Border crossing for Keystone XL completed

AP/Fuel Fix:

A Canadian company has built the first piece of the disputed Keystone XL oil sands pipeline across the U.S. border and started work on labor camps in Montana and South Dakota. But it has not resolved a courtroom setback that would make it hard to finish the $8 billion project.

The 1,200-mile (1,900-kilometer) pipeline from Alberta to Nebraska was stalled for much of the past decade before President Donald Trump was elected and began trying to push it through to completion.

Environmentalists and Native American tribes are bitterly opposed to the line because of worries over oil spills and that burning the fuel would make climate change worse.

Work finally started in April at the border crossing in remote northern Montana. That 1.2-mile section has now been completed except for some site reclamation activity, TC Energy spokeswoman Sara Rabern said.

The Calgary-based company has started site work for labor camps near Baker, Montana, and Philip, South Dakota, but it has not set a date to occupy them.

Montana officials have not yet received plans requested from the company to make sure it can prevent the camps from spreading the coronavirus, said Erin Loranger, a spokesperson for Montana Gov. Steve Bullock. The state expects to receive the plans before the camps are occupied, she said.

The company's three-year construction timeline was put into doubt following a May 15 ruling from a federal judge in Montana that cancelled a key permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The permit is needed to build the line across hundreds of streams, wetlands and other water bodies along its route.
...

There is more.

This pipeline has faced more irrational opposition then any in history.  Environmental wackos have found them a judge who is irrational as they are about the project and he has further delayed the northern tier. 

The Southern portion of the pipeline has not faced as much irrational opposition,  The pipeline will bring heavy crude from Canada into the US which will mean less dependency on oil shipped from the Middle East and Venezuela that is used to produce gasoline at US refineries when mixed with the light crude being produced from the shale wells.

Opponents of the project would like to see the US more dependent on alternative energy projects which are less efficient, take up more land mass and lack the ability to scale to meet demand up or down.