With the clash between Congress and the White House over the Canada-to-Texas Keystone XL pipeline nearing a climax, the head of the Canada’s Alberta province said Wednesday that slumping energy prices would have no effect of his country’s determination to build the pipeline.
Alberta Premier Jim Prentice told a U.S. Chamber of Commerce audience that fluctuating oil prices have not affected the financial viability of the 1,100-mile pipeline. Mr. Prentice was in Washington as the new Republican majorities are poised to pass legislation bypassing President Obama and ordering the pipeline to be approved — legislation the president has vowed to veto.
“Oil prices move around a lot, and they will continue to move around a lot,” Mr. Prentice said in response to a question after his remarks. “Through that whole process this project has remained viable.”
He said the recent that the drop in world oil prices, which have gone from over $110 a barrel in early 2014 to under $50 today, would not have a financial effect on the building of the pipeline or on his government’s support for the project. Mr. Prentice said completing Keystone remains a key part of the energy infrastructure of North America.
Mr. Prentice argued it was misguided to impose strict regulatory and environmental standards on Canada, a close ally, “while giving a free pass to comparable oil from other countries, such as Venezuela.” He said many of his constituents are “confused” by the delay, given the historic openness of the U.S. market.
“The oil it would carry is produced in my province under environmental standards that are at least as high as those that apply to oil produced in the United States and much, much higher than those that apply in other countries that are allowed to land their oil in the U.S. market without interference,” he said.
SEE ALSO: House to accept Senate Keystone bill, setting up Obama veto
Supporters say the pipeline will create thousands of jobs and provide a reliable means for getting the oil in Canada’s vast tar sands fields to the U.S. and to global markets, reducing North American reliance on less reliable foreign oil sources. They say the Obama administration has intentionally dragged out its deliberations over the pipeline for fear of angering environmentalists in the president’s Democratic political base.
But critics contend the Canadian tar sands are a particularly dirty source of fossil fuel and the U.S. should be looking to cleaner energy alternatives. The route of the proposed pipeline has also proven controversial, especially in states such as Nebraska where the pipeline skirts sensitive environmental areas.
Mr. Prentice did not press Mr. Obama by name to approve the pipeline, but pointed to a lengthy State Department review that, he said, concluded Keystone would not increase carbon emissions and that “Alberta was going to continue with the development of its energy resources one way or the other.”
Should Mr. Obama veto the Keystone XL project, Mr. Prentice said Alberta’s oil would still be transported to the U.S. by less efficient means, including by rail.
The Senate approved building the Keystone XL pipeline late last month on a 62-35 vote, and the Republican-dominated House is expected to follow suit next week. The White House has said Mr. Obama opposes bill in part because he sees it as circumventing the review process by the State Department.
The Environmental Protection Agency threw another wrench in the Keystone debate earlier this week, questioning in a letter Monday whether the falling oil prices will pressure Keystone’s owners to pump even more oil to make up the lost revenue, leading to more carbon emissions.
SEE ALSO: Senate approves building Keystone pipeline
But Russ Girling, chief executive of Calgary-based TransCanada, which is building the pipeline, told Canadian Press that the EPA argument was just the latest delaying tactic being used to try to block the project.
• Jonathan Soch can be reached at jsoch@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.