Alberta already has strict standards in place to reduce greenhouse gases and rejects the premise that it can't meet its emissions-reduction goals, the Canadian province's leader said yesterday.

In an interview with ClimateWire during her second-ever official visit to Washington, D.C., Albertan Premier Alison Redford said she was "confident" that the Keystone XL pipeline would be constructed, even though Obama's rejection of a cross-border permit for the project gave Canadian officials "pause." Regardless, she said the province would find a way to move its oil sands resource to market with or without Keystone XL.

"It's frustrating, but we are not fully dependent on the construction of this one piece of infrastructure in order to continue to advance our development," said Redford about Keystone XL, a pipeline that would run from Canada to Texas refineries if ever constructed.

Considering that the oil sands are the source of about one-tenth of one percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and the province has North America's first carbon tax on large emitters, the emissions effect is "quite minute," Redford said.

Redford's spokeswoman said the premier would be meeting with Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) and Bill Owens (D-N.Y.) while in the nation's capital. Her trip is part of a three-city tour also including Chicago and New York.

The 47-year-old premier's comments come as the U.S. Senate may consider an amendment attached to a larger transportation bill this week that would overturn President Obama's decision on the pipeline. Earlier this month, TransCanada announced it would begin construction on the southern portion of Keystone XL and reapply for a permit for the northern portion crossing the U.S.-Canada border.

In the midst of a lobbying fight

Redford's visit also falls amid a tense situation in Canada between national politicians who say the oil sands are being unfairly targeted and environmentalists who claim the Canadian government is attacking them through unprecedented rhetoric and making it more difficult for them to testify at oil sands hearings because of budget cuts controlling the hearing process.

Redford said she welcomed a vigorous debate and didn't think there should be any restrictions on environmental groups.

"One of the reasons I think that we're in this situation now [with Keystone] is because more of those discussions needed to be had sooner," she said about environmentalists. "People weren't sitting at the same table."

Yet she criticized opponents who she said have misled the public about the province's impact on climate change. Echoing industry arguments, she said the focus should be more on the industry's greenhouse gas intensity, or emissions profile per barrel of oil sands crude.

The industry claims intensity increased by a small amount -- 2 percent from 2009 to 2011 -- after years of decreasing.

The province is doing its part with its support of research, according to Redford. Beyond new technology, there is no way for Alberta to curtail its emissions overall beyond curbing oil sands production generally, a prospect that is not going to happen because of the demand for the product, she said. Last month, the Albertan government released a budget projecting a doubling in oil sands royalties in the next five years because of increased production estimates and robust oil prices.

She added that there needs to be greater transparency of environmentalists testifying in Canada at proceedings to approve oil sands projects -- such as one occurring right now to consider Enbridge's propose Northern Gateway pipeline, which would run from Alberta to Canada's western coast if constructed.

But she dismissed one charge of environmentalists -- that there is the appearance of a conflict of interest by the Albertan government using the same lobbying firm in Washington, D.C., as the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), which represents the oil and gas industry.

"The merger of oil and state is in my mind, shocking," said Keith Stewart of Greenpeace Canada this week.

Both the Albertan government and CAPP employ Nelson, Mullins, Riley & Scarborough.

"There would only be a conflict if we weren't completely straightforward and honest about who we are," said Redford.

How much will carbon capture cost?

Critics say that the oil sands singlehandedly threaten Canada's overall climate targets and are a chief reason Canada withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol in December.

Alberta has a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 50 million metric tons annually by 2020, while current policies fall short -- putting the province on a path to cut emissions by 14 million metric tons, according to a December analysis from the Pembina Institute, a Canadian environmental think tank. The group said the province's emissions constitute a third of Canada's total and are "heading sharply upwards."

Emissions from Alberta's oil sands region, for example, are forecast to double between 2009 levels and 2020.

As an example, Pembina analyst Simon Dyer said the province would need 25 carbon capture and sequestration projects in the next eight years on oil sands processing facilities to meet its own target. As of now, the province has committed roughly $2 billion for four projects that are not fully operational, one of which envisions equipment attached to an oil sands upgrader.

When asked whether Alberta was still committed to its greenhouse gas reduction goals in the wake of the report, Redford said Pembina's calculations were "speculative." It's impossible to know what future technologies funded by Alberta's revenues from its carbon tax may hold to reduce emissions, she said, citing one project to perfect a coating for oil pipes to make them more efficient.

"This is what we said to Pembina -- we don't think you can draw those conclusions based on the nature of the industry at this point," Redford said.

Dyer said his group's calculations were not speculative, considering they were based on the Albertan government's calculations. It is obvious that the province missed its targets for 2010, he said.

"The government of Alberta is perhaps backtracking now that it realizes how expensive carbon capture is," he said.