The EPA has reviewed the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Final SEIS for those in the know) for the Presidential Permit (PP for those with a juvenile sense of humor–like me) for the Keystone Pipeline (ever hereafter The Project) to proceed. The results? Well, let me quote the letter the EPA wrote (can the EPA write?) to the Department of State (can the Department of State read?):
While the overall effect of the Project on oil sands production will be driven by long-term movements in the price of oil and not short term volatility, recent large declines in oil prices (oil was trading at below $50 per barrel last week) highlight the variability of oil prices. The Final SEIS concluded that at sustained oil prices of$65 to $75 per barrel, the higher transportation costs of shipment by rail "could have a substantial impact on oil sands production levels -possibly in excess of the capacity of the proposed project." In other words, the Final SEIS found that at sustained oil prices within this range, construction of the pipeline is projected to change the economics of oil sands development and result in increased oil sands production, and the accompanying greenhouse gas emissions, over what would otherwise occur. Given recent large declines in oil prices and the uncertainty of oil price projections, the additional low price scenario included in the Final SEIS should be given additional weight during decision making, due to the potential implications of lower oil prices on project impacts, especially greenhouse gas emissions.
In other words (if you have to say 'in other words', why didn't you just say it in other words to begin with?), low oil prices make oil sand development if The Project is constructed because shipping by pipeline is cheaper than shipping by choo-choo and this makes it more likely that your grandchildren will be vacationing on the beaches of Lake Erie in the winter.
Leave a Reply