The proposed Keystone Pipeline, which would carry oil from Canada’s tar sands to the Gulf Coast, has faced intense opposition in Congress and the courts.
Here’s a look at some of the most important factors in the fight over the project.
The fight over Keystone XL has been a long and bitter one.
As of last fall, more than three dozen states had sued the Obama administration over the pipeline, and more than 30 environmental groups have also signed on to legal challenges.
Keystone XL would transport nearly 700,000 barrels of oil a day from Alberta, Canada’s oil-producing province, through Nebraska and Illinois to refineries along the Gulf of Mexico.
The Obama administration has said the pipeline would be able to generate up to 4.6 million barrels of crude oil a month.
But a group of environmental groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, has said that figure is overblown.
They say that the pipeline could only produce about 3.5 million barrels a day.
The Environmental Protection Agency has said there is no credible evidence of climate change in the region, and the State Department has also dismissed the pipeline’s potential impacts on marine life.
And in April, the Obama Administration said the oil sands of Alberta’s tar sand region could be used to produce up to 6.5 billion barrels of fossil fuels per year by the mid-2040s.
Keystone is a long way from becoming a reality.
A pipeline to the Atlantic Ocean has been proposed by Canadian company TransCanada, and President Obama has proposed building the Keystone XL from the Gulf to the Pacific Ocean, where it would cross the Bering Strait.
But the TransCanada project has faced opposition from landowners and tribes along the way.
There’s a lot of money at stake.
According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the pipeline will generate $8 billion for the United States, but that number includes a lot more oil, not just for the pipeline itself.
In its latest filing with the court, the NRDC estimated the project could generate $1.7 trillion in additional oil production in the pipeline alone.
That’s because of the additional revenue generated by the additional oil being produced in the Gulf by the pipeline.
And the pipeline is projected to require up to 1.5 trillion cubic feet of new oil annually by the middle of the century, according to the Energy Information Administration.
TransCanada says it can’t provide an estimate for the amount of oil it could produce.
The company has also faced significant legal challenges, and in August, the judge in the case ordered TransCanada to pay $4.5bn in damages.
In response, TransCanada has said it will continue to work with state and local governments to build a pipeline through their state to the Midwest and Northeast.
And TransCanada CEO Russ Girling says the pipeline won’t require the federal government to provide tax incentives.
“There’s no additional tax revenue that would be needed to build it, and we think we can continue to provide the tax incentives that would otherwise be required for that project,” Girling said.
The U.S. has a long history of supporting oil pipelines.
There are more than 300 oil pipelines in operation in the United Stated.
Keystone will be the fourth such pipeline, following the Trans-Alaska Pipeline, the Keystone and Trans-Canada XL.
The pipeline has been in the works since 2009.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership, which is aimed at opening up trade between nations in Asia, will be ratified in the coming weeks.
The United States has also supported a number of other energy projects, including Keystone XL.
In 2013, President Obama signed a law authorizing $8.6 billion in oil and gas tax breaks for American companies.
In 2014, President Barack Obama approved $3.7 billion in tax breaks.
And over the last three years, more U. S. companies have received tax breaks worth at least $4 billion, according the Tax Foundation.
Keystone could affect climate change.
The Keystone XL proposal would send the oil from Alberta’s oil sands to refiners along the gulf.
But climate scientists have warned that the oil would be released into the atmosphere and could cause serious damage to the planet’s climate.
As part of the Obama-era Keystone XL rule, the State and Federal departments of energy are required to report annually on how much oil from the tar sands would contribute to global warming.
The State Department estimates that the amount would be between 2 and 4 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.
But environmental groups say the actual amount is much higher, and have warned the project’s potential impact on the climate is exaggerated.
“We are concerned that there is a potential for increased carbon dioxide release from the oil pipeline,” said Rachel Carson, the former secretary of the Smithsonian Institution.
“That is not the kind of thing that should be happening.”
The climate fight has been very public.
There have been public hearings on the pipeline and at least two lawsuits over it.
Keystone has been front and center in debates over the Keystone climate change rule,