| Submit your comments on this article |
| Economy |
| Enviros Want Keystone Pipeline "Reviewed" Some More |
| 2013-06-28 |
| Six advocacy groups have asked the State Department to prepare a new environmental review of the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline, saying that evidence has emerged showing it will hurt the environment. The demand, contained in a 48-page letter, comes as President Obama has pledged to block the project, which would carry heavy crude from Canada to the Gulf Coast, if it would "significantly exacerbate the climate problem." How convenient. Now he can kill it "for the children". The letter sent Monday says that several new analyses show that the project will speed heavy crude extraction in Canada's oil sands region. The State Department is currently responding to more than 1.2 million comments on a draft environmental assessment issued in March, which suggested that denying a permit to the pipeline firm TransÂCanada would have little overall climate impact because the oil would be extracted and shipped out anyway. Duh! "Limitations on pipeline transport would force more crude oil to be transported via other modes of transportation, such as rail which would probably (but not certainly) be more expensive," the assessment said. I like trains as much as the next guy, but pipelines do not whack stoopid drivers at grade crossings. The advocacy groups said that the Like breathing. |
| Posted by:Bobby |
| #9 So while all the econuts and Champ dither and whine, The UP, and BNSF will just keep putting more trains on the tracks and more tracks on the ground to haul the oil wherever the owners of said oil can get the best price. and all those locomotives burn diesel, making more carbon than the pipeline ever would. and since a pipeline is fixed, risk mitigation for spill response is a defined metric, unlike 110 car unit trains running all over. with lots of grade crossings as Fred inlined. we have 6 of those beauties a week traveling to the refinery at Anacortes, WA on majestic Puget Sound, competing with 8 Amtrak passengers trains (4 each direction), at least 3 unit coal trains heading to Vancouver ( plus the returning empties), as well as several manifest freights. Bring on the pipeline naysayers. |
| Posted by: USN, Ret. 2013-06-28 21:59 |
| #8 Looks like big time Champ supporter Tom Steyer may have some skin in the game as well. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-06-28 14:34 |
| #7 A fine rant, indeed. As for the "significantly exacerbate the climate problem" nonsense, if we build the pipeline, the oil will be processed and burned here in the US under US enviro laws. If we don't, it will likely go to China which has few, if any, pollution controls. Which scenario has greater impact on the (non-existant) climate problem? |
| Posted by: SteveS 2013-06-28 14:17 |
| #6 A most righteous rant indeed skw |
| Posted by: regular joe 2013-06-28 12:19 |
| #5 They are selective with their benefits. Let's look at the dice. First off, this would be a huge flow of money and influence into what they call Red States, a devisive term on its own head. Second, if its not selling here its selling somewhere else. Raw material, oil and coal, can be sold to China manufacturers at just pennies on the overbid. Third, the activism works as a shakedown, not only against the energy sector in the way of payoffs and bribes, but also for the agitation groups as they can point and say hey, we get results so fund us. Fourth, we pay more, which not only generates more taxes but also makes us less wealthy, wealthy being free - free to move, free to work, free to live, free to cool our family when it is 108 and 40% humid; it furthers the idea of reliance on somebody else to take care of the individual needs. Fifth, it puts another rachet on the foot binding of the USA and adds tally marks to the collectivist agenda. Sixth, the product can still be delivered via rail and road. This creates a power of delivery system which can be exploited politically - damage to infrastructure and collision would actually benefit the gov as it creates the need to get further involved. Of course, the tax revenue generated by these transport taxes puts a dimple on their chins as well. I say prove they can do climate creationism globally by proving locally - refill the DC swamps and turn off the AC. Affordable energy empowers people financially and exostentially, which is the antithesis of collectivism. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2013-06-28 10:46 |
| #4 Funny how selective leftists are with their concern about 'costs'... |
| Posted by: Raj 2013-06-28 09:28 |
| #3 Six advocacy groups Since there is no real penalty for political use of the IRS, if there's a change in regimes, these guys need to be added to the list for close scrutiny. Consider it 'equal treatment before the law' or 'it all depends on who's ox is getting gored'. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2013-06-28 09:25 |
| #2 Awaiting expert testimony from Rachel Jeantel ? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-06-28 08:59 |
| #1 Reminds me of that Far Side cartoon with the turbulence. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2013-06-28 08:17 |