Activists seek to counter Keystone revival in Senate

The campaign to create the Keystone XL transnational pipeline continues, as Senators sought Monday to attach pro-pipeline legislation to a transportation bill.

An amendment (S.A. 1537) to the bill S. 1813, proposed by Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., and co-sponsored by five GOP senators, would authorize the pipeline’s construction by TransCanada Corporation “to construct, connect, operate and maintain pipeline facilities,” while negating the need for a presidential permit.

Across the border: The proposed path of the Keystone XL pipeline. (Graphic courtesy NRDC.org)Across the border: The proposed path of the Keystone XL pipeline. (Graphic courtesy NRDC.org)

Separate legislation in the House also seeks to bypass a presidential permit for the pipeline’s authorization. The North American Energy Access Act, Title XIV of H.R. 7 (the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act of 2012) would require the Federal Energy Regulation Commission to issue a permit to TransCanada no later than 30 days; if the commission fails to do so, the permit would be issued automatically at the expiration of the 30-day period.

The news of the legislation launched several environmental groups into action. 350.org, a global grassroots movement for solving climate change, began a signature campaign shortly after learning of the Senate bill, setting a goal of 500,000 signatures in 24 hours. At the time of posting, the group had attained almost 700,000 signatures, with 350.org founder Bill McKibben taking the message to satirical pundit Stephen Colbert and his show last night.

The Keystone pipeline would run from the Athabasca Oil Sands in Alberta, Canada down to refineries on the Gulf Coast in Texas, forming a spine down the continent.

Subscribe to NCR

Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.

Subscribe now!

The Obama admin-
istration rejected a permit Jan. 18 for the pipeline’s construction, but days later, Republicans in Congress began introducing legislation to approve the pipeline. The Hill reported yesterday that the president remains open to the project and has told TransCanada they can reapply for a permit.

[For a timeline of Keystone XL from Grist.org, click here]

Other groups have joined 350.org in speaking out against the latest legislation, including former vice president Al Gore and his Climate Reality Project. In a post on the Climate Reality website, Gore said, “If approved and built, this pipeline, Keystone XL, would carry the most carbon-intensive source of oil on the planet.”

Gore said that the U.S. should be looking to work with Canada on clean energy and energy efficiency, rather than investing more money in “the production of more dirty oil.”

“It doesn’t matter where you live, or if the pipeline crosses into your home state. An increase of carbon pollution anywhere leads to climate change everywhere.”

Gore encouraged people to attach their name to the signature campaign, as did the Sierra Club, MoveOn, the League of Conservation Voters and outdoor apparel/environmental group Patagonia, among others.

A letter signed by 15 climate scientists Monday urged Congressional leaders to block approval of the pipeline.

“The tar sands are a huge pool of carbon, one that it does not make sense to exploit. It takes a lot of energy and water to extract and refine this resource into useable fuel, and the mining is environmentally destructive,” read the letter.

“We can say categorically that this pipeline is not in the nation's, or the planet's best interest.”

Editor's Note:

Subscribe to the Eco Catholic email alert to get weekly highlights from the blog. If you already receive email alerts from NCR, add Eco Catholic to your profile.
Learn more.

I am a tree hugging

I am a tree hugging conservative and own two very high mpg hybrids. I elect the "green" option to have my electric bill be a little higher because I am allocated all "green" electricity from solar, nuclear and hydro. I am considering buying a new home with big PV panels providing 40-50% of all residential needs with a roll back to the utility for over production. I love camping and national and state parks. So, I hope my environmental bona fides are established. However, WE NEED THE KEYSTONE PIPELINE. The US should be as independent as possible from unfriendly sources of oil. It is as simple as that. If the Keystone is delayed or abandoned, it would be the most stupid of a long list of very stupid decisions made by Obama and his apparatchiks. Canada will sell the Keystone oil to China and Asia in general instead of the US and we will continue to be importing by ship from Africa, South America and, to some extent, from the Middle East, at a much higher sea transportation cost and at an infinitely higher national security cost than via pipeline to Canada. Yes, we need too worry about the environment, but any EPA study about environmental impact should be treated with the priority of the Apollo program and pipeline route diversions made accordingly. Actually, it may be more important than going to the moon in longer terms. Election year politics should not determine the long term energy policy essential to our country.

Your argument loses validity

Your argument loses validity when you fail to mention the fact that the oil from Keystone is NOT destined for use in this country. It would be refined here, but then it would be transported, by ship, to other countries. Does this make sense? No. But it really doesn't matter because the environmental effects will be so devastating we will forget about how it is "supposed" to reduce the price of oil to us.

The Keystone oil will be

The Keystone oil will be refined on the Gulf Coast and sold into the world market.....the largest of which is the US market. In the event of another Arab oil embargo, blockage of the Straits of Hormuz or whatever shortage event, the US would have a huge North American supply more or less impervious to terrorists and foreign politics and very cheap to deliver in comparison to the cost of VLCCs. In such an event, the refined product would be readily available here. On the environmental issue, I advocate a full court press to find the best way to route the pipeline. It can be done if you do not put Democrats in charge of it.

Post new comment

NCR Comment code:

  1. Be respectful. Do not attack the writer. Take on the idea, not the messenger.
  2. Use appropriate language. Avoid vulgarities and slurs.
  3. Keep to the point. Deliberate digressions don't aid the discussion.

For more detailed guidelines, visit our User Guidelines page.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
(if you have one; if not, leave this blank)
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <font> <swf> <swf list>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may use <swf file="song.mp3"> to display Flash files inline

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This is to prove you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.