Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Support Quality Journalism
The Globe and Mail
First Access to Latest
Investment News
Collection of curated
e-books and guides
Inform your decisions via
Globe Investor Tools
Just$1.99
per week
for first 24 weeks

Enjoy unlimited digital access
Enjoy Unlimited Digital Access
Get full access to globeandmail.com
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(select.open)}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](select.open),dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){window.requestAnimationFrame(function() {var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))});}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1); // via darwin-bg var slideIndex = 0; carousel(); function carousel() { var i; var x = document.getElementsByClassName("subs_valueprop"); for (i = 0; i < x.length; i++) { x[i].style.display = "none"; } slideIndex++; if (slideIndex> x.length) { slideIndex = 1; } x[slideIndex - 1].style.display = "block"; setTimeout(carousel, 2500); }

A new planned route for the Keystone XL pipeline through Nebraska would not have a major impact on the state’s water, land or wildlife, according to an updated environmental study produced by the Trump administration.

The U.S. State Department released a draft study Monday of the pipeline’s potential environmental impact in Nebraska, where opponents have repeatedly thwarted the project. The study is now subject to public input through Aug. 29 before it’s finalized.

The announcement marks another step in pipeline developer TransCanada’s quest to finish the 1,184-mile oil pipeline, although the company continues to face obstacles in Nebraska.

Story continues below advertisement

Environmentalists, Native American tribes and an organized minority of landowners in the state have prevented the company from moving ahead with construction, and they’re now trying to block the project with a lawsuit currently pending before the Nebraska Supreme Court. Oral arguments in that case aren’t expected until October at the earliest, and a decision won’t come down until months later.

The new report came as no surprise Art Tanderup, a farmer in Neligh, Neb., whose property lies on the pipeline’s proposed pathway. Tanderup said he hadn’t yet read the State Department report, but voiced concerns that the project is “just being pushed through” despite the warnings of local landowners who oppose it.

Tanderup, a plaintiff in the Nebraska lawsuit, said he’s worried the pipeline will leak and contaminate local groundwater. He said the region has porous soil and a water table so high in some areas that you can’t drill a posthole without hitting water.

“Once those chemicals (from a pipeline spill) get in the aquifer, they cannot be cleaned up,” he said. “It’s not a good place to be running a tar sands pipeline.”

The report said most of the disruption would take place during pipeline construction and would have a “moderate” impact at most, and in those cases, crews could mitigate the damage. TransCanada has said it will compensate affected landowners for damage, although opponents say the company isn’t offering enough.

“It is estimated that disturbed pastures, croplands and grassy rangelands may take one to five years to recover to pre-construction levels,” the report said.

The Trump administration signed a federal permit for the project in March 2017, reversing the Obama administration’s decision to reject the company’s request. But a new federal review was needed because Nebraska state regulators approved a substantially different route in November than the one the State Department had initially studied.

Story continues below advertisement

The new route approved by the Nebraska Public Service Commission is five miles longer than the original proposed pathway, requires an additional pumping station and runs next to an existing TransCanada-owned pipeline for nearly 89 miles.

The pipeline would carry up to 830,000 barrels of crude oil per day from Canada to Steele City, Neb., where it would connect with the original Keystone pipeline that runs down to Texas Gulf Coast refineries.

The State Department’s new report noted two major spills in South Dakota involving the original Keystone pipeline, which went into operation in 2010, but added that TransCanada has a lower overall spill rate than average in the oil pipeline industry.

Crews have replaced all of the contaminated soil and reseeded the affected farmland after the November 2017 spill in Marshall County, S.D., according to the report. Another spill near Freeman, S.D., in April, 2016, led to increased supervision of the pipeline in that area, and nearby aquifers were not affected, the report said.

Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies