Sentences with phrase «oil pipeline debate»

Not exact matches

As pipeline politics came to dominate the North American energy debate, uncertainty over TransCanada's Keystone XL project gave new urgency to other efforts to expand Canada's oil market, including Enbridge's Northern Gateway project.

In the midst of shock and sadness, already there are those who have concluded this is an advantage for the pipeline industry in the oil debate.

Victoria businessman David Black has thrown yet another log on the fiery debate over Enbridge's Northern Gateway pipeline with his proposal to build a $ 13 - billion oil refinery on the province's northern coast.

Black has also said he thinks his proposed refinery, by providing permanent jobs and economic benefits to British Columbians hitherto wary of oil exports, «will change the debate on the pipeline.»

The Calgary - based company has flagged a final investment decision in the not - too - distant future for the hotly - debated Keystone XL pipeline to transport Canadian oil to US refineries.

The accident, though, will likely shift the U.S. debate over Keystone away from whether or not building the pipeline would have any significant impact on greenhouse gases (the U.S. State Department says it won't, environmentalists disagree), to whether or not Western Canada's oil is a particularly hazardous fuel.

The debate over TransCanada Corp.'s Keystone XL oil pipeline has forced Americans to confront their complicity in the development of Canada's oilsands.

A sharp correction in oil prices is putting the debate around major pipeline projects, such as Keystone XL, into a more nuanced light.

The derailment and explosions, which took place around 1:15 a.m. on Saturday, underscored a debate in the effort to transport North America's oil across long distances: is it safer and less environmentally destructive to move huge quantities of crude oil by train or by pipeline?

And experts have debated to what extent Alberta's oil might be shipped out by rail if the pipeline's northern route falters.

A rail catastrophe has left at least 13 dead in Quebec, and renewed the debate over whether it is better to move oil by freight train or pipeline

The flurry of climate action comes as the Senate is debating legislation requiring Obama to approve the Keystone XL pipeline's movement of Canadian oil sands crude into the United States.

This is a truly seismic change, and may mean some big changes in the oil sands and pipeline debates.

There's been extensive coverage of President Obama's decision, forced by a Republican legislative maneuver, to reject the application for a much - debated pipeline project, known as Keystone XL, that would have carried a tarry oil precursor from Canadian oil sands to American refineries.

The spill and its aftermath has not just shaken an Arkansas town, but has also sparked continued debate over the controversial tar sands oil and how transporting this oil via pipelines puts communities and the climate at risk.

Better yet would be to debate an energy policy for the USA, including opening up exploratory oil and gas drilling including shale deposits, limiting the exponential growth of regulations currently stifling new exploration, ending the EPA regulatory war on coal, reactivating the Keystone pipeline, etc.; these issues have direct impact on American jobs and future energy independence, both of which are more important issues for US voters (and presidential candidates) than any «climate» debate.

As we debate our entire national commitment to climate change action through the proxy of an oil sands pipeline project or two, we should remember every one of us has had a hand in getting the bitumen into that pipe.

The heavily debated northern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline, designed to carry tar sands oil from the Canadian border into Nebraska, is awaiting a yes - or - no decision from President Barack Obama.

Even if oil and gas production is allowed to grow per the NEB's projections, there are two other export pipelines likely to be built that are not mentioned in the heated TMX debate.

For seven years, the fate of the 1,179 - mile (1,900 - kilometer) long pipeline has languished amid debates over climate change and the intensive process of extracting Alberta's oil and U.S. energy security

The pipe would send hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil sands bitumen from Edmonton to the port of Vancouver each day — this at a moment when oil sands production and the pipelines that move it have become the proxy for a debate about climate change and the fossil fuel industries not just across Canada but worldwide.

Lac - Megantic train explosion rekindles pipeline debate On Saturday, a train carrying crude oil derailed and exploded destroying an historic part of Lac - Megantic, Quebec and killing at least four 13 people..

Following the recent disaster in Lac - Mégantic, Quebec, in which a train carrying oil derailed and exploded killing 50 people rekindled the debate over whether we should be shipping oil via pipelines or rail.

As firefighters continue to fight the train fire and search for the 40 50 missing people, this explosion has already rekindled the debate over transporting oil by rail or by pipeline.

During the debate over the Keystone project, the oil industry rolled out a series of studies claiming that pipeline construction would create 20,000 temporary jobs in the United States and that lower oil prices (they didn't say exactly how much lower) resulting from the new crude supplies would create as many as 250,000 more jobs across the country over the long term.