{ "id": "R42611", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R42611", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 429884, "date": "2014-04-14", "retrieved": "2016-04-06T23:03:02.081851", "title": "Oil Sands and the Keystone XL Pipeline: Background and Selected Environmental Issues", "summary": "If constructed, the Keystone XL pipeline would transport crude oil derived from oil sands sites in Alberta, Canada, to U.S. refineries and other destinations. Because the pipeline would cross an international border, it requires a Presidential Permit.\nAlthough some groups have opposed previous oil pipelines, opposition to the Keystone XL proposal has generated substantially more interest. Stakeholder concerns vary from local impacts, such as oil spills or extraction impacts in Canada, to potential climate change consequences.\nArguments supporting the pipelines construction cover an analogous range. Proponents of the Keystone XL Pipeline, including high-level Canadian officials and U.S. and Canadian petroleum industry stakeholders, base their arguments supporting the pipeline primarily on increasing the security and diversity of the U.S. petroleum supply and economic benefits, especially jobs.\nA number of studies have looked into the various environmental impacts of oil sands crude. This report focuses on selected environmental concerns raised in conjunction with the proposed pipeline and the oil sands crude it will transport.\nGreenhouse Gas Emissions\nKey studies indicate that the average greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensitymetric tons of GHG emissions per units of production (e.g., barrels)of oil sands crude is higher than many other crude oils. However, industry stakeholders point to analyses indicating that GHG emissions from oil sands crude oil are comparable to other heavy crudes, some of which are produced and/or consumed currently in the United States.\nDue to oil sands increased emissions intensity, many stakeholders have voiced concern about potential climate change consequences associated with oil sands development. In June 2013, President Obama stated that an evaluation of the net effects of the pipelines impact on our climate would factor into the Department of States (DOSs) national interest determination in order to determine if the project would significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution. Thus, DOSs 2014 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) has received considerable attention. Among other conclusions, the FEIS estimated that the incremental (i.e., net) life-cycle GHG emissions associated with the pipeline would be 1.3 million to 27.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year (0.02%-0.4% of U.S. annual GHG emissions). In addition, the FEIS stated that the approval or denial of any one crude oil transport project, including the proposed project, is unlikely to significantly impact the rate of extraction in the oil sands or the continued demand for heavy crude oil at refineries in the United States based on expected oil prices, oil-sands supply costs, transport costs, and supply-demand scenarios.\nSome stakeholders have questioned these conclusions, arguing (1) that the project may have greater climate change impacts than projected by DOS, and (2) that there is nothing presumed or inevitable about the rate of expansion for the Canadian oil sands. Other stakeholders support the FEIS analysis, arguing that as long as there is strong global demand for petroleum products, resources such as the Canadian oil sands will be produced and shipped to markets using whatever route necessary.\nOil Spills and Other Local Impacts\nSome groups have argued that both the pipelines operating parameters and the material being transported through it impose an increased spill risk. The National Academy of Sciences National Research Council examined this issue in a 2013 report, stating that it did not find any causes of pipeline failure unique to the transportation of diluted bitumen [oil sands crude]. However, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), spills of oil sands crude may result in different impacts than spills of other crude oils.\nOther environmental concerns pertain to the region in which the oil sands resources are extracted. Potential impacts include, among others, wildlife and ecosystem disturbance and water resource issues. In general, these local/regional impacts from Canadian oil sands development are unlikely to directly affect public health or the environment in the United States. Within the context of a Presidential Permit, the mechanism to consider local Canadian impacts is unclear.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R42611", "sha1": "df3d5f771d6ac439b117446995b380e9e2af740d", "filename": "files/20140414_R42611_df3d5f771d6ac439b117446995b380e9e2af740d.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R42611", "sha1": "3698fe08392ad2c18031ddd226ed94e6d67b5004", "filename": "files/20140414_R42611_3698fe08392ad2c18031ddd226ed94e6d67b5004.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc462370/", "id": "R42611_2013Feb21", "date": "2013-02-21", "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41", "title": "Oil Sands and the Keystone XL Pipeline: Background and Selected Environmental Issues", "summary": "This report focuses on selected environmental concerns raised in conjunction with the proposed pipeline and the oil sands crude it will transport. As such, the environmental issues discussed in this report do not represent an exhaustive list of concerns raised by environmental groups.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20130221_R42611_dc576839967c57d6ede9e541dc33a796e8ab5a77.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20130221_R42611_dc576839967c57d6ede9e541dc33a796e8ab5a77.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Petroleum industry", "name": "Petroleum industry" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Pipelines", "name": "Pipelines" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Petroleum pipelines", "name": "Petroleum pipelines" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc98034/", "id": "R42611_2012Jul16", "date": "2012-07-16", "retrieved": "2012-08-21T08:46:06", "title": "Oil Sands and the Keystone XL Pipeline: Background and Selected Environmental Issues", "summary": "This report looks at concerns about the Keystone XL pipeline. These include the need for a Presidential Permit, as the pipeline crosses and international border. Additionally, the report discusses specific environmental issues that the Keystone XL proposal raises.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20120716_R42611_d642f0d28f518bb6360e89ba396f2d86b68a6347.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20120716_R42611_d642f0d28f518bb6360e89ba396f2d86b68a6347.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Petroleum industry", "name": "Petroleum industry" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Pipelines", "name": "Pipelines" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Petroleum pipelines", "name": "Petroleum pipelines" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Economic Policy", "Energy Policy", "Environmental Policy", "Foreign Affairs" ] }