Obama rejects Keystone XL pipeline project

On the heels of years of politically charged discourse about the Keystone XL pipeline on both sides of the border, US president Barack Obama has rejected the energy company’s proposal.

Keystone would run from Canada’s tar sands through Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska, connecting with existing pipelines.

Supporters of the Keystone deal believed the project would create thousands of jobs and allow for a more stable way to transport oil between Canada and the Gulf Coast of the United States.

In the president’s speech, he said the oil pipeline would not make a meaningful long-term contribution to the economy.

August 26, 2011 – The State Department issues its final environmental impact statement determining “there would be no significant impacts to most resources along the proposed project corridor”.

February 11, 2015 – Congress again tries to push the Obama administration to decide on the permit by passing legislation forcing the decision and sending it to the White House. Even with slumping crude prices shrinking expansion plans, oil-sands projects under construction will require another export pipeline by early next decade, according to an analysis Friday by Desjardins Capital Markets. Today, we’re continuing to lead by example.

Sen. Barbara Boxer of California, the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, praised the decision, saying the pipeline “would have brought the filthiest oil known to humankind into our country in large amounts”.

“While we understand the impact of this decision on Canada, I am confident that our close and long-standing relationship with Canada will continue to grow stronger in the years ahead”. Newly elected U.S. House Speaker, Paul Ryan called the decision to nix the pipeline “sickening”.

Proponents of the 1,179-mile pipeline, primarily Republicans, contend it would boost the economy and help create jobs while providing the United States with a stable oil supply. Spokesperson Catherine Reheis-Boyd for Western States Petroleum told ABC7 News, “Ultimately, decisions about America’s energy future should be based on science and fats”.

And Congresswoman Cheir Bustos (D) Ill. said, “We should focus our efforts on a wide range of alternatives such as non-carbon emitting nuclear technology, biofuels, solar and wind so we can reduce our dependence on foreign fossil fuels and ensure more middle-class jobs in the Quad Cities and across IL”.