Energy
What Will Be the Future of the Keystone XL Pipeline Under President Trump?
From EnergyNow.ca
By Terry Winnitoy, EnergyNow
The Keystone XL Pipeline, proposed in 2008, was designed to transport Canadian crude oil from Alberta to refineries in the United States, specifically to Steele City, Nebraska, and onward to refineries in Illinois and Texas, as well as to an oil pipeline distribution center in Cushing, Oklahoma.
Spanning approximately 1,179 miles and designed to transport up to 830,000 barrels of oil per day, the pipeline promised significant economic and energy security benefits. However, it became a focal point of political and environmental controversy, leading to its eventual cancellation by Presidents Obama and Biden.
Here’s a brief look at its history, the reasons it should have been built, the political dynamics that led to its cancellation and will President-elect Trump revive it?
Why the Keystone XL Pipeline Should Have Been Built
Economic and Job Creation
The pipeline was projected to create thousands of construction jobs and several hundred permanent jobs, providing a significant boost to the economy. It was also expected to stimulate economic activity through the development of related infrastructure and services.
Energy Security
By facilitating the efficient transport of a large volume of oil from a stable and friendly neighboring country, the pipeline would have reduced American dependence on oil imports from more volatile regions, enhancing national energy security.
Environmental Safety
Pipelines are generally safer and more environmentally friendly for transporting oil compared to rail or truck, with lower risks of spills and accidents. The Keystone XL was designed with the latest technology to minimize leaks and environmental impact.
Regulatory Oversight
The project underwent extensive environmental reviews and was subject to strict regulatory standards to ensure it adhered to environmental protection and safety measures.
Political Reasons for Cancellation
Environmental Activism
The pipeline became a symbol for environmentalists who opposed further development of fossil fuel infrastructure. They argued it would contribute to climate change by enabling the extraction and consumption of oil sands, which are more carbon-intensive than other oil sources.
Obama’s Cancellation
President Obama rejected the pipeline in 2015, citing environmental concerns and its potential impact on global climate change. He argued that approving the pipeline would have undercut America’s leadership on climate change.
Trump’s Reversal and Biden’s Final Cancellation
President Trump revived the project in 2017, citing economic benefits and energy security. However, President Biden canceled it again on his first day in office in 2021, fulfilling a campaign promise to prioritize climate change issues and transition towards renewable energy.
Political Symbolism
For both Obama and Biden, the decision to cancel the Keystone XL Pipeline was also a symbolic gesture, demonstrating a commitment to environmental sustainability and a shift away from fossil fuel dependence in line with their administrations’ climate policies.
Will President-Elect Trump Reinstate It?
Currently, there is no definitive answer on whether President-elect Trump will reinstate the Keystone XL Pipeline. His previous administration showed support for the project, citing its potential economic and energy security benefits. However, reinstating the pipeline would require navigating significant political, legal, and environmental challenges that have developed over the years.
It would also depend on the current geopolitical, economic, and environmental priorities at the time of his taking office. The Keystone XL Pipeline’s history is a complex tapestry of economic aspirations, environmental concerns, and political maneuvers.
Its cancellation has been a contentious issue, reflecting the broader national and global debates over energy policy and climate change strategy. Whether it will be reinstated remains a significant question, contingent on a multitude of factors including political will, environmental policies, and market dynamics.
That all said, re-instating its approval might be the perfect “in your face” moment for Trump to Obama and Biden as he begins his second term of presidency. We’ll have to wait and see.
Energy
A full-throated endorsement of the Secretary of Energy nominee Chris Wright.
In Praise of Chris Wright
Like others, we have watched with curiosity as President-elect Donald Trump has rolled out his nominees for the various leadership positions of his administration. Whatever your views on any particular candidate, an undeniable pattern has emerged. First, Trump is selecting people who strongly support the specific campaign promises on which he ran, and those chosen are vowing to implement them to the letter. Second, lack of prior government experience seems to be an attribute rather than a detriment. Finally, the helminthoid establishment in Washington appears utterly ill-prepared for the deluge that is set to befall them, and Trump can expect significant bipartisan resistance as it dawns on lawmakers just how literal he was being on the campaign trail.
Of particular interest to this publication were the President-elect’s positions on energy. During his many rallies and speeches, candidate Trump vowed to be extremely supportive of domestic energy production, promising to unleash a wave of new investment in oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy. He also committed to ending participation in various international climate change initiatives, much to the horror of those on the progressive environmental left. The shackles of federal regulation would soon be lifted, he said, and the US would come to dominate the global energy scene once again.
Against this backdrop, President-elect Trump electrified those in industry by nominating Chris Wright to the position of Secretary of Energy on Saturday. We can think of no better person for the job.
Consider his impressive biography. Wright earned an undergraduate degree in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and did graduate work in electrical engineering at both MIT and the University of California, Berkeley. He was a pioneer in the development of US shale gas resources, creating enormous value for shareholders over the past two decades. He has grown his current company, Liberty Energy, into one of the premier energy industry service providers in North America. Finally, he is an investor in and board member of Oklo Inc., a next-generation small modular nuclear reactor (SMR) company that has seen its market cap soar in 2024.
Things get even more promising when one studies Wright’s policy positions on energy. In early 2024, Liberty Energy published a 180-page policy document titled “Bettering Human Lives,” and we are hard-pressed to find anything to disagree with. The ten “Key Takeaways” from the summary page read as follows:
1. Energy is essential to life and the world needs more of it!
2. The modern world today is powered by and made of hydrocarbons.
3. Hydrocarbons are essential to improving the wealth, health, and life opportunities for the less energized seven billion people who aspire to be among the world’s lucky one billion.
4. Hydrocarbons supply more than 80% of global energy and thousands of critical materials and products.
5. The American Shale Revolution transformed energy markets, energy security, and geopolitics.
6. Global demand for oil, natural gas, and coal are all at record levels and rising – no energy transition has begun.
7. Modern alternatives, like solar and wind, provide only a part of electricity demand and do not replace the most critical uses of hydrocarbons. Energy-dense, reliable nuclear could be more impactful.
8. Making energy more expensive or unreliable compromises people, national security, and the environment.
9. Climate change is a global challenge but is far from the world’s greatest threat to human life.
10. Zero Energy Poverty by 2050 is a superior goal compared to Net Zero 2050.
What’s not to like? The first nine of these takeaways are objectively true statements of fact, although few executives of publicly traded companies have had the courage to say them out loud. Wright has consistently done so throughout his career. The last is a brilliant reformulation of the climate change debate, as it forces a consideration of the impact on humans, not just the impact of humans.
Wright’s nomination is sure to trigger vigorous opposition by all the predictable people, and we hope he is well prepared to run the gauntlet of personal destruction that the left will undoubtedly use to derail him. Should he win approval in the Senate, Wright has the opportunity to be a historic and transformational figure. His talent, knowledge, leadership attributes, and track record of success make him more than qualified for the job. Count us among those excited at the prospect.
If you’re interested to hear from Wright himself, listen to this episode of Energy News Beat, featuring a discussion with Wright and yours truly, recorded in March of this year.
Thank you for reading. Please subscribe to access all articles and support our work.
Daily Caller
Trump Energy Policies will be executed by New York Rep. Lee Zeldin and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum
North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Zeldin And Burgum Take On Daunting Roles In Second Trump Term
President-elect Donald Trump has set Washington, D.C. afire over the past week with a series of controversial picks for cabinet-level offices and other senior advisory positions. The Senate confirmation hearings for nominees like Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Matt Gaetz, Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard are destined to be must-see TV, events Congress could use to help cut the federal deficit by airing in pay-per-view format.
But the nominees whose offices have the biggest impact on energy policy are likely to be among the least controversial announced so far. Those would be former New York Rep. Lee Zeldin to head up the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum to be secretary of the Department of the Interior (DOI). While many would assume the secretary of Energy would be the cabinet position to wield the most power to regulate energy companies, the reality is that these other two positions are far more impactful.
For the oil, gas and coal industries, no part of the federal government possesses greater authority to regulate their business than DOI, which oversees all leasing, mining, drilling and minerals production related to federal lands and waters. The U.S. government is the largest landowner in the country, owning large percentages of the lands in the intermountain West under which some of the biggest domestic reserves of these mineral resources exist. Specific regions of these western states are also prime locations for wind and solar development.
North Dakota is a state rich in mineral reserves and is one of several states in which federal lands are intermingled with state and private landholdings. As governor, Burgum has had to grapple with the same array of permitting, leasing and multiple-use issues he will now be assigned to oversee at DOI. One of his main tasks will be to reinvigorate a federal leasing program that has been held dormant in violation of an array of laws and regulations by current Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, a longtime anti-development activist.
At EPA, Zeldin will be faced with the daunting task of bending a massive bureaucracy that has been packed with direct hires from billionaire-funded climate-alarm groups to get with the Trump agenda. One of Zeldin’s immediate major tasks will be to find ways to streamline the agency’s permitting and approval processes.
The slowness of permitting and delegations of authority at the agency have become bottlenecks to progress in meeting some of the carbon reduction goals laid out in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), President Joe Biden’s signature piece of legislation. Barring an unlikely major rewrite or repeal of the IRA, those goals will remain among the priorities that Zeldin will find on his plate when he assumes office next year.
While the common perception of the Trump energy-and-climate agenda focuses on its “drill, baby, drill” aspects, it is key to remember that former President Trump did not abandon U.S. carbon reduction coals in his first term and has not pledged to do that in the second term to come. In fact, U.S. carbon emissions fell significantly across Trump’s previous four years in office.
Both Zeldin and Burgum will also make a high priority of reviewing the massive pile of new regulations put in place by the Biden administration, which total to more new pages published in the Federal Register than any other presidency, and then working to eliminate or modify many of them. This is a daunting task that could prove overwhelming given the inevitable obstruction and pushback by the career bureaucracy within these agencies and departments.
Given the way the Trump overall agenda seems to be shaping up, Zeldin and Burgum will be taking on these administrative tasks simultaneously with Trump’s goals of cutting staff and even moving entire agencies to locations outside of Washington, D.C. They will also have to be managed in conjunction with Trump’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency to be run by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy.
What it all portends is a period of upheaval and radical change not just at EPA and DOI, but across the entire federal structure. Given that the U.S. system of government was designed by the country’s founders to inhibit radical change, we are in for some interesting times indeed.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
-
Economy2 days ago
COP 29 leaders demand over a $1 trillion a year in climate reparations from ‘wealthy’ nations. They don’t deserve a nickel.
-
Education1 day ago
Lowering Teacher Education Standards Will Harm Students
-
Daily Caller19 hours ago
Smugglers Reportedly Telling Migrants To Hoof It Toward Border Before Trump Takes Office
-
Business17 hours ago
Companies Scrambling To Respond To Trump’s ‘Beautiful’ Tariff Hikes
-
conflict19 hours ago
Biden Caves, Allows Ukraine To Use US Missiles For Long-Range Strikes Inside Russia
-
International2 days ago
Trump sues New York Times for $10 billion over ‘false and defamatory statements’
-
Energy1 day ago
Ottawa’s proposed emission cap lacks any solid scientific or economic rationale
-
Alberta23 hours ago
On gender, Alberta is following the science