TransCanada: Pipeline would not affect climate
02/19/2013 5:23 PM
02/19/2013 5:24 PM
In a shift in strategy, the company that wants to build an oil pipeline from western Canada to Texas said Tuesday that the project will have no measurable effect on global warming.
Alex Pourbaix, TransCanada’s president for energy and oil pipelines, said opponents of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline have grossly inflated its likely impact on emissions of greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming.
Canada represents just 2 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, Pourbaix said at a forum sponsored by a manufacturing group that supports the pipeline. Oil sands concentrated in Alberta, where the 1,700-mile pipeline would start, make up 5 percent of Canada’s total, Pourbaix said.
“Simple math tells us, therefore, that the oil sands represent only one-tenth of 1 percent of global greenhouse emissions,” he said. “Even if production from the oil sands were to double, the (greenhouse gas) contribution from the oil sands would be immaterial to global” greenhouse gas production.
Pourbaix’s comments came two days after a rally Sunday by pipeline opponents drew an estimated 35,000 people to Washington. Organizers, including the Sierra Club and other environmental groups, billed the event as the largest climate rally in U.S. history.
Opponents say the $7 billion pipeline would carry “dirty oil” derived from tar sands that requires significantly more energy to produce than conventional crude oil and emits up to 20 percent more greenhouse gases.
At Tuesday’s forum, organized by the National Association of Manufacturers, Pourbaix took on the climate argument head-on. He and other TransCanada executives have previously emphasized the pipeline’s safety, the jobs it will create and the fact the oil comes from a U.S. neighbor and ally.
“Our opponents are trying to make this debate about GHGs,” he said, referring to greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide that are emitted as oil is produced and refined. “So let’s look at Canada’s contribution to global GHGs.”
Pourbaix called Canada a leader on climate change and noted that Alberta was the first jurisdiction in North America to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. The province also has imposed a carbon tax, an action the Obama administration has said it will not propose.
Oil carried by Keystone will displace heavy crude from Venezuela, Nigeria and other countries that also contributes to global warming, Pourbaix said. “You could shut down oil sands production tomorrow and it would have absolutely no measurable impact on climate change,” he said.
Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University, said Pourbaix’s comments appeared to be based on “some rather rosy assumptions” about oil sands production. First, the calculation does not take into account the energy cost of refining and transporting oil from tar sands, nor does it account for a huge reserve that could make the Alberta tar sands a key contributor to global warming in the future, he said.
Mann, who opposes the pipeline, said U.S. approval of Keystone XL would encourage increased development of the tar sands. Canadian officials have called development of the tar sands a national priority.
Join the Discussion
The Wichita Eagle is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.