McManus: Sen. Hassan's position on Keystone pipeline is best for U.S. GOP ads misleading

There were ads on TV for several Republican candidates in the recent New Hampshire primary election that blame Sen. Maggie Hassan (and President Joe Biden) for the high cost of gasoline.

One of her alleged misdeeds — also mentioned in a Herald letter to the editor and a more recent op-ed piece from the chair of the Republican National Committee — was Hassan's opposition to the Keystone pipeline.

Although the information regarding this project is readily available from a number of sources, the ads (and the RNC statement) choose to ignore just what the Keystone project is really all about. Here are some facts:

First: Keystone is not about American oil. The owner of the proposed pipeline is a Canadian corporation.

Second: The crude oil doesn't come from the United States. The source would be Alberta, Canada.

Third: The crude oil would not be sold in the United States. The end of the pipeline would have been refineries near Port Arthur, Texas, and the reason for that is that the final product would have been destined for export overseas. The truth is that the United States doesn't need additional sources of domestic oil. We already produce more oil and gas than we use and we are a net exporter of fossil fuels. Reviews of the Keystone proposal by both the Obama and Trump administrations concluded that the approval of the project would not have had any impact on the price of gasoline in the United States.

Fourth: The location of the proposed pipeline from Alberta would have been through the states of Montana and South Dakota to Nebraska.  A connecting line already in place would carry the crude on to the Texas coast. While construction would undoubtedly create some jobs, it's not clear exactly how many, and in any case they would be temporary; once the project is complete the jobs would be gone, but the threat of spills, ruptures, or other contamination would remain, and any and all of that would occur on U.S. land with the initial cleanup cost being a United States or state problem.  Any long-term environmental damage would definitely fall on the states and communities involved.

The source of the oil in Alberta is so-called tar sands, and the extracted crude is far more corrosive and toxic than standard crude, which has led to a number of leaks in existing pipelines carrying similar product, including pipelines owned by the owner of Keystone. (Although this would have been Canada's problem, there are negative environmental impacts from the extraction process itself, including ground and air contamination and destruction of large areas of wilderness.)

Finally, it is a complete fallacy to make any kind of claim that Sen. Hassan (or Biden) has any real ability to control the price of oil. That is set by an international consortium of industry representatives and the OPEC countries, and we only have to look at the most recent quarterly earnings reports of the major oil companies to understand who has benefited from the ability to manipulate the ultimate costs at your local gas station.

So, given the above — all good, solid and factual information — there is no question that, as for the Keystone pipeline, Sen. Hassan did the right thing in the best interests of the country, and the claims to the contrary are misleading at best, perhaps even closer to being deliberately dishonest.

Anthony McManus is a Dover resident and local historian.

This article originally appeared on Fosters Daily Democrat: McManus: Sen. Hassan's position on Keystone pipeline is best for U.S.