Seeking Alpha

An environmentalist group says the Keystone XL pipeline (TRP) would add as much as 1.2B metric...

An environmentalist group says the Keystone XL pipeline (TRP) would add as much as 1.2B metric tons of carbon pollution to the atmosphere over 50 years, more than four times higher than a draft State Department analysis. The report counts emissions from the burning of petroleum coke, a by-product of tar sands refining, and the effects of deforestation in its estimate, which the State Department didn’t include.
From other sites
Comments (7)
  • The Geoffster
    , contributor
    Comments (4013) | Send Message
     
    Ludites.
    23 Jul 2013, 03:36 PM Reply Like
  • Paulo Santos
    , contributor
    Comments (20628) | Send Message
     
    It's a bit stupid to include the burning of the crude, as if it wouldn't get used without the Pipeline ...
    23 Jul 2013, 03:39 PM Reply Like
  • SoldHigh
    , contributor
    Comments (1013) | Send Message
     
    "An environmentalist group..."

     

    Yeah, there's an objective source! LOLOL
    23 Jul 2013, 03:41 PM Reply Like
  • RJKRJK
    , contributor
    Comments (141) | Send Message
     
    Lets also not forget the methane emanations of the workers. Oh, and lets kill all of the animals within a 40 mile distance from the pipeline for the same reason. A wise man once said, and it is still true today, "stupid is as stupid does".
    23 Jul 2013, 03:57 PM Reply Like
  • Uncle Pie
    , contributor
    Comments (3130) | Send Message
     
    who says they have to burn the coke? Coke is used to make steel, and no one makes steel in North America anymore. They'll probably just bury it in a big hole.
    23 Jul 2013, 04:30 PM Reply Like
  • tullii
    , contributor
    Comments (112) | Send Message
     
    Carbon Capture Storage : example Quest CCS Storage will put a quash on that number from the environmentalists. I'm all for clean air and a clean planet too, but there is so much innovation happening in the Oilsands 'clean' technologies to improve the environmental footprint and that side of the issue is not getting near as much attention as it deserves. Scooping up oilsand is the lowest cost of energy on the planet, the choice is simple, offshore is expensive, conventional drilling is not repeatable in declining basins, unconventional is great initially but decline rates require massive ongoing capex each drilling season, North America needs this deposit produced, and the economy of scale of new markets from the pipeline will provide the best environmental standards through innovation, but we can't pay for it when WCS crude gets lowest price on the planet.

     

    23 Jul 2013, 05:13 PM Reply Like
  • marpy
    , contributor
    Comments (799) | Send Message
     
    A Trash Report from a biased Trash group = zero credibility.
    23 Jul 2013, 11:32 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector