Trump throws his support behind Keystone XL and other pipeline projects to unleash American energy

President Donald Trump took to his Truth Social platform Monday to call for the building of the Keystone XL Pipeline. The pipeline is but one of several oil and gas infrastructure systems that have been impeded or canceled by Democratic presidents and climate activist groups. 

Critics of those actions argued that pipeline opposition has killed jobs, hurt the economy and driven up energy costs. Now, as Trump seeks to “unleash American energy,” they’re growing more hopeful that infrastructure supporting fossil fuels will become easier to build. 

Forcing a transition

Trump has also called for the Constitution Pipeline project to be revived. The project, originally proposed by Williams — along with partners Altagas, Cabot Oil & Gas, and Duke Energy — was to transport natural gas from the Marcellus Shale deposit in Northeast Pennsylvania to New England.  

On Earth Day in 2016, New York State denied the Clean Water Act permit the project needed. After a long fight, Williams management announced in 2020 it was halting investment in the pipeline. “While Constitution did receive positive outcomes in recent court proceedings and permit applications, the underlying risk adjusted return for this greenfield pipeline project has diminished in such a way that further development is no longer supported,” the company said. 

Despite being next door to one of the world’s richest sources of natural gas, New England had to import natural gas from Russia during a cold spell in 2018, and it’s one of the most expensive markets for natural gas. 

Climate groups like the Sierra Club, however, cheered the company’s decision to halt development and argued that natural gas would be replaced by renewable energy. So the pipeline was an unnecessary risk to the climate, they claimed. 

“As people across New York and Pennsylvania have said all along, there was no need for this dirty, dangerous project. Had Williams listened to the impacted communities eight years ago, they could have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in clean, renewable energy sources, instead of wasting it on a fracked gas pipeline that they’ve now abandoned,” Kelly Martin, director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign, said in a statement. 

Massachusetts, like other New England states, was convinced natural gas would soon be an energy source of the past. In 2020, Attorney General Maura Healey, who is now the state’s governor, launched an investigation into the natural gas industry as part of an effort to stop consumers from using fossil fuels. 

“In order to combat the climate crisis and meet our clean energy goals, we must transition away from fossil fuels and change the way gas utilities do business in our state,” Healey said in a statement announcing the investigation. 

Increasingly expensive

Massachusetts’ ratepayers are now facing sky-high heating costs. Lacking the pipelines to transport the gas from Pennsylvania, much of the cost is delivery fees to import liquefied natural gas, ABC affiliate WCVB News reported earlier this month, as well as an “increasingly expensive” program that subsidizes programs to pay for residents to transition away from fossil fuel-based heating.

Rather than reconsider her state’s anti-fossil fuel policies, Gov. Healey is now “deeply troubled” by Massachusetts ratepayers' struggle to pay heating bills, the Boston Herald reports. She demanded the Department of Public Utilities bring down costs. Paul Diego Craney, spokesman for watchdog Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, told the Herald that Healey shouldn’t be surprised by the cost of heating in her state. She had “stopped more natural gas from entering Massachusetts” as attorney general, he pointed out, which she “bragged about” on the campaign trail.

“She’s a demagogue, and most of the blue-state governors are demagogues. That’s the truth of it,” Tom Shepstone, an energy expert who publishes on his "Energy Security and Freedom" Substack, told Just the News. 

While New England governors would never risk the political fallout from publicly supporting the pipeline, Shepstone said it’s quite possible that Trump is having conversations behind the scenes with these New England governors, including New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, who, like Trump, want to bring down energy costs. The Constitution pipeline may be a shared interest they have.

Trump “doesn’t care if she [Hochul] attacks him, but they probably have candid conversations about the pipeline,” Shepstone said. 

He said it’s unlikely that the original developer will be interested in reviving the project, but it’s likely someone would want to invest in it. 

“I'm rather optimistic about getting some of these pipelines built in. The problem has always been in places like New York, the outsized influence that the the NGOs have had —- particularly the Rockefeller family, they've had an enormous influence on both Republican and Democrat governors over the years in New York,” Shepstone said. 

Michigan energy

The Line 5 Pipeline could potentially go the way of Constitution or Keystone XL if Michigan’s Democratic governor and attorney general get their way. 

The pipeline runs from Ontario, Canada, across the Straits of Mackinac, and down through Michigan, providing residents 55% of the propane that Michiganders use for heating and cooking. It’s also essential for refineries in Michigan and Ohio, which support tens of thousands of jobs and contribute over $20 billion to the regional economy. 

Jason Hayes, director of energy and environmental policy for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, explains on his “Forest, Fuels, and Freedom” Substack that the pipeline has been in operation since 1953, and it’s faced opposition for years, including efforts from Gov. Gretchen Whitmer who wants to shut it down.

Currently the aging pipeline sits at the bottom of the strait, which was how pipelines were built in the 1950s. A 2018 Michigan analysis found that relocating the pipeline to a cement-lined underground tunnel 100 feet below the lakebed would project the Great Lakes from any spills, while still allowing for the supply of affordable energy to the region. Enbridge, the operator of the pipeline, is willing to cover all construction costs for the upgrade, so taxpayers are off the hook. Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel nonetheless oppose the project. 

The Institute of Energy Research (IER) joined up with the Mackinac Center to push for the tunnel to be constructed. Last week, they sent a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth asking for him accelerate the Army Corp of Engineers environmental impact statement. 

Alex Stevens, manager of policy and communications for IER, told Just the News that the underground tunnel addresses all the environmental concerns, and the activist groups that continue to oppose it, such as the Sierra Club, have never offered any viable alternative that would affordably replace the energy for the pipeline. 

“They're completely content with the current situation. Anything that addresses the safety concerns or recognizes the need for the pipeline while at the same time addressing the environmental concerns is pretty tragic to them. Because they can't fundraise off the issue anymore,” Stevens said. 

The Michigan Court of Appeals last week rejected arguments from environmental groups and Native American tribes that the Michigan Public Service Commission failed to properly issue permits for the project, the Washington Times reported, and the court refused to revisit the decision. 

Biden killed Keystone

The Keystone XL segment was more than half complete and on track to be completed by 2022. The project would have transported 830,000 barrels of crude oil per day. As his first official act to carry out his campaign promise to “end fossil fuels,” Biden canceled the permit, claiming that it would make climate change worse.

TransCanada, which is now TC Energy, first proposed the project in 2008. The contested Keystone XL pipeline portion was to be the second half of a pipeline running from Hardisty, Alberta, Canada, to the Gulf Coast, and these two portions are part of a larger pipeline system running through the heart of America. The southern portion, which is now known as the Gulf Coast Pipeline, runs between Cushing, Oklahoma, and Port Arthur, Texas. It was completed in August 2019. 

The second portion of the Keystone XL project would have run from Hardisty to Steele City, Nebraska, but because it crosses an international boundary, it’s required to receive approval from the U.S. Department of State. This gives the president the power to deny, approve or revoke the permits. 

President Barack Obama first rejected TC Energy’s application in 2012 and continued to oppose the project, despite State Department estimates showing it would create 42,000 direct and indirect jobs and add close to $20 billion to the U.S. GDP. After Trump’s first victory, TC energy resubmitted a presidential permit application, and Trump reversed Obama’s rejection with an executive order allowing the project to move forward. 

When Biden canceled the permit, TC Energy terminated the project and removed hundreds of miles of pipe it had already installed, which were used in other projects. The right-of-way agreements for the pipeline to pass through private property were nullified, as were other permits for the project.

It’s going to take a lot of convincing to get investors on board with restarting the project. These projects can take years to build, even with an expedited permitting process, and they will continue to face opposition from environmental groups who use lawfare to delay and hopefully kill projects. 

Whether Trump’s friendly regulations and federal support can encourage the billions in investment these projects need remains to be seen. As we’re seeing in New England, it may be the outrage of ratepayers that provides the impetus to push past the opposition.