Tarsands Infrastructure: South/East [US] is a category that represents the many connecting and supplying pipelines and associated projects that are needed to transport fuels for the production of tar sands bitumen and to move tar sand heavy bitumen to the Lower 48 of the US for refining. This involves some massive new pipeline projects to Illinois, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Louisiana, California, Pennsylvania, Texas and elsewhere including existing refineries in Ontario and Quebec.
Though the category is labelled "US", the proposed new projects also traverse untouched Canadian territory across Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. The names of some of the larger ones include The Alberta Clipper Project, The Spearhead Pipeline (expansion) and the Keystone Pipeline, along with other pipelines controlled by TransCanada and Enbridge, as well as Imperial Oil. Despite the massive size and scale of pipeline networks already existing through the continental United States, these pipelines and associated construction would be needed to achieve US and Canadian government goals of reaching 5 million barrels a day of tar sand oil being shipped out of the tar sands "ground zero" of Alberta.
Native bands ask court to block pipeline Updated at 4:41 PM
By Mary Agnes Welch
Some Manitoba bands have asked the court to quash a plan to build an oil pipeline through southern Manitoba, saying the federal government failed to consult with First Nations or offer compensation.
N.D. Oil Pipeline Should Be Rerouted
By DALE WETZEL 02.08.08, 1:55 PM ET
BISMARCK, N.D. -
Opponents of a proposed oil pipeline want North Dakota regulators to reroute it away from an aquifer, lake and forested river valley, saying the pipeline developer's efforts to safeguard against leaks are inadequate.
TransCanada Corp. (nyse: TRP - news - people ), which is developing the Keystone pipeline, has said it will install heavier pipe near the Fordville aquifer, which is six miles southwest of Park River in southern Walsh County, and close to Lake Ashtabula north of Valley City.
While a few small nuggets of things are coming through in the Globe's series on the tar sands, the articles are not only omitting a lot of important facts, they are distorting others. When the articles talk about "Albertan" opinions on the tar sands, they omit/distort the fact that the province is really split into north and south-- and that a majority of those as far north as Edmonton, let alone south like in Medicine Hat, Calgary and Lethbridge, have never actually seen the tar sands mines (or in-situ operations).
Feds say Keystone won’t harm environment
Janell Cole N.D. Capitol Bureau
Published Friday, January 18, 2008
BISMARCK — The TransCanada Keystone Pipeline “would result in limited adverse environmental impacts” in North Dakota and other states it will pass through, the U.S. government says.
The State Department has released its final environmental impact statement on the project, though it will still accept public comment until approximately Feb. 11, then issue a final order, according to a cover letter to “colleagues and stakeholders” dated Jan. 11.
The Dirty Dilemma of Canadian Crude
Tar sands oil comes at an environmental cost. But blocking it from the U.S. may make matters worse
By Damian Joseph
January 21, 2008
Detroit: Say no to refinery expansion
January 10, 2008
By ED McARDLE
In the debate over record gas prices, some experts point to dwindling supplies unable to meet soaring demand, while others stress lack of refinery capacity in the United States. Marathon Oil believes it has the answer.
Jan. 11, 2008, 12:08PM
S.D.: Pipeline Passes Regulatory Hurdle
By DIRK LAMMERS AP Business Writer
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — A proposed oil pipeline that would deliver Canadian crude to U.S. refineries has passed another regulatory hurdle.
TransCanada Corp. said Friday that it has received a Final Environmental Impact Statement from the U.S. State Department that says its planned Keystone Pipeline project would result in limited adverse environmental impacts.
January 7, 2008
Impacting Unimpaired
New agreements like the SPP and TILMA are aimed directly at unimpeded extraction in the tar sands
by Macdonald Stainsby
The Dominion - http://www.dominionpaper.ca
BLM: Tar sand development may hurt parks
By BOBBY MAGILL
The Daily Sentinel
Monday, January 07, 2008
Tar sands development could severely affect Utah’s Canyonlands National Park, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area and a stretch of the San Rafael Swell along Interstate 70, according to a Bureau of Land Management report.
A very significant statement, buried within the article below, produced for a North Dakota audience, in that is shows basically why EVERY SINGLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT is a crock of doo-doo. Cumulative Impacts are measured, or there is nothing to look at within a report. It's really quite simple-- if the report does not factor in all the ways in which the environment is impacted by development, then you don't have an impact of development to the environment report. Everything else then, is a smoke and mirrors game.
