Looking for a recent article on Keystone XL economics ... anybody remember?

[jimlup]

I saw an article online in the last few days explaining that if Keystone XL isn't built that Canada will likely NOT be able to export the tar sands oil via alternative methods. I believe it was in a "mainstream" economic type publication. I need the reference to support a point in a discussion I'm having with someone.

Does anyone know the link or remember this article? I wish I had bookmarked it!

[jimlup]

1. bump...

[cprise]

2. Here are some possible leads

http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/02/14/5-myths-about-keystone-xl-debunked/192668

http://grist.org/politics/debunking-natures-arguments-for-keystone/

My glancing view of the issue is that building rail capacity to match KXL capacity would be a huge additional cost, and that China's carbon tax may figure into the price for tarsands oil. Then there is a little matter of Canadian activists allowing pipelines to run laterally through some of the country's best lands (IMO, not going to happen).

The industry needs KXL or else it will go nowhere. There is no other reason to do political battle for years over it. The burden of proof is on people who claim the alternatives to the pipeline won't drastically impede production.

[kristopher]

3. Good list

You can add this article about the Goldman Sachs evaluation. I don't know if it was posted here.

Goldman Sachs report finds that Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is linchpin for tar sands production
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswift/goldman_sachs_report_finds_tha.html

NRDC produces excellent work.

[jimlup]

4. Thanks - I'm pretty sure it was the Gooldman Sachs report

covered in the Washington post.

The other links are very useful and I will go through them carefully as it seems that it is good time to be educated about this one.