Quote:
Originally Posted by octothorp
Not having followed Keystone in detail, what was the reason for phase 4 having such a radically different route than phase 1? Surely it would have been much easier to gain approvals on land where those phase 1 deals were already in place. Obviously it's shorter, and I see that there was a plan to access the Bakken formation fields in Montana. Are those the only reasons? Was it thought that approval on the phase 4 route would be easier than additional capacity along the phase 1?
In retrospect, would a larger-capacity along the phase 1 line, combined with a connector line with the Bakken fields as a later phase have been better?
|
Phase 1 took the long route because they converted a big chunk of the old natural gas mainline to oil service. So most of the Canadian portion was already built.
For KXL they planned to build new, so they went the shortest route.