In mid-January, TC Power introduced that their controversial Keystone XL pipeline would obtain net-zero power as quickly because it was commissioned, and that the entire pipeline’s operations would run on renewable power by 2030. Nonetheless, a newly inaugurated President Joe Biden revoked Keystone XL’s allow, stating in his Government Order that “Leaving the Keystone XL pipeline allow in place wouldn’t be according to my Administration’s financial and local weather imperatives.”
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, although a Progressive with a powerful environmental agenda, has additionally supported Keystone XL, concerning it because the “key” to the continued progress of Canada’s profitable oilsands trade.
However can a pipeline which exists solely to convey oil destined for burning in combustion engines ever be thought-about environmentally accountable, or is that this greenwashing at its most interesting?
Keystone XL has been contentious from the start
The pipeline was first proposed by TransCanada Power (now TC Power) in 2011. If accomplished, the 1,200-mile pipeline would convey 830,000 barrels of diluted crude oil from Alberta to refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast day-after-day.
Since its introduction, the undertaking has been topic to political ping-pong. Proponents hailed the roles it might create and argued it might assist the USA obtain power safety. Opponents mentioned the pipeline would threaten communities and waterways, in addition to ramp up manufacturing in Alberta’s oilsands, deemed soiled by environmentalists not only for their local weather impacts, however for the cleared forests and tailing ponds left behind.
President Obama canceled the pipeline in early 2012. TransCanada nonetheless managed to construct the southern leg, which runs from Cushing, Oklahoma to Port Arthur, Texas (it was not topic to presidential approval because it didn’t cross worldwide borders) and submitted a brand new utility for the northern stretch that very same 12 months. After Obama rejected that utility, President Trump signed an Government Order reviving it, and building started in April of 2020. Keystone XL was transferring forward till President Biden’s pen stroke in January.
“Inexperienced” pipelines nonetheless transport fossil fuels
TC Power has vowed to buy renewable power both immediately or as renewable power credit to offset the power required to energy the pipeline. The corporate additionally promised to spend money on renewable power infrastructure alongside the pipeline route, creating 1.6 gigawatts of electrical capability and 1000’s of building jobs.
All of this funding would go in direction of offsetting the power required to function pumping stations and carry out inspections and upkeep. However if you take a look at the overall carbon influence of a undertaking like Keystone XL, contemplating every little thing from the power wanted to extract, dilute, transport, and refine the sticky bitumen to the carbon emitted when the refined product is burned in automobile engines, pipeline operations symbolize a mere fraction. Combustion of the ultimate product accounts for between 70 and 80 p.c—the most important piece by far.
The US State Division’s official choice on Keystone XL estimates that pipeline operations would produce 1.44 million metric tonnes (MMT) of carbon dioxide per 12 months, an quantity near the annual emissions from 300,000 passenger vehicles. That seems like rather a lot, but it surely’s lower than one p.c of the undertaking’s whole annual emissions—from extraction of the crude to burning the refined oil—which the State Division estimates at between 147 and 168 MMT of carbon dioxide per 12 months.
Caption: Combustion of the ultimate product accounts for the biggest share of the greenhouse gasoline emissions produced from oilsands improvement.
Credit score: The Pembina Institute
Canada’s oilsands are particularly soiled
Fossil fuels are hydrocarbons, which is simply the chemical time period for a molecule made up of hydrogen and carbon. They’re categorised partly by the complexity of their carbon chains—the less carbon molecules linked collectively, the lighter the product. Methane, for instance, consists of a single carbon atom linked to 4 hydrogen atoms and is extraordinarily unstable. Mild crude from Texas incorporates hydrocarbons with chains between 5 and 12 carbon atoms lengthy. The molecules in heavy crudes have carbon chains of 15 or extra.
The heavier the oil, the extra power required to course of it. Many local weather scientists have criticized Keystone XL as a result of the “extra-heavy” crude oil, or bitumen, trapped in Alberta’s oilsands takes a lot power to get better—and since it releases extra carbon when burned. It’s thick and sticky, like chilly peanut butter. The oil should be extracted utilizing steam, both within the floor or at a processing plant, and diluted or upgraded earlier than it may possibly even movement in a pipe. Lighter crude could be pumped proper out of the bottom.
Though there may be a variety within the high quality of the bitumen and the effectivity of the extraction applied sciences, most analyses concur that oilsands manufacturing is kind of a bit extra power intensive than lighter, extra typical crudes. In different phrases, it takes extra power to get better, course of, transport, and refine a barrel of Tar Sands oil than one from say, Texas’ Permian Basin.
Oilsands crudes are persistently among the many most carbon-intensive crudes in response to The Pembina Institute, which has analyzed a number of experiences evaluating the power depth of a variety of oil merchandise. The Oil-Local weather Index additionally reveals Canadian additional heavy crudes falling on the higher finish of the size.
[ART SUGGESTION] https://oci.carnegieendowment.org/#total-emissions?ratioSelect=perBarrel®ionSelect=North%20America
Caption: This chart reveals the power depth of 24 consultant oil merchandise from North America, starting from “Excessive Fuel” to “Further Heavy.” The 4 samples from Canada’s oilsands (the darkish brown bars) are among the many most energy-intensive of all.
Credit score: Oil-Local weather Index
The stakes are excessive, each financially and environmentally
Ninety-seven p.c of Canada’s confirmed oil reserves are sure within the oilsands. The nation has made enormous investments within the trade and in getting the land-locked product to market. In March of 2020, Premier Jason Kenny of Alberta introduced that the province was investing $1.5 billion in Keystone XL to assist guarantee it was in service by 2023.
The stakes? Jobs and cash—plenty of it. In keeping with Canadian Affiliation of Petroleum Producers, the oilsands trade pays an estimated $17 billion in provincial and federal taxes over the subsequent ten years, and was chargeable for 215,000 direct and oblique jobs in 2018.
On the similar time, Canada has set bold local weather targets, together with a objective of net-zero emissions by 2050.
Local weather scientists argue that growing tasks like Keystone XL will spur extra manufacturing and lock within the related emissions for many years, making it not possible for us to collectively scale back our greenhouse gasoline emissions to protected ranges.
“Constructing tasks like Keystone XL incentivizes the greenlighting of latest Tar Sands manufacturing tasks,” says Anthony Swift, Director, Canada Venture for Pure Assets Protection Council (NRDC). “These must be shut down inside a couple of years if we’re to satisfy our local weather targets.”
Proponents argue that if Keystone XL isn’t constructed, Canada will simply discover one other strategy to get the product out. And whereas it’s true that different strategies corresponding to “oil-by-rail” have elevated in recent times, as soon as manufacturing outpaced pipeline capability, these costlier choices are unlikely to spur new improvement, says Swift. “Tar Sands tasks are actually costly to construct. Discovering an financial strategy to get the product to market is essential in supporting new Tar Sands manufacturing.”
Oilsands manufacturing already accounts for 12 p.c of Canada’s whole greenhouse gasoline emissions. Keystone XL would open the floodgates to new oilsands manufacturing and extra carbon emissions at each ends of the pipe—irrespective of how “inexperienced” the packaging.