Environmental organizations are showing a too rare unity in their opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline. In the U.S. Congress, the Republicans are fighting hard to get around reasonable review processes for safety, environmental impact, and understanding of the national interest to support a pipeline to move highly-polluting Canadian tar sands to Gulf Coast refineries to feed into Chinese and other foreign markets seemingly insatiable demand for diesel fuels. And, yesterday a large coalition set a rather daunting target: 500,000 signatures, within 24 hours, to signal to the U.S. Senate that fossil-foolish lobbying doesn’t represent the will of the U.S. public (the citizens, the voters …). Some thought 250,000 would be a better target (or 350,000 to be 1,000 times over a sensible target for a carbon reductions plan of 350 parts per million in the atmosphere). In fact, the coalition underestimated the passion and reach of realism when it comes to the Keystone XL pipeline. Last evening, the Sierra Club released a press release that began:
At 6:54pm ET on Monday night, just under seven hours into a 24-hour petition drive, environmental and public interest groups smashed through their goal of sending the Senate over 500,000 messages opposing the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.
As Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune put it:
Americans don’t want this oil, they don’t want this risk, and they don’t want this political circus. The President stood up to Big Oil and rejected the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. If Republicans in Congress were genuinely concerned about jobs they would have passed the jobs package last fall. If they were genuinely concerned about building America they would pass a clean transportation bill. And if they were genuinely concerned about the American people they would get out of the business of approving dangerous oil industry pet projects.
Considering all the news and this effort to have Americans send messages to their Senators, perhaps it makes sense to take a moment to ‘review’ the bidding as to why Keystone XL pipeline is not in the national interest and why you should urge your U.S. Senator to oppose putting fossil fuel lobbying ahead of American interests.
Thus, a simple question as to Keystone XL: Why not?
The Keystone XL pipeline would
- Ease expansion of environmentally devastating tar sands oil exploitation.
- Tar Sands exploitation devastates boreal forests, damages Canadian waterways/wetlands, and ravages wildlife populations (including migratory bird populations).
- Tar Sands, as a fuel source, is significantly more polluting (by every measure) than traditional petroleum fuels.
- Worsen prospects for mitigating climate change
- One of the world’s leading climate scientists, James Hansen, has said that expanded tar sands production would be “game over” for the climate system and lead to irreversible catastrophic climate chaos.
- Lead to increased fuel prices for significant numbers of Americans
- Currently, tar sands imported into the United States are refined mainly in Upper Midwest refineries and oversupply of fuel products there have lead to a lowered crude fuel and consumer prices for much of the Upper Midwest when compared to global oil prices. Keystone XL would move this fuel into the international market and out of American fuel tanks.
- Create increased risks of oil pipeline spills
- The first Keystone pipeline, which is relatively new, has had a large number of leaks.
- Keystone XL would go through sensitive areas where a pipeline leak could impact sensitive environmental areas and numerous Americans’ health.
- Threaten employment
- The only significant independent review of the Keystone XL pipeline project’s employment impact creates significant risk for reducing overall employment.
- Industry claims have been contradictory and do not stand up to even the scantiest of open-minded scrutiny.
- Industry practices have been, seriously, at odds with their practices and delivered results.
- Hurt America’s prospects for achieving a clean energy future
- The pipeline would divert attention and resources from other paths and opportunities.
- The pipeline’s approval feeds into a ‘drill, baby, drill’ mentality that fundamentally fails that increased production is counter to achieving energy security.
Very simply, oil industry lobbyist claims to the contrary, the Keystone XL pipeline is not in the U.S. national interest.
Let your Senator know that Congress should not put oil industry boardroom interests ahead of American national interest.
11 responses so far ↓
1 The Republican Agenda To Raise America’s Gas Prices // Mar 16, 2012 at 9:09 am
[…] Keystone XL pipeline will increase prices in the near and […]
2 WeMustChange » Blog Archive » Why Keystone XL, War With Iran, and "Drill Baby Drill" Will Actually Raise Gas Prices // Mar 20, 2012 at 7:35 pm
[…] Promoting Keystone XL pipeline will increase prices in the near and mid-term; […]
3 Regulatory Red Herrings: Twists and Turns in Job Impacts // Apr 3, 2012 at 10:08 am
[…] seen this clearly with Keystone XL pipeline. Proponents are letting us (all of U.S.) know that it will create 6500 … or 25,000 … or […]
4 Energy Bookshelf: Charting a course toward “sustainable prosperity” // Apr 9, 2012 at 2:21 pm
[…] places, in last-ditch efforts against fossil-foolish intiatives (from vastly expanded fracking to Keystone XL pipeline to coal power plants around the world), it is critical to foster positive visions for the future. […]
5 Scientists Simple Plea to Secretary Clinton // Jul 17, 2012 at 7:33 am
[…] are a plethora of reasons why Keystone XL pipeline is not in the U.S. national interest — from the reality that it will likely be a net jobs loser to the high risk from Delbit oil […]
6 Time for a breakup … // Jul 24, 2012 at 4:39 pm
[…] Many have outlined reasons why Keystone XL pipeline is not a smart project for the United States. Opening the pipeline likely will lead to increased gasoline prices for many Americans. The pipeline, carrying the rather dangerous and difficult to clean up “Dilbit” oil, risks having leaks (despite industry promises that, well, such leaks would never, never, never happen … cross their fingers and laugh their way to the bank). There is that pesky little issue of how Tar Sands Oil will exacerbate climate chaos (which, of course, has nothing to do with extreme weather events, the drought devastating America’s 2012 crop yields, and …). In summary, when it comes to Keystone XL, there are plenty of reasons “Why not!” […]
7 On Climate issues, Mr President, begin the “education process” with your senior staff // Nov 18, 2012 at 4:44 pm
[…] and speak to those who will be outside the White House tomorrow, 18 November, to bring attention to reasons why Keystone XL costs are far higher than its benefits for the nation and […]
8 Educate yourself about the Keystone XL Pipeline. Please. – Greg Laden's Blog // Feb 23, 2013 at 8:24 pm
[…] Keystone XL: Why not? […]
9 Educate yourself about Keystone XL … please … please … please // Feb 24, 2013 at 8:24 am
[…] Keystone XL: Why not? […]
10 Will the SEC investigate State Department’s Climate Bomb? // Jan 31, 2014 at 3:25 pm
[…] NOTE: There are a wide range of reasons why Keystone XL is not in US interest. […]
11 Tom Steyer to SecState John Kerry: Investigate … Keystone XL has a fishy smell // Feb 2, 2014 at 11:25 am
[…] are significant and serious reasons for disagreement (and seems to dismiss and/or ignore reasons why the Keystone XL pipeline is NOT in U.S. national interest), there remains a fundamental challenge that Steyer calls on the Secretary of State to investigate […]