Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi
Anyway, the pipeline vs. rail is kind of besides the point, the emissions are just too small.
What matters is the future of the oil sands with and without the pipeline. Is oil sands production marginal without Keystone? The upstream production emissions are the real question. Without Keystone will an additional 800,000 barrels a day be built in the same time frame? The Department of State says yes, the EPA says no.
That's the nut of the issue.
|
But where does the replacement oil / energy come from?
At some point due to inelastic demand and poor short term (25 year) substitutions the price of oil will just rise to offset the cost of shipping or they will expand heavy oil production in Russia, Saudi, Kuwait and Venezaula rather than Canada.
I dont see how the EPA can credibly say that the worldwide emmissions due to oil would change as a result of keystone