Article content continued

Both TransCanada’s Keystone XL — which will run from Hardisty, Alta., to Steele City, Neb. — and Enbridge’s Line 3 — which links Hardisty to Superior, Wis. — should avoid the political pitfalls that have sunk Energy East and Northern Gateway and have put Trans Mountain in doubt, said Zachary Rogers, a research analyst at Wood Mackenzie.

“While there certainly is risk, and nothing is 100 per cent certain…Line 3 and Keystone XL are likely to proceed,” said Rogers in an interview.

Energy East, which would have delivered bitumen from the oilpatch to Eastern Canada, was cancelled by TransCanada Corp. in October 2017 after strong opposition from municipalities and Indigenous groups. Northern Gateway would have sent bitumen from Bruderheim, AB, to Kitimat, BC, for transportation to Asian markets. It too faced strong opposition, and was rejected by Trudeau in 2016.

Trump’s issuing of a presidential permit for Keystone XL revived a pipeline that had become a galvanizing symbol in the battle against climate change and the carbon footprint of oilsands production that ultimately led then-President Barack Obama to deem the project as not in America’s best interest in 2015.

But with state approval in Nebraska following Trump’s permission, Rogers now ranks the 830,000 barrel a day pipeline as the most likely to go forward.

“There are some difficulties obviously, on the regulatory front, but Keystone XL has largely cleared its last major regulatory hurdle at the end of last year,” he said.

Those difficulties include landowner permissions and local permitting, as well as court challenges in Nebraska from some of the many groups still opposed to it, but overall the regulators involved look to be on board, said Rogers.

“The Supreme Court of Nebraska and the State Legislature and the Nebraska Public Service Commission have all repeatedly been in support of the project. So we view the regulatory risk on Keystone XL as relatively low compared to Trans Mountain.”