Good points.
However, TransCanada and others are pushing ahead with additional routes. It's unlikely (it seems to me at the moment) that the Athabasca tar sands oil isn't going to be burned (at least in the near term).
Enbridge's Northern Gateway approved by Canadian regulator in 2013 - http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/12/20/canada-regulatoroksoilpipelinetopacificcoastamidnativeopposition.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enbridge_Northern_Gateway_Pipelines
Kinder Morgan wants to expand its existing Trans Mountain pipeline across BC - http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/12/16/3068391/trans-mountain-tar-sands-pipeline/
TransCanada's Energy East pipeline would take 1.1 Mbbl/day of tar sands oil to Quebec - http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/03/07/3377161/two-more-pipelines/
No doubt at least some of the push for these projects is to make things seem inevitable and try to lessen opposition to the Keystone XL. But it does seem unlikely to me that they are going to be totally stopped, especially while people like Harper are still in office.
I continue to think that our best hope is for offsets. Let them build the Keystone XL pipeline (the various laws seem to be written in a presumption for approval, so it seems hard to veto it); but in return, demand substantial carbon offsets at the refineries and elsewhere. If we (as a species) are going to burn the stuff, or use the stuff for petrochemicals etc., then let's figure out the least damaging way to do it and share the technology with China, Venezuela, and elsewhere that have or will use heavy oil like this.
My $0.02.
Cheers,
Scott.
Enbridge's Northern Gateway approved by Canadian regulator in 2013 - http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/12/20/canada-regulatoroksoilpipelinetopacificcoastamidnativeopposition.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enbridge_Northern_Gateway_Pipelines
Kinder Morgan wants to expand its existing Trans Mountain pipeline across BC - http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/12/16/3068391/trans-mountain-tar-sands-pipeline/
The new pipeline would increase the capacity of the Trans Mountain pipeline system from 300,000 to 890,000 barrels per day — more than the 830,000 barrels that Keystone XL would carry to the Gulf Coast.
TransCanada's Energy East pipeline would take 1.1 Mbbl/day of tar sands oil to Quebec - http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/03/07/3377161/two-more-pipelines/
No doubt at least some of the push for these projects is to make things seem inevitable and try to lessen opposition to the Keystone XL. But it does seem unlikely to me that they are going to be totally stopped, especially while people like Harper are still in office.
I continue to think that our best hope is for offsets. Let them build the Keystone XL pipeline (the various laws seem to be written in a presumption for approval, so it seems hard to veto it); but in return, demand substantial carbon offsets at the refineries and elsewhere. If we (as a species) are going to burn the stuff, or use the stuff for petrochemicals etc., then let's figure out the least damaging way to do it and share the technology with China, Venezuela, and elsewhere that have or will use heavy oil like this.
My $0.02.
Cheers,
Scott.