Keystone pipeline how much oil

Development of the pipeline was blocked by the Obama administration in , but President Trump overturned that order and allowed it go ahead. A planned 1,mile 1,km pipeline running from the oil sands of Alberta, Canada, to Steele City, Nebraska, where it would join an existing pipe. It could carry , barrels of oil each day. It would mirror an existing pipe, also called Keystone, but would take a more direct route, boosting the flow of oil from Canada.

At the coast there are additional refineries and ports from which the oil can be exported. The pipeline was set to be privately financed, with the cost of construction shared between TransCanada, an energy company based in Calgary, Alberta, and other oil shippers. US-produced oil would also be transported by Keystone XL, albeit in smaller quantities than Canadian. Canada already sends , barrels of oil per day to the US via the existing Keystone pipeline.

The oil fields in Alberta are landlocked and as they are further developed require means of access to international markets. The United States has proven itself to be an an unreliable business and strategic partner in this case.

We should not be surprised when Canadian companies forgo future deals with American counterparts in favor of less environmentally stringent but more dependable associates across the Pacific — in China. This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here. More From Forbes. Nov 10, , am EST. Nov 9, , pm EST. Nov 9, , am EST. The northern segment, from Alberta to Texas, is the section that has run into several points of opposition.

While the northern leg stalled, TransCanada went ahead on the southern leg. The line would cross through 16 counties in North and East Texas. This map lays out the existing and proposed routes:. Some estimates have gone as high as ,, which is highly unlikely.

Factors such as direct vs. The State Department released a report in March stating that the pipeline could directly or indirectly create up to 42, jobs, including 3, construction jobs. Many critics of Keystone XL worry it will have harmful environmental impacts. The Sierra Club has said it opposes the specific use of tar sands, which is found in the deposits in Canada.

The scientific name for tar sand is bitumen , a mixture of clay, sand, water, and oil that with modern technology can be refined into usable oil. Critics say that it is more corrosive than conventional oil. It is this corrosiveness that has some concerned about leaks in the pipeline.

For evidence against the transport of tar sands crude, environmentalists point to an event in May , when 21, gallons of oil leaked in North Dakota. This was also due to a faulty valve. The State Department says the maximum amount of spillage in a worst-case-scenario of a Keystone Pipeline leak is 2.

TransCanada points out that this is significantly smaller than the amount that escaped during the Deepwater Horizon disaster. The pipe was decades old. The pipeline is often compared to another one built by the Canadian energy company Enbridge, which also transports tar sands crude into the U. Despite her claim, Enbridge is not without heavy public scrutiny.

Thousands of gallons of oil sands crude flowed into Talmadge Creek, a tributary of the Kalamazoo River. The event caused the EPA to recommend to the State Department that pipelines carrying tar sands be regulated differently than pipelines that carry other types of oil.

Environmentalists also point to the process of refining tar sands oil, saying it will create large amounts of greenhouse gas emissions, though the exact percentage increase is debated.

The report found that the pipeline would not have a significant impact on climate change because tar sands oil will be extracted regardless of whether or not the pipeline is built. Courtesy the Keystone Mapping Project. On Wednesday, not long after being sworn in as president of the United States, Joe Biden fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order scuttling the 1,kilometre pipeline expansion as part of the administration's effort to fight climate change.

The project, first announced in , would have carried , barrels of crude a day from the oilsands in Alberta to Nebraska and connected with the original Keystone pipeline that runs to Gulf Coast refineries.

They've got the capacity in the States to be able to make up for that. They're not really counting on the additional capacity, the growth that Keystone XL would bring. While supporters of the project north of the border say the decision represents a major loss for Canadian jobs and oil production, it likely won't have a similar negative impact on U.

And I don't think that's the case anymore. As well, there was no guarantee that adding , barrels a day of capacity would lead to , barrels a day of additional production in the oilsands, said Mabee. With Canada already moving , barrels a day by rail to the U. In the years since Keystone XL was first proposed, the U.