CEA Responds to Dr. Stansbury’s ‘Study’ on Keystone XL

HOUSTON, TX – In an attempt to willfully ignore the exceptionally high safety standards of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, a new report from Professor John Stansbury at the University of Nebraska suggests that the pipeline poses several serious environmental risks, all of which run counter to the conclusions of virtually every credible analysis of the project.

In response to Dr. Stansbury’s report, entitled “Analysis of Frequency, Magnitude and Consequence of Worst-Case Spills from the Proposed Keystone XL Pipeline,” Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA) Executive Vice President Michael Whatley issued the following statement:

“Stansbury’s report trots out the same refuted arguments that have been pushed by anti-development groups for over a year, except this time under the guise of an academic study.  The Keystone XL pipeline will contain an additional 57 safety precautions above and beyond what the law requires, which is why the Department of State has preliminarily concluded that this will be the safest pipeline ever built in the U.S. It is disappointing and reckless that an unfounded opinion piece which uses one unfortunate spill as its singular data point can be released as a scientific ‘study.’ This report is not grounded in facts, it is not an ‘independent assessment,’ and to treat it as such is just plain wrong.”

The Keystone XL pipeline would transport 700,000 barrels of crude oil per day from the Dakotas, Montana, Kansas, Oklahoma and Alberta, Canada to refineries along the Texas Gulf Coast.  Because it crosses an international border, the project must be approved by the Department of State, which is currently reviewing TransCanada’s application and recently ended a 45 day public comment on a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS). The Department of Energy has estimated that approval of the Keystone XL pipeline could ultimately end the United States’ dependence on Middle Eastern oil.