Keystone will be even worse for the climate than you thought, says futile new report

Jan 17, 2013 by

Casey Danson

Director, Global Possibilities

by Casey Danson

The fact is the longer we pursue fossil fuel solutions to our energy problems, the less likely we are to make any impact on Climate Change.  Why isn’t  Obama following the tide to renewable energy in a big way in this country.  We have the sun, the wind, geothermal in abundance!!!!  but who’s looking.  Are we too unconscious to see our potential for renewable energy.  Is it really FUTILE?  That’s really depressing,  As for Keystone – an abomination that uses our water and land in a totally irresponsible manner, should not be on the table of possibilities.

The following from The Christian Science Monitor:

Keystone XL pipeline, global warming on Obama’s energy agenda

 

 

  1. One of the first challenges Obama will face is an old problem: whether to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada to Texas. Obama blocked the pipeline last year, citing uncertainty over the conduit’s route through environmentally sensitive land in Nebraska. Gov. Dave Heineman is considering a new route; he is expected to make a decision next month.
  2. The State Department has federal jurisdiction because the $7 billion pipeline begins in Canada.
  3. The pipeline has become a flashpoint in a bitter partisan dispute. Republicans and many business groups say the project would help achieve energy independence for North America and create thousands of jobs.
  4. But environmental groups have urged Obama to block the pipeline, which they say would transport “dirty oil” from tar sands in western Canada and produce heat-trapping gases that contribute to global warming. They also worry about a possible spill

 

The Keystone XL pipeline is a 1,700-mile, $7 billion project that would bring 700,000 barrels of carbon-heavy tar-sands oil per day from Alberta, Canada, to refineries on the Gulf Coast. It would be an extension of a pipeline that became operational in June 2010 and already carries crude oil from Alberta to Illinois and Oklahoma.

Richard A. Bloom

A pipeline protester walks in front of the White House.

The extraction and production of tar-sands oil is much more damaging to the environment and emits more greenhouse gases than the processes for obtaining and processing conventional oil. If the pipeline is built, it would greatly expand the market for the oil, hastening its extraction and potentially adding to global climate change.  Is this reason enough???

 

We welcome your comments!