy Practice leader Bill Dickenson comments on the decision to reject the Keystone XL Pipeline in the January 24th National Journal Energy Blog.
Click here to read full blog article.