Eight Things the U.S. State Keystone XL Report Got Wrong About the Alberta Oilsands

Last week the Alberta government responded to the U.S. State Department's final supplemental environmental impact statement (FSEIS) on the Keystone XL project by emphasizing the province's responsibility, transparency, and confidence that the pipeline is in the "national interest" of both Canada and the U.S.

In order to provide a more specific and science-based response to the FSEIS report on Keystone XL, Pembina Institute policy analyst Andrew Read provided counterpoints to several of its central claims.

1. Oilsands Emissions
   The U.S. State Department's report claims that "Alberta's oil sands account for about 5 per cent of Canada's overall GHG emissions and Canada is responsible for about 2 per cent of global emissions."
   
   Read says that "oilsands are the fastest growing source of emissions in Canada," and industry and government have been unable to curtail rising emissions in contrast to other industrial sectors. ...
2. Carbon Capture and Storage ...
3. In Situ Recovery of Bitumen ...
4. Water Withdrawals ...
5. Air Quality Monitoring ...
6. Tailings ...
7. Land Reclamation ...
8. Potential Impacts and Environmental Monitoring ...

Eight Things the U.S. State Keystone XL Report Got Wrong About the Alberta Oilsands