Tar sands industry admits impact of pipeline protests

Print Friendly

The dedicated organizing of countless activists, including those arrested in Washington and Ottawa, is being felt by governments and industry. We can stop the pipeline!

Tar Sands Action, October 31, 2011

Yesterday we got some of the strongest confirmation yet that efforts to stop the Keystone XL pipeline are having a long-term impact on the tar sands industry. It’s clearer than ever that President Obama’s decision on the pipeline will have a critical impact on the development of the tar sands in Alberta – potentially leading to “stranded oil sands” long term.

Canada’s Financial Post – the premier business magazine of Canada – published an article detailing how the escalating pressure to stop Keystone XL is causing investors in the tar sands to reconsider their long term plans for exploiting the world’s second largest pool of carbon.

Organizing by environmental justice advocates across the country has put the Keystone XL pipeline in question, which in turn has revealed just how important the pipeline would be to the development of the tar sands industry.

Here is the key conclusion from the Financial Post – read the whole thing here.

“The signs are there: the Keystone XL oil sands pipeline has festered into an uncomfortable election issue for the U.S. president, Barack Obama.

“The upshot for Canada: a decision on whether to grant a Presidential permit, promised by year end, could once again be delayed.

“The reality is that anything short of a go-ahead in December for Keystone XL would plunge the oil sands sector into disarray until new solutions move forward. The worst-case scenario? Stranded oil sands – for years.

“Keystone XL, with a capacity to carry up to 830,000 barrels a day from Alberta to Texas, was due for startup in early 2013. There is no backup on the same scale or timeline.”

These reports contradict numerous earlier claims by TransCanada and tar sands industry sources suggesting that other transportation alternatives could potentially substitute for Keystone XL’s capacity should the project be rejected by President Obama.

Additionally these new comments contradict the State Department’s assertion that the global warming effects of Keystone XL should not be assessed in the final national interest assessment of the pipeline, on the assumption that rejection of the pipeline would have no impact on overall tar sands production.

All signs point to the President’s decision on Keystone XL as being a turning point for the Alberta tar sands. The entire industry and all future US regulatory decisions have been deeply impacted by concerted organizing from the environmental movement, suggesting a hard road ahead for further exploitation of this deadly resource.

The dedicated organizing of countless activists – including the 1253 people arrested at the White House this summer at the first Tar Sands Action, and hundreds more arrested in Ottawa in a similar protest – means that we are potentially one step closer to slowing the growth of the tar sands long term.

4 Responses

  1. Rory Short November 2, 2011 at 12:19 pm |

    People power as opposed to money power, my heartfelt wish in this case is that people power will triumph over money power. It is the only way that we are going to save the world, for every life form including ourselves, because our world is being destroyed by money power.

  2. Chris Rodgers November 2, 2011 at 10:01 am |

    I didn’t want the pipeline coming through my state. I never dreamed that we might get them to quit developing tar sand production thereby protecting the forest environment and our climate! It is empowering.

  3. Terry Moore November 2, 2011 at 7:57 am |

    Sometimes it’s hard to imagine slowing down let alone stopping tar sands development. Then something like the campaign against the Keystone XL comes along and puts new wind in our sails. The power of people united. Amazing.

  4. terry conway November 2, 2011 at 6:44 am |

    Campaigners against tar sands will be interested to hear that here in Britain the authorities have been forced to acknowledge that two earthquakes earlier this year in north west britain were probably caused by fracking. They then go on to say that the conditions which caused this are “unlikely to reoccur” – of course we dispute this but it should give a boost to the antifracking campaign here

Comments are closed.