Seeking Alpha

Report: Harper to accept emissions reduction targets to win Keystone approval

  • In perhaps Canada's final push to win U.S. approval for the Keystone XL pipeline project, CBC reports PM Harper has written to Pres. Obama formally expressing a willingness to accept greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets proposed by the U.S.
  • The letter, sent last month, is a clear signal Canada is prepared to make concessions to get Obama's OK for the TransCanada (TRP) pipeline.
  • Environmentalists waste no time in criticizing the reported offer, urging Obama to reject any emissions deals as expanding oil sands production is "a recipe for climate failure."
From other sites
Comments (8)
  • AZ Desert Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (256) | Send Message
     
    There is a common sense reason Canada is pushing so hard for the XL to be built. It benefits Canada more than the U.S..
    7 Sep 2013, 08:48 AM Reply Like
  • marpy
    , contributor
    Comments (1104) | Send Message
     
    It benefits both countries in many ways. With Canada being far more dependent on resource extraction than the U.S. it obviously looks like it has a bigger impact on Canada. This may not be as straight forward as one may think as two of the big impacts for the US are energy Independence, and oil from an ally and politically stable neighbor. Based on a very volatile middle east, the growing Chinese influence in the region, deteriorating relations with Russia, and the whims of the likes of Venezuela, the benefits of Keystone and Oil sands production could become far larger for the US than Canada. The political landscape is always changing and with oil, it always makes sense to secure stable sources of supply when ever possible.
    7 Sep 2013, 09:24 AM Reply Like
  • Uncle Pie
    , contributor
    Comments (3540) | Send Message
     
    It's bizarre that the "friends of the earth" demonize the Keystone pipeline while ignoring the many hundreds of pipelines which already crisscross North America. It's odd they demonize Canada's heavy oil while the US imports 900,000 barrels/day from Venezuela (at least that was the figure for 2012, according to the IEA). Do they really think Venezuela is more reliable than Canada as a trading partner and steward of the environment? Do they really think it safer to ship oil across the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico than ship it across dry land in a brand new pipeline? Are they not aware that the carbon footprint for all Canada's oil sands projects is about 3.5% of the carbon footprint for North America's coal fired power plants? Why do they not protest the mile-long trains full of coal coming out of the Powder River Basin every day? Their laser focus on just one pipeline, and one relatively small carbon emitter, among so many, makes you wonder what their agenda really is.
    7 Sep 2013, 11:32 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1446) | Send Message
     
    Uncle,

     

    "...makes you wonder what their agenda really is"

     

    It's actually quite simple: first population control and second population reduction. To hardcore environmentalists humans are a "cancer" upon the earth. Making energy abundant, cheap, and affordable would only serve to spread the "cancer" so they are entirely opposed to any breakthrough that would accomplish this. As you may know, nuclear energy has no carbon emissions. Even hydro-electric is not considered "clean" because of the dams used to generate the water necessary to make it cost-effective.

     

    There is literally no way to appease them so why even bother trying.

     

    Unsurprisingly they refuse to do the honorable thing and kill themselves which would be the most effective way in which they themselves could reduce the "carbon footprint" of humankind.

     

    :)
    7 Sep 2013, 01:38 PM Reply Like
  • The Rebel
    , contributor
    Comments (1359) | Send Message
     
    "Do they really think Venezuela is more reliable than Canada as a trading partner and steward of the environment?"

     

    In a word, yes. They are leftists, first.
    7 Sep 2013, 10:04 PM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1619) | Send Message
     
    The XL would also help the US by giving us more control over global supply, particularly distillates. As to Venezuela, they own Citgo, one of oue largest refinerers, so Citgo will continue to process Venezuelan Crude. The Saudi's own half of Motiva, our largest refinery. Motiva will continue to process Saudi crude. The US has become a major global supplier of distillates, diesel etc., there are political implications.
    7 Sep 2013, 02:20 PM Reply Like
  • SoldHigh
    , contributor
    Comments (1013) | Send Message
     
    These environmentalist extremists are dangerous terrorists who use political means to promote their agenda which hurts the rest of us - zero sense in them.
    7 Sep 2013, 05:00 PM Reply Like
  • jimdice
    , contributor
    Comments (12) | Send Message
     
    I suspect the timing of Harper's offer coincides highly with the fact that Canada is one of the few countries backing Obama on Syria. I'm surprised the media has overlooked this significant fact.
    9 Sep 2013, 07:34 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs