American Oil and Gas Reporter - December 2015 - 31

page 30-31_Layout 1 12/1/2015 3:52 PM Page 2

a basis for even closer cooperation in the
future.
"For years, the Keystone Pipeline has
occupied what I, frankly, consider an
overinflated role in our political discourse,"
Obama says. "It became a symbol too
often used as a campaign cudgel by both
parties, rather than a serious policy matter.
All this obscured the fact that this pipeline
would be neither a silver bullet for the
economy, as was promised by some, nor
the express lane to climate disaster proclaimed by others."
While many Keystone supporters
praised the pipeline's potential for boosting
employment, Obama argues that if Congress wants to create jobs, it should pass
a bipartisan infrastructure program. He
contends such legislation would create
more than 30 times as many jobs per
year as the pipeline, and would benefit
the U.S. economy for decades to come.
The United States is reacting to climate
change concerns by investing in clean
energy and improving energy efficiencies,
the president adds. "America now is a
global leader when it comes to taking
serious action to fight climate change," he
asserts. "Frankly, approving this project
would have undercut that global leadership.
And the biggest risk we face is not acting."

Politics First
Neal Kirby, director of communications
and public affairs for the Independent
Petroleum Association of America, says
the president's decision puts politics and
pandering to activists above American
jobs and obtaining secure energy from
Canada.
"It increases our reliance on oil from
cartels such as the Organization of Petroleum
Exporting Countries, and doesn't acknowledge the benefits of the pipeline, such as
union labor and associated revenues that
would flow to the U.S. Treasury," he says.
Jack Gerard, president and chief executive officer of the American Petroleum
Institute, says the president's rejection
of the pipeline is a clear example of
politics coming before the interests of
U.S. workers and consumers.
"It's ironic that the administration
would strike a deal to allow Iranian crude
onto the global market while refusing to
give our closest ally, Canada, access to
U.S. refineries," says Gerard. "This decision will cost thousands of jobs and is
an assault to American workers. It's politics at its worst. Unfortunately for the
majority of Americans who have said
they want the jobs and economic benefits
Keystone XL represents, the White House

has placed political calculations above
sound science."
The administration's decision against
the northern leg of the Keystone XL
Pipeline will have no material impact on
greenhouse gas emissions, predicts Kevin
Birn, director, IHS Energy. He says IHS
research consistently shows that oil sands
production does not hinge on any one infrastructure project, and alternative means
of transportation exist.
"IHS continues to expect more than
800,000 barrels a day of new supply to
come on line by 2020 from existing projects relative to 2014. This will raise total
oil sands production to 3 million barrels
a day in 2020," Birn points out.
Jim Burkhard, vice president, IHS Energy, adds, "The Keystone XL decision
does not mean less oil sands overall, but
it may complicate oil sands access to the
U.S. Gulf Coast, where there is substantial
refining capacity for heavy crude. The
number one beneficiary of all this will
be Venezuela and other suppliers of heavy
oil that ship to the Gulf Coast by tanker.
Venezuelan heavy crude is similar to oil
sands in both quality and greenhouse gas
intensity, and will continue to be consumed
by U.S. refineries in the absence of access
to Canadian crude oil."
❒

DECEMBER 2015 31
American Oil and Gas Reporter - December 2015

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Oil and Gas Reporter - December 2015
