Committee hears Keystone Pipeline debate


Copyright © TransCanada Corporation

A House Energy and Commerce Committee (HECC) hearing concerning the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline proposal is keeping the issue – and the hopes of The American Legion that the pipeline will be built – alive.

American Legion Legislative Deputy Director Dean Stoline attended the Jan. 25 session and reported that arguments presented at the hearing, American Jobs Now: A Legislative Hearing on the North American Energy Access Act, fell along familiar lines. Proponents expressed opposition to President Obama’s recent denial of permission to build the pipeline from the “oil sands” of Alberta, Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. Opponents, on the other hand, said they continue to side with Obama.

In explaining the background of the issue, Stoline said, “TransCanada submitted its Keystone XL Pipeline application to the State Department in September 2008. In order to speed a decision on the application, Congress, in the recently considered Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011, included a provision directing the president to approve the pipeline project within 60 days unless the president determined that it was not in the national interest. On Jan. 18, the U.S. State Department, which is in charge of the approval process, issued a recommendation to the president that, indeed, the pipeline did not serve the national interest. President Obama agreed with the findings and rejected the application.”

Opponents of the proposed pipeline are concerned about the possible environmental impact of nation-spanning construction and are urging more study before approval. They say that rushing to build the pipeline may cause regrettable and irreparable harm.

Proponents of the project, on the other hand, echo The American Legion’s recently expressed position that blocking the Keystone project is not in the best interest of job creation and national security.

Rep. Lee Terry, R-Neb., introduced the North American Energy Access Act (H.R. 3548) last December and sits on the HECC. “This isn’t over,” he said. “We’re working towards restarting this project.”

In his bill, Terry proposes to transfer pipeline application approval authority from the State Department to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), while allowing for a route modification to be performed by the state of Nebraska.

Under Terry’s proposed legislation, FERC would then have 30 days to decide whether or not to grant the pipeline construction permit and 30 days to rule on the Nebraska re-routing plan. The bill mandates that the permit would be automatically approved if the FERC did not take action within those time periods.

In hearing testimony, State Department Assistant Secretary Kerry-Ann Jones said the proposed legislation’s narrow time constraints and automatic mandates prevent an informed decision on the project. She said the bill also appears to override foreign policy and national security considerations because it cuts the rightful agency, the State Department, out of a decision involving a cross-border (Canada-U.S.) permit.

Jeff C. Wright, FERC’s director of the office of energy projects, echoed those concerns, calling the proposed legislation “unclear” while essentially forcing an approval of the project.

Log in or register to post comments

Tell us what you think

robertegoss

February 2, 2012 - 3:32pm

Sure, it would be great to have more crude to refine but the problem in the US is not crude, but it's limited refining capacity. Secondly, what is the price in both potential damage to our water supply and the environment? Rep Terry assumes that by transferring the approval from the State Dept to FERC it would expedite the process. However, FERC is saying Keystone is "unclear" and has echoed similar concerns of the President Obama Administration whose opponents are using the Keystone project as a political panacea.

oberlin

February 2, 2012 - 6:07pm

The XL Keystone pipeline project is another republican rip off, the truth finally come out the USA was never ment to get one drop of this crude oil, it will be pumped directly into super tanker ships and sent directly to china.
The USA will get no benefits what so ever out of this pipeline.
This entire project is designed to put money into the republican leaders off shore banks. This will make the USA taxpayers pay the cost of building and maintaining to make the republican party rich enough to take this country down to its knees.
They have already sold all of our good jobs to overseas putting our citizens out of work and they get to avoid paying taxes on thier profits.
We are now only exporting one product, gasoline while our country is running short and forced to pay a higher price for needed transportation fuel.
This will do nothing for our fuel supplies, the republicans are trying to get richer off of the american tax payer.
WISE UP DO NOT LET THIS HAPPEN.
HOLD THE REPUBLICAN CROOKS ACOUNTABLE.

larryschupp

February 2, 2012 - 6:44pm

You are exactly right. The only ones who will benefit are those in power and they will do so at the expense of the American taxpayers. Construction of this pipeline will actually mean that our gas prices will go up since this oil will use some of our already short supply of refining capacity.

larryschupp

February 7, 2012 - 6:24pm

According to researchers at the Cornell University Global Labor Institute, TransCanada, the proposed manufacturers of the pipeline, have admitted that "KXL will increase the price of heavy crude oil in the Midwest by almost $2 to $4 billion annually." The Cornell study explains that this will happen as a result of "diverting major volumes of Tar Sands oil now supplying the Midwest refineries, so it can be sold at higher prices to the Gulf Coast and export markets."

Fox expects us to take Petrowski at his word when he claims that building KXL could result in gas prices dropping "20 to 30 cents a gallon"; indeed, Asman responds to his claim by saying that the Gulf executive is "on the retail side of the gas business, so you know" how gas prices come about.

But the Cornell University study estimates nearly the exact opposite of Petrowski's claim, estimating that building the KXL pipeline could increase domestic gas and diesel fuel prices in some states by between "10 to 20 cents more per gallon" and, to rub salt on the wound, possibly "cancel out some or all of the jobs created by KXL" after only one year of increased fuel prices. From the study:

HIGHER FUEL PRICES IN 15 STATES

According to TransCanada, KXL will increase the price of heavy crude oil in the Midwest by almost $2 to $4 billion annually, and escalating for several years. It will do this by diverting major volumes of Tar Sands oil now supplying the Midwest refineries, so it can be sold at higher prices to the Gulf Coast and export markets. As a result, consumers in the Midwest could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel fuel, adding up to $5 billion to the annual US fuel bill. Further, the KXL pipeline will do nothing to insulate the US from oil price volatility.

Even one year of fuel price increases as a result of KXL could cancel out some or all of the jobs created by KXL, based on the (more accurate) $3 to 4 billion budget for KXL (the remaining cost to build within the Us). Higher fuel prices due to KXL would have broad adverse impacts. Gasoline is a significant cost for most Americans, and especially for those with lower incomes and/or residing in rural areas. Moreover, refined oil products (notably gasoline and diesel) are very widely used throughout the economy (especially in agriculture and commercial transportation). So higher fuel prices due to KXL would ripple through the economy and impact a very broad range of people and businesses.

This is just another example of our leadership ann the conservative media misleading us on facts about the Keystone XL pipeline.

MDDiveMaster

February 2, 2012 - 9:41pm

We need to invest in clean energy. You want more jobs, buy made in USA - want higher unemployment, buy made in China!

The government cannot create jobs, where what we buy is made is where the jobs go! Can't buy it at Walmart, Sears...? Go online, you can find lots of things made in the USA.

brashfelky

February 23, 2012 - 5:54pm

Bring the manufacturing back to the U.S.. Raise tariffs on American corporation's products made with foreign labor and make it unprofitable to use this labor. I worked in manufacturing for 35 years as a skilled master tool and die maker and the most I ever made per hour was $18. Now corporations want those same skills for $7. Wake up America. I lost one of the best jobs I ever had as a result of NAFTA. My company (a leading maker of medical devices) moved the plant to Juarez, Mexico where they do not have skilled labor and they pay 2 pesos per hour. NAFTA allowed these corporations to make astronomical windfall profits. Was it the Republicans who were behind it. You say they back big business. No! It was the Democrats and Bill Clinton. Again you didn't pay attention and let jobs slip away. That was a long time ago and we still live with the devastation of this stupidity.