Climate protest against the Keystone Pipeline
A report on the climactic impact of the Keystone Pipeline was released this week and it essentially gave the pipeline the go-ahead. Environmental extremists, on the other hand, say the report gave the president the evidence he needs to end the pipeline for good. Who do you think Mr. Obama will side with?
The State Department released a report on Friday concluding that the Keystone XL pipeline would not substantially worsen carbon pollution, leaving an opportunity for President Obama to approve the pipeline, according to The New York Times.
The report further indicated that the pipeline passes Mr. Obama’s criteria as set forth in last summer’s speech. The pipeline will NOT “significantly exacerbate” the problem of greenhouse gases. If the pipeline is not built, the report says, the oil would still be extracted and carried by rail instead.
That reminds me of Warren Buffett’s offer to transport the fuel by train at great cost to taxpayers but at a great profit to him. Rail transport is fraught with problems and rail explosions have occurred.
John Kerry now has to read through the 11-volume report and make a recommendation to Barack Obama. While we don’t know what Kerry thinks, we do know he wants climate change and global warming to be the hallmark of his reign.
There’s no timeline so this could go on for months or even years.
The firm that conducted the report has a remote connection to TransCanada, the company building the pipeline; some people who work at the firm also did work for TransCanada at one time. This has given the extreme environmentalists a platform to insist the report is tainted. If this wasn’t the excuse, they’d find another.
The report includes another excuse for Obama to deny the pipeline, as the environmentalists see it – it offers a remote alternative scenario in which the pipeline doesn’t reduce prices.
If you want to know how Mr. Obama will probably go on this issue – should Kerry ever get around to reviewing the report – all you have to do is go to The National Wildlife Federation (NWF) website, one of the many far-left environmental organizations. Their reaction to the report was quite different and they are Barack Obama’s key supporters.
According to the NWF, this is what was in the report: The “report acknowledges that the Keystone XL pipeline has significant climate impacts, and could cause the equivalent carbon emissions of up to almost 6 million new cars being put on the road”; tar sands is more polluting than oil; there could be spill risks; there could be waste in the bird nurseries [birds are like rats, they don’t need the protections these people want to give them]; this expansion of the tar sands will mean “game over for the planet” [huh?]; and it’s not in the national interests because it’s bad for wildlife and America.
Any of the environmental websites will echo the same warped and hyperbolic rants. The Nature Conservancy for example believes the damage would be incalculable. The Natural Resources Defense Council wants Keystone stopped, claiming it kills more jobs than it creates. The Sierra Club thinks the report provides damning evidence of the horrors of the Keystone Pipeline.
Extreme environmentalists only see worst case scenarios.
Their biggest complaint is that oil extracted from tar sands is dirty. In fact, oil extracted from tar sands has pollutants but that is why it is taken to the refineries. There is no significant difference in transporting via pipeline or rail except rail will be far more expensive.
Barack Obama and John Kerry are extreme environmentalists. If you want to know how Obama will decide on Keystone, just click on the links to the environmental organizations and you will have your answer.
Hopefully I am wrong.