60 Groups Ask Kerry to Prioritize Climate Action and Reject the Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline
Secretary Kerry takes the helm at the State Department in the midst of a permitting process for the pipeline that will complete an environmental review of the impacts of the pipeline as well as an evaluation of whether the pipeline is in the national interest. Previous reviews by the State Department have been considered to be faulty or too limited. That is why NRDC and other organizations have put out a Keystone XL checklist outlining key issues where a fresh and objective review is required:
- How Keystone XL will lead to an increase in harmful carbon pollution that would otherwise not occur.
- TransCanada’s poor safety record and the safety of tar sands pipelines. Unfortunately, the State of Nebraska signed off on a new route that not minimize the risk to precious water resources.
- How the Keystone XL pipeline is an export pipeline that will go through America – not to it – and would not support U.S. energy security.
- That low-income communities will bear a disproportionate share of the contamination including refinery emissions from processing dirty tar sands.
One of the key problems with the State Department’s previous analysis was its faulty conclusion that Keystone XL would not affect the growth of tar sands development or lead to an increase in harmful carbon pollution. In fact, the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is a fundamental element enabling the tars ands industry to triple production to over 5 million barrels a day by 2030 and to more than 9 million barrels a day over the longer term. Keystone XL would lock the U.S. into a long-term commitment to an energy infrastructure that relies on dirty oil.
More at: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ddroitsch/60_groups_ask_kerry_to_priorit.html
Letter at: http://docs.nrdc.org/globalwarming/files/glo_13020501a.pdf
= new reply since forum marked as read
what do they know.
Clinton wanted to arm the Syrian rebels, Obama shut that down. The final say is always with Obama. The SoS is simply the face of the President (and the country, of course), not someone who can unilaterally act on their own accord. This is reminiscent of the "Clinton boxed in Obama" arguments that happened when she was selected as SoS. Nah, it's Obama's decision in the end. It sucks but Obama isn't that great of an environmental President. It's unfortunate that Kerry, following Obama's decision, will have to sign off on Keystone as well. When he does sign off on it I do not think it is a slight against Kerry as he will simply be following orders.
That does not make Kerry a "fall guy." He does what the President asks him to do, not what he wants to do. I am sure there will be other areas (particularly when it comes to arming Syrian rebels or acting within the sovereign territories of other states) that he will be able to affect policy and convince the President that action isn't always necessary (Clinton being somewhat of a hawk in that respect). But in this case I do not see his view being very persuasive. 53 senators are already backing the plan. TransCanada thinks it will be approved. However, it appears that it won't be approved any time soon, probably in June.
Again, I do not see Kerry as a "fall guy" for doing what the President wants. The President, and Kerry, can even point to Nature magazine's approval of the pipeline in exchange for more stringent coal plant standards. It would work since we're already well on our way to developing massive fracking based natural gas alternatives. Indeed, John Kerry himself opined that "We are the Saudi Arabia of natural gas." Of course, what that quote doesn't tell you is that conventional gas has peaked in the United States and all new natural gas that is coming online is unconventional, and requires fracking:
Our future is not terribly bright and unfortunately one person, or a few people, cannot do much about the direction that human civilization is heading from an environmental standpoint.
