BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

Recycled Keystone XL Report Doesn't Add Up

This article is more than 9 years old.

The U.S. arm of the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) has been making news this week with a ‘new’ report claiming the Obama Administration drastically underestimated carbon emissions of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline.  The report seeks to make the case as to why the final portion of the Keystone pipeline system should not be built.

As tantalizing as the report sounds, supporters of the pipeline have been quick to point out the report is actually a recycled 2013 SEI report which the State Department took into account, and largely dismissed.

SEI Researchers Peter Erickson and Michael Lazaraus have claimed the estimated carbon emissions would increase four times as much as the State Department has predicted.  Claiming heat-trapping gas emissions will spike by up to 120 metric tons every year compared to official U.S. Government estimates, which conclude construction of this leg of the Keystone Pipeline System, will not significantly contribute to climate change.

SEI’s report assumes Keystone XL North will add 800,000 more barrels of oil per day (Bbl/d).  According to the SEI report, gasoline consumption will increase because of the additional production of crude oil, which will in turn, quadruple greenhouse gas emissions (GHG).

The report makes the same major error constantly made by the KXL opponents.  In talking point after talking point, anti-KXL groups seem to forget the portion of KXL already built.

In early 2008, the company planning on building and operating the pipeline split the KXL project into a Northern leg and a Southern leg.  President Obama approved the Southern leg, running from Cushing, Oklahoma to the Gulf Coast on March 22, 2008.  The only remaining section of the pipeline, which remains under consideration, is the Northern leg. Running from Alberta, Canada to Steele City, Nebraska, KXL North is only capable of transporting 450,000 Bbl/d, of which approximately one-quarter is designated for U.S. Bakken crude.

In other words, the most Canadian oil KXL could bring is 325,000 Bbl/d.  For comparison, the United States currently consumes 18.89 million barrels of crude. The addition of the oil from Keystone XL amounts to less than 2% of daily U.S. consumption.

Professor Andrew Leach penned an insightful article earlier this week titled, “A paper on Keystone’s Climate Impacts Would Fail Econ 101.”, calling out the economic miscalculations of the report. Professor Leach argues the recycled report based its findings on faulty assumptions, resulting in a report riddled with fallacies.

It is difficult to imagine how SEI’s report passes muster.  In fact, the federal government has now authored five different studies on the subject. The reports support the claim the project will not adversely affect the environment. The KXL fight has been a “Green Herring” for years, lasting longer than American involvement in WWII.

Canadian oil is finding, and will continue to find its way to market.  In saying this, every credible report reaches the same conclusion, bringing the oil to market via pipeline will remain the safest, greenest, and most efficient way to transport crude to market.

Brigham A. McCown is an attorney and public policy expert. With nearly three decades of combined public service, Mr. McCown formerly headed a federal agency and served as a key federal regulator over the energy and transportation industries. He is also a retired Naval Aviator and an avid baseball fan who calls it as he sees it, right down the middle.  To learn more, visit him on National JournalHuffington Post, and Fuel Fix or follow him on Twitter and Facebook.