A new report showing that importing Canadian tar sands oil would have a negligible impact on American greenhouse gas emissions is the latest in a series of developments that have undermined the environmentalist case against the Keystone pipeline.
The report, by IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates, suggests that rejecting the project could actually lead to an increase in emissions.
Supporters of the Keystone pipeline, which would connect Canada’s wealth of “tar sands” crude oil to refineries on the American gulf coast, pointed to IHS’s findings as further confirmation of the project’s environmental soundness.
It was the latest revelation that undermines environmentalist opposition to the project, Keystone supporters said. The IHS analysis followed reports that oil companies are seeking out alternative, less environmentally friendly, means of transporting Canadian crude.
Killing the Keystone Pipeline has become a priority of the American environmentalist community, even as some liberal commentators question the political wisdom of its intense focus on the project.
The pipeline’s most vociferous opponents “are obsessed with a program that amounts to a rounding error” with respect to total U.S. carbon emissions, wrote New York Magazine’s Jonathan Chait.
“There is no environmental case against the Keystone XL pipeline,” said James Taylor, senior fellow for environmental policy at the Heartland Institute.
President Barack Obama has stated he will not approve the pipeline if it results in an increase in U.S. carbon emissions.
However, supporters of the project say Canada will export its petroleum products regardless of his decision.
