State Department wins oil industry praise, green jeers on pipeline finding

The oil industry’s biggest trade group on Friday praised a new State Department finding that a proposed pipeline to greatly expand imports from Canada’s oil sands carries few environmental risks if managed properly.

The environmental study released Friday brings TransCanada’s proposed $7 billion, 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline a step closer to Obama administration approval. A final decision is expected later this year.

The American Petroleum Institute, in a statement, urged final approval and permits “without delay” and argued the project would boost the economy.

“The nation’s quintessential shovel-ready project is a step closer to reality,” said API Refining Manager Cindy Schild. “That’s good news for tens of thousands of Americans who stand to find new jobs when this pipeline project is finally approved. If the State Department gives the final okay, hiring could begin immediately in hundreds of American companies in the Midwest and across the country.” 

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) similarly called for final approval of the project that he contends is a vital way to increase energy security and create jobs.

He warned that the U.S. must act quickly due to a separate proposal to build a pipeline from the oil sands to ports on Canada’s west coast.

“This is a win-win for the American economy. But unless we take immediate action we risk losing this valuable oil supply to energy-hungry countries like China,” Upton said.

But environmental groups bitterly oppose the Keystone XL project, and quickly criticized the State Department finding Friday. The National Wildlife Federation also suggested a lawsuit is in the offing.

“The document still fails to address the key concerns for landowners and wildlife. It is almost certain to be scrutinized in other venues, including a probable legal challenge,” National Wildlife Federation Senior Vice President Jim Lyon said in a statement.

The Natural Resources Defense Council said the State Department analysis failed to sufficiently review pipeline safety issues, pollution in refinery communities, wildlife impacts and other issues.

“It is utterly beyond me how the administration can claim the pipeline will have ‘no significant impacts’ if they haven’t bothered to do in-depth studies around the issues of contention,” said Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, the group’s international program director.

“An administration committed to fighting climate change and building a clean energy economy in the United States must be more stringent in evaluating the vast impacts of this dirty and unnecessary project,” she said in a statement.

—This post was updated at 1:13 p.m.