Wintry mix spreads across Minnesota

MPR News helps you turn down the noise and build shared understanding. Turn up your support for this public resource and keep trusted journalism accessible to all. 

Turn Up Your Support


The State Department says that production of Canadian tar-sand crude, which has a bigger greenhouse gas footprint than other types of oil, is unlikely to be increased if the 

 goes ahead — and therefore would do little to contribute to climate change.
In the 

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

 on the controversial pipeline, the department takes no position on whether it should be built but notes that tar-sand crude produces 17 percent more greenhouse gases than conventional crude and as much as 10 percent more than heavy crude.


"This is only one piece of the information that we'll be considering going forward," State Department Assistant Secretary Kerri-Ann Jones tells NPR's Elizabeth Shogren.

The project has long been a lightning rod, not only for relations between Washington and Ottawa but within the U.S., where many conservatives say the project will create jobs, while others fear it will hurt the environment.

Reuters says the report reaffirms the idea that bituminous oil sand reserves require more energy to produce and process, and therefore result in higher emissions of greenhouse gases:

Now that the report has been released, the next step is for other federal agencies and the public to weigh in on it during a comment period that begins Feb. 5. While the study is not the final step in the process, it could be crucial in determining whether the project gets a final nod from the White House.

The Natural Resources Defense Council, which opposes the project, issued a statement after the report was released. "Even though the State Department continues to downplay clear evidence that the Keystone XL pipeline would lead to tar sands expansion and significantly worsen carbon pollution, it has, for the first time, acknowledged that the proposed project could accelerate climate change," NRDC International Program Director Susan Casey-Lefkowitz said, adding that President Obama "now has all the information he needs to reject the pipeline."

Ahead of the report's release, a spokesman for the company in charge of the project, TransCanada Corp., said the expectation is that the report would affirm earlier findings that the $5.4 billion pipeline is manageable from an environmental impact standpoint.

"Fifteen thousand pages of scientific and technical study published in four environmental analysis reports since 2010 have all concluded this project would have minimal impact on the environment," James Millar wrote in an email.

The proposed 1,179-mile pipeline extension would run from Hardisty, Alberta, to Steele City, Neb.

, the proposal is to extend the already existing Keystone pipeline:


A previous version of this story incorrectly referred to the Natural Resources Defense Council as the National Resources Defense Council.

Environmental News

The project has long been a lightning rod, not only for relations between Washington and Ottawa but within the U.S., where many conservatives say the project will create jobs, while others fear it will hurt the environment.


U.S. issues Keystone XL pipeline environmental review

Go Deeper.

Like this?

News you can use in your inbox