The Death Of Keystone: A Brief Analysis

There will be celebrations, but it strikes me as anti-climactic.  Lucky timing for the new government, though; its way too soon for it to have to wear any of the failure.   Whereas this decision will be the big fat fucking failing cap-stone to the too-long-but-now-ending political career of Stephen Harper. And I think Justin's nominal pro-Keystone stance was quite clever.  It was a bit like supporting the continued existence of the sun and the moon.  It ain't up to you, so why not?  But why not go the other way a la Mulcair?  Well, there were potential votes out West to be harvested for being a least a little "pro-pipeline", and support for Keystone could be used as a vote-harvesting carrot, even if it was a carrot made of smoke and mirrors.  Mulcair refused to wave the fake carrot, and lost.  Not that this was the sole reason he lost.  There was also that increasingly tattered looking beard. 

Anyway, going forward, I'm betting against Northern Gateway; I am inclined against Trans Mountain; and I suspect Energy East will pipe oil (or whatever) one day.  

Keystone XL: Don't Build It For Canada

A new poll, basically confirming what a lot of older polls suggested:

Canadians are more likely to oppose (44%) than support (36%) the Keystone XL energy pipeline, while 20% have a neutral opinion. The opposite is true on the other side of the border: the figures are 34%, 52% and 14%, respectively. However, support is highest among self-identified supporters of the federal Conservative Party of Canada (55%), mirroring the polarized situation in the United States, where 72% of Republicans support the project against 39% of Democrats.

From the same poll:

Within Canada, support for Keystone XL was highest in Alberta (58%). At 50%, Trans Canada’s Energy East project has greater support than Keystone XL, but opinions vary substantially across regions. At the high end, 68% of citizens in Alberta support the project, compared to a low of 33% of citizens in Quebec.

Presumably this means the Trans-Mountain pipeline has support somewhere under 50%. Unfortunately there is no link to the full poll that I can see.  Clearly, however, the federal government hasn't screamed HIPPY!! loud enough at protesters.  And maybe CAPP should buy a few more newspapers.  That'll push 'em over the top.

Joe Cressy, The NDP, And Keystone XL

NDP candidate Joe Cressy is yakking it up at the #trinspa debate:

Cressy: stop subsidizing oil patch, and start green energy; stop the Keystone XL pipeline, etc. #trinspa
— Pundits' Guide (@punditsguide) June 23, 2014

You know we all hate Keystone here in T.O. but I don't see what making it front-and-center in their campaign is going to do for the NDP.  What practical effect does opposing a pipeline the fate of which will be decided by the government of another country have?  The entire party might as well drop its pants are fart in the direction of Washington.  It'll do as much good.  What victory can be claimed if the decision goes against Keystone?  Could they not settle on  issues that apply to Trinity-Spadina  specifically?

How Ezra Levant Wrecked The Harper Government's Energy Strategy

From Bloomberg:

Still, the prime minister was unhappy that depictions of Canada as a “dirty oil” nation were not being adequately confronted by the industry or his ministers. He had become enamored with an argument put forth by conservative commentator Ezra Levant in a book called “Ethical Oil.” It posited that many petro-nations used their oil riches to finance nefarious activities and subjugate their own citizens.

[...]

Canada, in the view of Levant, stood practically alone as an ethical producer. In a “mandate letter” setting forth his priorities, Harper instructed Oliver, his new Natural Resources Minister, to become a take-no-prisoners salesman for Canada’s greatest resource.

Wow, was that ever dumb.  You take a fellow who, insofar as he is known at all in Canada, is known as one of the nation's most hated men, as your exemplar of rational argument.  And you send your Natural Resources Minister to act like him: to yell at any BCer with reservations re your pipelines, to call them dirty hippies and allies of Al Qaeda, and etc.  And you expect that to work.

People often complain that progressives are out of touch with the concerns of "everyday people". But the Harper Gov. thought threats and belligerance would carry the day in B.C.  That's displays an incredible lack of understanding of the local zeitgeist. 

Oil By Rail Just Got More Expensive

An account of the feds new rail safety improvements can be found here.  From it:

The federal government wants a three-year phase-out or retrofit of older tank cars that are used to transport crude oil by rail, but will not implement a key TSB recommendation that rail companies conduct route planning when transporting dangerous goods.

As well, certain tankers that Raitt said have "no continuous reinforcement of their bottom shells" will be removed within 30 days, by ministerial order. There are 5,000 of these cars in North America, she said, but could not give a figure of how many are used in Canada.

Raitt was speaking at a press conference in Ottawa Wednesday to announce the changes.

There are 65,000 of the more robust Dot-111 cars in North America that must be phased out or retrofitted within three years if used in Canada, Raitt said, adding, "Officials have advised us three years is doable."  She said she couldn't calculate the cost of the retrofits, but told reporters, "industry will be footing the bill."

Some rough cost estimates:

Retrofitting older cars can cost more than $70,000 each, while new tank cars cost well over $100,000.

If industry is indeed footing the bill, and if we assume about 1/10th of the total number of cars are operating in Canada, then we're talking billions in expenses over the next couple of years.  Which is to say that a standard argument for Keystone XL (and other pipelines)--block them and the product will just get to its destination by other means--is not necessarily true. Drive up the cost of hauling Alberta bitumen by rail, and you can probably drive down the total amount that gets out of the tar sands by that route. It becomes less economical, that is,  to get oil to market on trains if you're not allowed to immolate small towns along the route.

Jonathon Chait On Keystone XL

I've said it before, environmentalists aren't focused on Obama regulations re existing power plants because their role in that fight is largely over.  They did their bit. They won.  Chait acknowledges  this vaguely.  He writes:

I’ve argued that the EPA regulations on existing power plants due to come out this summer are Obama’s chance to fulfill his original climate goals that seemed to slip away when the cap-and-trade bill died in Congress during his first term. That doesn’t mean Obama is destined to succeed. Several things have to go right. First, the regulations have to be good — 200 to 500 metric tons per year is obviously a huge range. Then they have to survive a legal challenge from conservatives.

Yeah but this part of the process is not particularly amenable to mass action of the kind Bill McKibbon and 350.org specialize in.  Its a job for regulators and lawyers, the last of which have already done a bang-up job defending the EPA's right to treat C02 as a pollutant from any number of conservative interest groups.  So why not focus attention on new victories--ie shutting down Keystone XL?  And should said regulations come out on the weak side, well I'm sure the environmental movement can walk and chew bubblegum at the same time.

Keystone Delayed!!!

...until after the November U.S. mid-terms.  So probably into 2015!  Although I don't see this as much of a Cdn election issue.  It doesn't really matter what your position is on a decision that's up to the yanks to make.  Which is why I am willing to cut Justin Trudeau some slack on this issue.  What's far more important is where he ends up on the Trans Mountain line.

Justin Trudeau On Pipelines

From his interview with Calgary Metro News:

“Because of that I have been a strong promoter of the Keystone XL pipeline and also a harsh critic on the way the prime minister has approached pushing the Keystone XL pipeline. To my mind, the only thing that has prevented Keystone XL from getting approved already in the United States – and what has allowed it become such a polarizing issue, with celebrities weighing in and all sorts of people having very strong opinions even though there is not necessarily all that many facts going around in many of the conversations – is that the prime minister hasn’t done a good enough job of demonstrating a level of commitment to doing it right and upholding environmental protections and regulations. That’s what President Obama has said many times – that he needs to see concrete action from Canada – and what we get is all words. So I’m very much a proponent of Keystone XL.

“For similar reasons, I’m not a proponent of the Northern Gateway Pipeline … which runs through the Great Bear Rainforest, which has spectacularly failed at getting community buy-in from First Nations communities and from local communities that could be potentially affected by it. And it’s not just an environmental argument, it’s also an economic argument. There are 20,000 British Columbians who make their living on the sea around Haida Gwaii and on the Pacific Coast. They would all be in peril – those jobs, those livelihoods – with a catastrophic accident, which, unfortunately, is all too capable.

"So, my intent is to make sure we send Enbridge back to the drawing board for that. I am, however, very interested in the Kinder Morgan pipeline, the Trans Mountain pipeline that is making its way through. I certainly hope that we’re going to be able to get that pipeline approved. And I hope that Kinder Morgan learns from Enbridge’s experience of short-cutting or going too light on community buy-in. Ultimately governments grant permits, but only communities grant permission.”

This is substantive,  and pretty good positioning.  Of course I would prefer than none of these pipelines go through, but I don't have to campaign for Prime Minister in Alberta.

Lets talk about them one by one

1) Northern Gateway.  Should this actually come to the point where somone tries laying pipe, we will have national unity issues on our hands--ie BCers going apeshit.  That would be bad for everyone involved.  Remember, in B.C. the hippies kick you.  So good on Justin for opposing it.

2) Keystone XL.  Naturally, I am against this project and think everyone else should be as well. That said: what I think, and what Justin Trudeau thinks, and really even what Prime Minister Harper thinks, doesn't mean a thing.  The Obama administration will do what it will on the basic of domestic political considerations.  I suspect they will reject the line, or punt  until after the 2014 mid-terms, but who knows?  Which is why Canadian politicians favororing or disfavouring the line are engaging in empty theatrics: Mulcair opposes a line he can do nothing about, Trudeau favours one he can do nothing about.  They might as well be for or against the sunrise.  It will happen, or not, in spite of them.  So, bottom line: I don't really care what their position is.

Although of course Justin is right about Harper's government fumbling the issue.

3) Kinder Morgan (Trans Mountain).  This is the most interesting of the three cases.  Opinion doesn't appear to have hardened on the West Cost for or against the line in the way it has in the case of Northern Gateway.   And while I personally would like to see it halted, should the First Nations in its path, and property owners around Vancouver, become amenable, I would defer to them.  And this appears to be the Trudeau position.  Now, should local opinion turn against the line, I would hope he will reconsider.

A Couple Of Polls On CDN Pipelines

From Forum, so FWIW:

A bit surprising, or at least other polls in B.C. have shown support for NG drifting upward.  And, nterestingly enough, opposition to the Keystone XL line is and remains much higher in Canada than in The United States.

Jonathan Chait's Puzzling Defense Of Keystone XL

He writes:

Keystone is at best marginally relevant to the cause of stopping global warming. The whole crusade increasingly looks like a bizarre misallocation of political attention.

My view, which I laid out in a long feature story last spring, is that the central environmental issue of Obama’s presidency is not Keystone at all but using the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate existing power plants. That’s a tool Obama has that can bring American greenhouse gas emissions in line with international standards, and thus open the door to lead an international climate treaty in 2015. The amount of carbon emissions at stake in the EPA fight dwarf the stakes of the Keystone decision.

This is bizarre.  The Obama administration has already committed to having the EPA regulate new and exiting power plants (starting with the easier and less controversial situation re new plants).   Chait is asking the environmental movement to focus its attention on a battle that, for the time-being at least, they seem to have already won.  What is the point of that?  Why not look for new victories?  Why not aim and for Keystone dead AND coal regulated into obsolescence?

Justin On Keystone

People may have been surprised, but shouldn't have been.  Justin's position on Keystone XL has been on record for awhile know.  And though I personally oppose Keystone and all other pipelines out of Mordor, that is not a tenable stance for a politician looking to win seats in Alta. or Sask. Indeed, of the three pipelines currently under consideration, Keystone is the easiest to get behind because its fate is entirely out of Canadian hands.  There's nothing that need to be done, or can be done at this point, but add a few cheers from the side-line.  More bothersome to me is Justin's apparent support for the Trans Mountain line (through 2nd link above).  But since there's no regulatory application even on the table yet for that one, presumably he will have time to change his mind.

Canadians Are "Concerned" About A Lotta Stuff

If "a majority of Canadians say they are “concerned” about potential negative financial impacts on their families if proposed pipeline projects fail to get the go-ahead" is the best they can suck out of the results of the latest Ipsos-Reid poll, then I imagine the details are even worse news for team tar-sands.  I wonder if Ipsos asked a straight up-or-down question re approval/disapproval of the individual projects under consideration?

A Note On A Poll Re Keystone XL

For the most part, its the same old.  More Americans than Canadians support the building of Keystone  XL to pipe tar-sands bitumen down to the Gulf .  Actually, I'm cheating a bit.  The new poll doesn't measure Canadian views, but other recent polls show from about a 50/50 split up here to about two-thirds against.  But whatever.  What interested me most was this bit:

But for all they had to say about pipelines and fracturing, the respondents were largely ignorant of an important trend in their country's energy sector. Survey results show that more than half are unaware of the American energy boom of recent years – and only 34% knew that it came from traditional energy sources.

I would guess this is because when most people think of the cost of energy they think of gas prices, and gas prices have lingered high for years now, even though the economy has been stuck in neutral. So if energy booms and nobody hears it, is it a boom worth the name?

Come Get Some, Bituman Cowboy

If Harper says that he will not take no for an answer from the U.S. on Keystone — a project over its future he ultimately has no real control — should one not conclude that he will also not accept that provinces such as British Columbia, Quebec or Ontario throw roadblocks in the way on the pipelines that are on the drawing board to bring Alberta’s oil to the East and West coasts? In those cases the Prime Minister actually has the power to walk his talk.

Chantal's a smart lady, but she doesn't understand the ROC so well, and less and less as you go farther West.  If Harper's remarks are supposed to be a threat aimed at B.C. should they resist the construction of Northern Gateway and Trans Mountain, then he will have something between riots and a civil war on his hands if he tries to follow-up.  Going East, I'm not so sure.  These projects seem to be re-purposing existing pipe-line rather digging new ditches.  But threats out of Albertans will do the opposite than pave the way for them.

Harper's New Enviro Plan: Show Me The Money

...or, more precisely, the cuts in Carbon Emissions.  Simon Donner of UBC has it right:

@tyler_bryant @StephenLeahy Right. Climate value of "trading" pipeline for GHG reduction elsewhere will depend on the numbers
— Simon Donner (@simondonner) September 6, 2013

...which is to say that a deal is doable, if whatever Keystone XL produces by way of carbon emissions can be offset elsewhere.  To embed Mr. Donner again:

@StephenLeahy Not ideal, but not impossible. Lots of other GHG reduction opportunities in Canada which could be offered.
— Simon Donner (@simondonner) September 6, 2013

We shall see.  But I should say I doubt this government's ability to whomp up a real CO2 reduction plan in the time available, especially if it needs buy-in from the provinces.  For example, to save the tar sands does Ontario's auto industry get thumped?

But, once again, doable...as in not impossible.

Looks Like Keystone XL Faces Another Delay

The investigation of an alleged conflict of interest by a U.S. State Department contractor reviewing the proposed Keystone XL pipeline won’t be complete until January.

The State Department’s Office on the Inspector General announced today that it was reviewing whether recommendations it made in a separate February 2012 report into conflict questions about another Keystone contractor are being followed as the department conducts an environmental review of the $5.3 billion project.

Announcing a Keystone approval/rejection before this investigation has been completed isn't impossible, but it would be, as the folks at Desmog Blog note, "odd".  I've been willing to give ERM the benefit of the doubt on this one, on the grounds that the number of companies capable of doing this kind of environmental assessment must be pretty small, and therefore some ties between the company and TransCanada (or any of the other tar-sands big players) is to be expected.  Lying about those connections, though...that might be a no no.

On Environment Ministers And Petcoke

From Impolitical:

CTV was reporting that Peter Kent may be moving on and therefore would be out as Environment Minister. Not sure there's much a new Canadian minister might do to sway the Obama administration but Keystone has got to be figuring into Harper's thinking. Is Rempel, currently the Parliamentary Secretary to Kent, the one? 

Whoever it is, they're also going to have to deal with this burgeoning - and very warranted - focus onpetcoke. This oil sands byproduct gained greater visibility recently given the Koch brothers' piling of it on the Detroit waterfront to the discomfort of Windsorites looking on from across the river. 

We, for the most part, won't burn it for fuel due to its high emissions levels and the "Environmental Protection Agency will no longer allow any new licenses permitting the burning of petroleum coke in the United States." So it is largely being shipped overseas to China and Mexico, nations that don't care much about emissions levels. Shouldn't we Canadians be concerned about that? Particularly if Keystone were to be approved, with the amounts of petcoke that will be produced. 

Worth noting that one place using Petcoke close to home is Nova Scotia because, basically, its cheap.  In fact that's where part of that big pile is going.  Nevertheless:

Renewables produced 18.3% of [NS's] electricity in 2012, the highest total ever. Approved wind farms to be built and the proposed Maritime Link project would help us reach 40% renewables by 2020 and continue to reduce our use of coal and pet coke.

...which 18.2 per cent figure is considerably larger than, I think, Ontario.  

PS.  Maritime Link is this.  When finished, it will connect the NS power grid to NFLD and surplus power from the  Lower Churchill Hydroelectric Generation Project.

We're #1 (In Oil Spills((Especially Alberta)))

A toxic waste spill in northern Alberta has killed off roughly 42 hectares of boreal forest, in what could be the biggest environmental disaster in North America in recent history.

The Tar sands...salting everything they touch.

Oil Spilling, Redux

From Jansen, Sask.:

The oil industry suggests they will move their product by train if their pipelines don't get approved.  They should really be made to use safe rail cars.

Keystone XL--Not Coming Soon

This (story through link) just confirms what I've argued for awhile.  The Obama administration will take its own sweet time over the Keystone XL decision, especially if they are leaning towards approval.  You don't want angry enviros arguing before a judge that you short-circuited the process.  I'm betting on nothing out of the Whitehouse until 2014.