Oil companies pumped to find another way as Keystone XL and Northern Gateway pipelines stall

On a cold, blustery Sunday in February, tens of thousands of people descended on Washington’s National Mall to protest the proposed TransCanada Corp.’s $5.3-billion Keystone XL oil pipeline. They chanted, waved placards and called on U.S. President Barack Obama to kill the project, which, if completed, would pump up to 830,000 barrels a day from Alberta’s oil sands to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast. Referring to the energy-intensive processes needed to extract gooey oil-sands bitumen, activist and organizer Bill McKibben claimed that approving the 1,200-km pipeline would be tantamount to lighting a massive “carbon bomb.”

Read more: http://tinyurl.com/kj5foab

State Department Approves (Non-Keystone) Pipeline to Canada

The U.S. State Department approved on Wednesday a pipeline to Canada.

However this was not the controversial Keystone XL pipeline that has been the subject of environmental and political battles in the United States Congress. Rather, it is a pipeline to carry ethane from the Bakken formation in North Dakota, through Saskatchewan, to Empress, Alberta.

Read more: http://tinyurl.com/ndllorf

Rail v. Pipelines: No Safe Bet for Oil

The Canadian government said it was committed to a safe rail transit network following a weekend derailment in a Quebec town near the border with Maine. At least five people were killed Saturday when a train carrying crude oil from North Dakota slipped the track and exploded in Lac-Megantic. The federal government said it was in charge of the investigation, though it was unclear what initially led to the incident. Oil deliveries by rail have increased along with North American crude oil production. In a tit-for-tat season of pipeline and rail incidents, it’s becoming clear there are no clear-cut winners for crude oil transit.

Read more: http://tinyurl.com/kmbcrmu