{"id":367713,"date":"2025-02-26T09:55:33","date_gmt":"2025-02-26T08:55:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=367713"},"modified":"2025-02-26T09:56:04","modified_gmt":"2025-02-26T08:56:04","slug":"keystone-pipeline-revival","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=367713","title":{"rendered":"Keystone Pipeline Revival?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Science Matters<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0Ron Clutz<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The News<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Smith backs Trump\u2019s call to build Keystone XL pipeline<\/a><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Trump revealed on his Truth Social platform that the shelved pipeline project is still on his mind<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Background<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

In 2011, Congress forced then-President Barack Obama to make a decision<\/a> on Keystone XL by including a provision in an unrelated tax bill that required him to decide the project\u2019s fate within 60 days or determine it wasn\u2019t in the national interest. After several years of turmoil, Obama finally rejected Keystone XL<\/a> in 2015.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

But when President Donald Trump<\/strong> took office in 2017, he invited parent company TC Energy to reapply<\/strong> for a new permit for Keystone XL. They did and were approved.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

On the first day<\/strong>\u00a0of\u00a0Biden\u2019s<\/strong>\u00a0presidency, he issued an\u00a0executive order canceling the Keystone XL pipeline<\/strong>\u00a0\u2014 making good on his promise to the climate activists who helped get him elected, but inviting the lawsuit brought by 21 states who say they will be hurt economically by Biden\u2019s decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Bigger Picture: Br\u2019er Canada and the Tar Baby<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n
\n
\"\"\/
Disney animation of \u201cBr\u2019er Rabbit and the Tar Baby\u201d from Songs of the South, a collection of Uncle Remus American folk tales.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

On Nov. 6, 2015, President Obama canceled the Keystone XL pipeline. Canada PM Trudeau, just installed and wanting not to offend, politely said he was \u201cdisappointed.\u201d Here is the back story that you won\u2019t hear in the media.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Americans should know all about tar pits. As the traditional folk tale suggests, there have been many tar pools across the US. A famous one is in Los Angeles: La Brea Tar Pit. Pictured above around 1910, it\u2019s an oil spill produced by Nature.  Notice the many oil derricks nearby.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tar pits are composed of heavy oil fractions called gilsonite, which seeped from the Earth as oil. In Hancock Park, crude oil seeps up along the 6th Street Fault from the Salt Lake Oil Field, which underlies much of the Fairfax District north of the park.[3] The oil reaches the surface and forms pools at several locations in the park, becoming asphalt as the lighter fractions of the petroleum biodegrade or evaporate.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This seepage has been happening for tens of thousands of years. From time to time, the asphalt would form a deposit thick enough to trap animals, and the surface would be covered with layers of water, dust, or leaves. Animals would wander in, become trapped, and eventually die. Predators would enter to eat the trapped animals and also become stuck.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/La_Brea_Tar_Pits<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
La Brea Tar Pits and Museum today.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Canada\u2019s Tar Baby<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

So, as you can see, tar pits are hazardous to animal and plant life. In Canada, we have a much greater problem bestowed on us: the Athabasca tar sands in Alberta. The oil deposits are much too large to put fences around it an<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, as you can see, tar pits are hazardous to animal and plant life. In Canada, we have a much greater problem bestowed on us: the Athabasca tar sands in Alberta. The oil deposits are much too large to put fences around it and open it as a museum, as was done in L.A. No, in Alberta the environmentally responsible thing is to clean up the mess Nature left behind.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The cleanup requires a massive effort, but costs can be offset by processing the tar into petroleum products and shipping them to markets who want to use them. \u00a0Using those products from syncrude oil liberates CO2 once\u00a0trapped in bitumen, and in the air becomes available to plants who\u00a0grow larger and faster\u00a0from the increased concentration. \u00a0The Japanese would call this a \u201cvirtuous cycle.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Br\u2019er America is a neighbor with the facilities to help, but because of CO2 hysteria, the Obama and the Biden administrations were afraid of getting some tar on their hands. Actually a pipeline is the environmentally friendly way of transporting the crude oil, but now trains will be used instead of the pipeline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The origin of the Alberta oil sands is a debated subject. Two primary theories are asserted:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1.) These sands are the remnants of a once vast reserve of crude oil that, over extremely long periods of time, has escaped or been destroyed microbiologically; thus leaving behind some bitumen and also converting the lighter crude oil into bitumen through bacterial processes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2.) The bitumen evolved from highly organic cretaceous shales (similar to oil shale). Underground pressure forced the bitumen out of the kerogen rich shales where it soaked into existing silt grade sediments and sand bodies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the first theory, petroleum would be formed in the traditional manner, and then converted to bitumen by some additional process.  More description here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Summary<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, whether Nature created the tar mess by bacteria or by underground pressure, it\u2019s up to us humans to clean it up. Canada is doing the heavy lifting, while the Dem administrations preferred posing as innocent bystanders.\u00a0 Maybe a Keystone Pipeline Revival will be triggered by Trump to the benefit of energy dependent North Americans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

See Also:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
Pipeline Facts vs. Fears<\/a><\/blockquote>