A comprehensive summary of key issues related to the Keystone XL pipeline
Source: State Department EIS on the Keystone Pipeline
A friend of mine from college who is a practicing lawyer recently took a continuing legal education class at a local college. For his class project he chose to analyze the Keystone XL pipeline. He consented to me posting most of his memo, with his anonymity preserved and with his conclusions removed.
I found his questions and answers to be balanced and useful, and thought others should have the benefit of reading them as well. The presentation of the jobs impacts probably overestimates what is likely to come to pass, and I think it’s important to describe the errors in the State Department’s analysis (because they are both glaring and consequential), but overall this summary is worth a read, no matter what your conclusions are about the pipeline. It focuses more on the legal issues than many other discussions of this type, so that’s also useful.
See my related posts on Transport Constraints and Keystone XL, the circular reasoning in the State Department’s Environmental Impact Analysis, and why I think the pipeline should not be approved. The circular reasoning still remains in the final EIS, alas.
On to the memo! It was first sent to me in April 2014. Here are the first few paragraphs:
The following is information which I have collected in connection with my in-class presentation on The Keystone XL Pipeline. I have used a question-and-answer format below, as some newspapers are also prone to doing, so as to summarize and speak to the complex and multi-dimensional issues presented by this landmark situation unprecedented in the annals of American environmental law and policy, as far as I am aware.
1. What Is The “Keystone Pipeline”?
The project’s full name is “The Keystone XL Pipeline”; “The Keystone”; or, simply, “Keystone”, and will be referred to as such herein. Keystone is an intended sequential arrangement of individual large pieces of pipeline intended to be built and placed in four (4) states within the United States of America: Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas. Keystone’s contact with Kansas is limited relative to Keystone’s contact with Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska. Given recent litigation and unusual and remarkable political events in Nebraska relating to Keystone, special attention is paid herein to Nebraska’s interrelationship with Keystone. (Please see below).
2. Which Countries Are Involved?
Canada, and the United States. Canadians including Prime Minister Stephen Harper - and Jim Prentice, former Canadian Conservative Party official touted as a possible Harper successor - are seeking to pressure the Obama Administration to approve the Keystone. USA Today For The Journal News, Tuesday, February 18, 2014. However, no commentator has suggested that Canada has the power to compel America’s decision on Keystone. Canada has roughly one-tenth of America’s population and probably one-one hundredth of America’s political power in the world theatre. (No citation for the latter - that’s just my estimate).
3. Which Companies Are Involved?
“TransCanada” is the company seeking to build the Keystone. TransCanada is a pipeline and energy company based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada - from the municipality of Hardisty, Alberta, Canada. Hardisty, Alberta is a town in Flagstaff County in Alberta, Canada. It is located in east-central Alberta, 111 kilometers (69 miles) from the Saskatchewan border, near the crossroads of Highway 13 and Highway 881, in the Battle River Valley. Hardisty is a town which is mainly known as a pivotal petroleum industry hub where petroleum products such as Western Canada Select blended crude oil and Hardisty heavy oil are produced and traded. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardisty
