Home | About | Donate

Dirty Tar Sands Oil Flows to South's Refineries Despite Keystone XL Rejection


Dirty Tar Sands Oil Flows to South's Refineries Despite Keystone XL Rejection

Sue Sturgis

Year in which TransCanada's Keystone Pipeline carrying carbon-heavy tar sands oil from Canada to the United States was approved by the Bush administration: 2008

Year in which the first phase of the pipeline, from eastern Alberta to Nebraska and then on to Illinois, was completed: 2010


This is mortifying:

"Effect the Keystone XL cancellation is expected to have on the amount of tar sands oil flowing from Canada to the U.S.: little

"Barrels of tar sands oil flowing to the U.S. Gulf Coast every day through another existing pipeline system operated by the Canadian company Enbridge: 450,000

"Following a planned expansion of the Enbridge system, barrels of tar sands oil that could be flowing to the U.S. Gulf Coast daily : 800,000

"Amount Enbridge is investing in storage infrastructure along the U.S. Gulf Coast for the increased amount of tar sands oil expected to flow there: $5 billion."

Since this filthy technology essentially constitutes a war on nature (and climate), it reminds me of the way that Monsanto and friends made a profitable KILLING on Agent Orange; but when it came to offering some form of restitution to the Vietnamese people for all of the resulting Cancers, they turned away.

Now with TIPP and TPP threatening to grant all rights and privileges to malevolent corporations and ZERO to human beings, one can only wonder if any restitution will be possible to those individuals suffering respiratory disease and Cancers as a result of living too close to daily toxic exposures...and NOT by their "free" choice.


What is mortifying, at least to me, is that there exits an alternate pipeline route from Alberta to southern refineries. That stopping the XL pipeline will not prevent tar sands development. That this was not made clear in previous reporting about the pipeline.

Ms. Sturgis deserves a truth tellers award for shattering the 'feel good' delusions and illusions about big oil power and influence. We think we won but it wasn't going to be that easy. We won this battle only because they had already won the war.


"Effect the Keystone XL cancellation is expected to have on the amount of tar sands oil flowing from Canada to the U.S.: little"

Yes, it certainly is "mortifying" isn't it? But is not something that some of us haven't been hinting at by pointing out how all those "pressure groups", like McKibbon's 350.org, focus on KXL were diverting attention form the bigger picture going on behind the scenes ....


Oh, c'mon - some of us, in pointing out the other pipelines being quietly approved, have been trying to "make clear" for awhile now that all the attention focused on KXL was diverting us from the bigger picture ... But we were ignored or critiqued by pretty much the same folk who are critiquing us for refusing to jump on the Sanders bandwagon ...


Very interesting. And so, would you say that in order to support their "brand", these groups have engineered a story of "success"? Is that what we're seeing here?

Oh, and would you be able to name more of these groups, other than McKibbon's? Just so I can keep a focus on them.

Thanks for your attentiveness.


Not to suggest i don't recognize a bit of sarcasm here ...

As to the first, I don't think reports of their "success" will hurt their "brand" any - but the idea that Dems can be successfully "pressured" to do the right thing, if not naive, smacks of party loyalty ...

As for other groups, any that convey the same message i would be a bit jaundiced toward, but hey, choose your poison ...


Right, genius. Pick on Bill McKibben rather than those corporations that bend law to their inclination.


And then there is this accident waiting to happen at the bottom of our Great Lakes, where 75% of our Nations fresh surface water waits to be sacrificed to GREEDY irresponsibility-

Every day 62-year-old pipelines push nearly 23 million gallons of oil through the heart of the Great Lakes. What if they ruptured?
Aging pipelines owned by Canadian company Enbridge lie exposed in the water at the bottom of the Straits of Mackinac, where Lake Michigan and Lake Huron meet. These pipelines, called Line 5, were built in 1953 during the Eisenhower administration.
When another Enbridge pipeline ruptured in 2010, it spilled about 1 million gallons of heavy crude oil into the Kalamazoo River. It was the largest land-based oil spill in U.S. history, and is still being cleaned up. Enbridge’s Line 5 through the Straits of Mackinac is 15 years older than its pipeline that gushed oil into the Kalamazoo River.
Despite assurances they could detect a leak "almost instantaneously," Enbridge initially misdiagnosed the massive spill into the Kalamazoo River, restarting pumps twice and allowing 17 hours to lapse before final shutdown. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency compared their poor handling of the disaster to the bumbling of the “Keystone Kops.”
This was just one of 1,068 Enbridge spills that dumped 7.4 million gallons of oil between 1999 and 2013 -- an average of 71 spills and 500,000 gallons leaked per year. That’s more than one oil spill every week for the last 15 years.
Where will the next Enbridge spill occur?

When is our Government going to get up off it's dead ass and make Enbridge remove this 62 year old cancerous sore, just begging to go to FAILURE??????? WTF,WTF,WTF!!!!!!


Well he wasn't keeping his eye on the right ball, and apparently, neither are you ...


This article entirely misses the point. When the 350.org team picked the KXL fight, the climate movement was barely deserving of the name and we were losing everywhere. While they couldn't have known it would work out this way, it was a brilliant strategic decision, building a fierce, determined and growing grassroots climate action movement here in North America. We've stopped KXL, we've stopped Northern Gateway in Canada, we're still working to reverse the State Dept's decision to allow Enbridge to nearly double capacity on its Alberta Clipper line, and we're in the process of stopping TransCanada's Energy East - and that's only just the beginning.

Ms. Sturgis seems to think the climate movement should've been able to stop the Keystone 1 pipeline, which was built before we existed. The math is very basic: Stopping Keystone XL means 830,000 barrels per day of new capacity to bring a combination of tar sands and Bakken fracked oil to refineries on the Gulf Coast doesn't exist, and that freaking matters.


Here's another interesting article that breaks down kxl and why it didn't really need to be built ...


Thank you! Is an excellent analysis!


And here we are, right in the middle of it here in Nebraska! My biggest fear was what would happen to our aquifer -- 5 billion won't do sh!t if it spills into the aquifer. :scream:


The sad part is, that pipeline isn't the only threat to your aquifer ...


You got that right -- our current governor is also a threat ...


Get yourself a Green governor! (smile)


Have you been to Nebraska???? Even the Democrat from here is a DINO! :smirk: :confounded: :smiley:


Hmmm. Don't think you understood my point. I wasn't being sarcastic. I was wondering if what we're seeing here was a soft target that doesn't make a dent in the problem, but offers groups like 350 an apparent win, thereby bolstering their position as successful activists. That's what I meant by "bolstering the brand" - standard PR terminology.


Sorry, OS, I am so used to being whacked here that i tend to be paranoid and impute sarcasm where it isn't - i agree with your point completely (smile)