The Keystone XL pipeline was meant to take Canadian oil to the Gulf of Mexico to refineries intending to export it. Very little of the refinery infrastructure at the terminal end of the pipeline was equipped to redistribute it domestically. Something like 70% of the oil transported by Keystone XL would have been for export.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2017/apr/16/kirsten-gi...
https://www.lsu.edu/hss/english/files/university_writing_fil... (Page 5)
If I understand these summaries correctly:
1. Countries in Latin America are developing and therefore using more oil so they have less to share with us.
2. We are consuming slightly more oil.
3. Oil obtained from hostile and unreliable regions should be replaced.
The effects would be that oil consumed from the pipeline would be cheaper, it would be more reliable, and while not being totally for domestic use would make a significant dent in our oil consumption in the right categories.
Edit:
Opposition to the Keystone XL likely would have been more effective if it focused on (potential) environmental impacts as well as the spill that occurred in 2017. I think that's what the Biden administration focused on when it cancelled the permits.
They're not the only refineries that handle heavy crude but they are the ones with the easiest access to the export markets of Central and South America.
I don't think it's splitting hairs, that's the main point of the conclusion. What she said:
The Keystone XL pipeline "doesn’t even have any oil for America."
Line 9 runs practically right behind my house, and since it was reversed some years ago it feeds facilities in Ontario (and Quebec) with Alberta oil. Line 5 runs under the great lakes, all the way from western Canada to refineries in Sarnia (and is currently under threat from Mich. governor, but that's a separate topic)
90ish percent of Ontario's oil consumption is domestic oil depending on time of year and so on. The remainder is mostly from the US. Small % from middle east.
Oil from Alberta makes it all the way to refineries near Montreal. Last I looked 70% of Quebec's oil is domestic origin.
Politicians in Alberta have become masters of ignoring this key fact in their rabble rousing.
Could capacity be increased? Maybe. Is it strictly necessary? I don't know. Should we be reducing consumption anyways? Yes.
See map here, on Enbridge's website, zoom in to Ontario:
https://www.enbridge.com/reports/2021-liquids-pipelines-cust...
Now, the Atlantic provinces, that's another story. But a much smaller market.
Because the market is bigger and demand is greater
Because Quebec is powered by hydro and doesn't need oil and doesn't want the pipeline going east because they sell power.
The eastern provinces get oil from offshore locally or from Saudi/middle east so the cost doesn't make sense.
The oil is going south anyways on trucks. The pipeline took so many trucks off the road.
Quebec uses tons of oil every day, whenever they fill up their cars. Most of it comes from Saudi Arabia, brought into the Irving Refinery in New Brunswick. Irving would use Canadian oil if they could get it.
https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/energy-markets/pr...
"Line 9 has been delivering crude oil from Sarnia, Ontario to Montreal since its reversal became operational in December 2015. The line has a capacity of 300 Mb/d and transports a combination of oil from western Canada and the U.S. Midwest.
In 2018, deliveries of imported and eastern Canadian crude oil on the Portland-Montreal Pipeline fell to an average 2.5 Mb/d, less than 1% of its capacity." (italics mine)
That being said, GPP is partially correct: Quebec is the highest electricity producer and consumer in Canada, but it's almost entirely hydroelectric and their electricity is cheap. "Quebec’s emissions per capita are the lowest in Canada at 9.4 tonnes CO2e – 52% below the Canadian average of 19.6 tonnes per capita."
With the highest electric vehicle uptake in the country, and the lowest greenhouse gas emissions, seems Quebec has the right to be smug (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnFAAdOBB1c)
Anyways, please don't spread political disinformation. Quebec is not a significant consumer of Saudi oil, despite what Jason Kenney has to say about it.
Only because they don't count any emissions that come from Hydro. We have no idea what they actually producing because they don't test any of the dam reservoirs for methane emissions.
>Quebec is not a significant consumer of Saudi oil, despite what Jason Kenney has to say about it.
Not my province, so I don't consume anything he says. Considering the biggest refinery in Quebec (Valero refinery in Levis, 265M barrels/day) refines sweet crude, I sincerely doubt it's getting the majority of it's oil from Alberta.
I mean, I understand that may be a good policy for an Alberta, but there's no reason why anyone else should think it's a good policy for them.
The chemical industry pollution in Sarnia is pretty bad from what I hear.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_the_ch...
Sarnia is refining an already upgraded bitumen though, so it's only getting half of the garbage. Also Line 9 goes from Sarnia to Montreal, Enbridge Mainline goes from Alberta to Sarnia.
Tar sands oil is an endless, pointless jobs program. It's barely afloat when oil prices are high, and a rock around the neck of the Canadian economy, and GHG commitments when they aren't. I'm not interested in drastically cutting back on my energy usage, to balance the books with one of the dirtiest fuel producers in the world.
Pipelines do nothing for me, but encourage this economically-destructive industry to expand. For every dollar of wealth it generates, it destroys a dollar and a dime.
I've lived in Edmonton during oil-boom times, and during not-oil-boom times.. and the corrosive effect of the boom and bust cycle on the Albertan economy, it's not pretty.
And a high per-barrel price in Alberta does nothing good for manufacturing in the rest of the country, dragging our dollar up and making our exports less attractive and the costs of production higher. When the dollar is high also makes my labour as a software engineer more expensive, without much benefit to me.
Ah well, enough ranting, off to go pick up sushi in my electric car and I'm not even joking.
That point alone makes me confident you aren't that familiar with the industry.
This source states an average of $40 today across all oil sands producers.
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Breakeven-Price-For-Ne...
Typically when oil prices drop (they were <$40 in early 2020), the oil sands companies put production on standby. It's like most oil exploration - it's either feast or famine depending on global prices.