skip to main content

→ Top Stories:
Clean Power plan
Safe Chemicals

Danielle Droitsch’s Blog

Pipelines and Prices: Race to the Gulf Coast is in Big Oil's Interest, But is it in the Nation's Interest?

Danielle Droitsch

Posted November 17, 2011

, , , , ,
Share | | |

Yesterday, the U.S. benchmark for oil jumped above $100 a barrel for the first time since this spring. A big factor was an announcement by Enbridge to pipe more oil to the Gulf Coast but would then be exported to Latin American markets - something the Keystone XL tars sands pipeline would do but in much larger volumes.  Despite all the talk of energy security of late this is another clear indication that the Keystone XL pipeline is all about oil industry profits and not the national interest.

Enbridge Inc. announced  it would start sending more oil to the Gulf Coast (something the proposed, and now delayed, Keystone XL tars sands pipeline would---do but in much larger volumes).  Oil companies cheered this announcement as they will increase their ability to sell oil from the Gulf Coast and export overseas. Here is how the AP story on the scheme outlines the issue:

"Oil prices jumped Wednesday after Canadian pipeline company Enbridge announced it would ship crude away from a key delivery point in Cushing, Oklahoma. The company bought a 50 percent stake in the Seaway pipeline from ConocoPhillips and plans to use it to transport oil from Cushing to refineries along the Gulf Coast, where much of it will be shipped overseas because of rising demand from Latin America."

If the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline were approved, even more oil will flow to the Gulf Coast and then to international markets and not provide the United States with energy security.  And building Keystone XL would very likely lead to even higher oil prices according to IHS CERA. This confirms the findings of Oil Change International's report. Keystone XL has always been about increasing US oil prices and finding a route to export tar sands on the world market.

To be clear, the U.S. doesn’t have an oil supply problem.  The U.S. oil market is shrinking and will continue to do so for several decades.  According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, U.S gasoline demand is in decline and will continue through at least 2030.  This is the result of stronger fuel economy standards already in place. The United States can further reduce oil use use by over 4 million barrels a day by 2025 through fuel economy for heavy trucks, improvements to air travel, and building efficiency.  The Environmental Protection Agency suggests that even deeper cuts – around 7 million barrels a day – are possible by 2030. Yesterday’s landmark announcement by the Obama administration establishing new fuel economy standards further reduces the nation’s oil consumption by 2.2 million barrels a day.

In the end, Keystone XL has never been about serving the American people.  It is a project to boost the profits of oil companies.  There is too much harm the pipeline will have to farmland, air and water across 1700 miles and six states.  Here is yet one more reason the Keystone XL pipeline is not in the national interest and why the pipeline should be denied.

Share | | |


mmfyNov 17 2011 09:21 PM

It certainly wouldn't be in the interest of this organization. I am still left wondering and will continue to how much people make in your organization. I think the public has a right to know. I get no answers - how surprising!

"In the end, Keystone XL has never been about serving the American people. It is a project to boost the profits of oil companies. "

Here is the same line - just reworded
In the end, NRDC has never been about serving the American people. It is a organization to boost the pockets it's exec.

conusamNov 18 2011 12:29 AM


Pamela JenkinsDec 22 2011 03:00 PM

I also wonder were these profits will go.
If the U.S. agrees to Keystone XL plan, will oil drop? and how much? Iwill this project help the U.S. in any form or make matters worst? So far it appears to me that the American people will not get any thing from this new idea. Lose of farm land, cities and other income may be lost because of this pipline. I see it this way so far! Lost of farm land which we need and we know the Keystone will force farmers to sell at rock bottom price, then cities will be move at the price that home owners, and business will pay. Then we have no way if the pipe will have a link, now oil is going into the ground unatended.
Sure we will have jobs for awhile but what about after the pipeline is finish will these workers still be employed by Keystone or let go? What about the very nice oil spill in the Gulf that took months to cap? I like this idea it sounds great but is it really a good idea at the end? This does not seem that the U.S. is getting much in return for all it is getting out of this great idea. No change in oil prices, no long term jobs, no way of knowing about future spills, What kind of security will be in place to keep this pipeline safe. We should get some of these questions answered before we go into this project any furter is all. Pamela

Comments are closed for this post.


Switchboard is the staff blog of the Natural Resources Defense Council, the nation’s most effective environmental group. For more about our work, including in-depth policy documents, action alerts and ways you can contribute, visit

Feeds: Danielle Droitsch’s blog

Feeds: Stay Plugged In